Once World War One level technology comes out, Richmond will be far to exposed (especially in naval terms). Not to mention as time goes on, Virginia's economic importance will decrease compared to the states in the Western Confederacy (which will have economies growing far faster).
Richmond in a Confederate victory scenario
- Thread starter Ficboy
- Start date
Once World War One level technology comes out, Richmond will be far to exposed (especially in naval terms). Not to mention as time goes on, Virginia's economic importance will decrease compared to the states in the Western Confederacy (which will have economies growing far faster).
Ficboy
Banned
Well that depends on how the rest of the world goes. For one thing, a Confederate victory in the Civil War predates things like the Franco-Prussian War in 1870-1871 that created Germany, the various alliances between great powers formed in the late 1800s-early 1900s and Franz Ferdinand's assassination in Serbia by the Black Hand in 1914 so butterflies may very well apply to these events or they might stay the same. It also depends if the Confederate States get itself involved in World War I depending on how relations with the United States (their greatest enemy) goes same with Britain and France their top trading partners and the closest they have to actual allies since the former would be very neutral towards the Americans and the Confederates compared to the latter at least if Napoleon III stays in power.
Also, the Confederate States would take a while to industrialize in order to catch up and compete with other Western countries and Richmond, Virginia given it's status as the capital would undergo some expansion.
This is true, to a point. Many nations have had capitals which were known to be vulnerable to the enemy (for instance Paris was known to be well within striking distance of an invading army since 1870 and before, but they never moved the capital even after it was almost captured in 1914) but there's both reasons of national pride, realpolitik, and simple expedience to avoid moving a capital. Richmond would, by the turn of the century, have been the capital of the Confederacy for 35 years, almost an entire generation! So much industry and various government buildings and traditions will have grown up around it that moving the capital will seem unreasonable.
There would be valid reasons for moving it, but similarly there would be valid reasons for removing the American capital in Washington to some place like Philadelphia. However, I can't see either happening beyond vague plans for each government to retreat in the face of an enemy offensive. There'd be too much pride at stake.
That being said, their clearly wasn't enough US pride to keep the capital in Philadelphia or NYC.
Like someone mentioned above, Richmond was only to be a temporary capital. At the end of the day, I seriously don't think pride and industry won't win out over the following:
- Strategically vulnerable (especially since West Virginia and Kentucky would most likely be in the Union still, as would northern Virginia).
- Virginia would be perceived to have too much power over the other states.
- In non-centralized location makes it a poor place for running the government.
- Western industrialization and increased use of the Mississippi makes Virginia less relevant in the grand scheme of things.
- There are better, safer, options.
Ficboy
Banned
Richmond, Virginia would likely undergo massive development to accommodate the government of the Confederate States of America such as the Presidency (The Executive Mansion aka the White House of the Confederacy), Congress (Senate and House of Representatives of the Confederate Capitol), State Department, Treasury Department, War Department, Post Office Department and other new departments over the years.
As for Monument Avenue (which has gone some rather unfortunate changes), it would more or less be the same like OTL with statues of Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jonathan Jackson, Jefferson Davis, Matthew Fontaine Maury and J.E.B. Stuart dotting the area.
As for Monument Avenue (which has gone some rather unfortunate changes), it would more or less be the same like OTL with statues of Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jonathan Jackson, Jefferson Davis, Matthew Fontaine Maury and J.E.B. Stuart dotting the area.
Last edited:
Also, Williamsburg was pretty much a ghost town by 1865. The structures you see today were rebuilt in the 1930s and had all burned down shortly after the Revolutionary War. I think the most likely scenario is that Virginia cedes an area of land just outside of Richmond proper for the new "Confederal District" or they build a permanent capital somewhere else.
The Constitution of the CSA provided for a capital district to be established, pretty much in the same manner as the D of C... there were some ideas floated around IIRC that would've put it on a river, on the border between 2 states, but none were generally accepted as suitable....
I think what is now Birmingham AL would've been a good location... centrally located, essentially nothing there in the 1860's except for 3 small villages... it's a city that basically sprang up out of nothing post-war, but is also just upland from the historic 1st Confederate Capital... alternately Atlanta would be good, especially if the torching of it were averted somehow. It was already a fairly sizable and growing town, and especially well-located in regard to rail transport. Also since the capital of GA was in Milledgeville at the time, you wouldn't have one city doing "double-duty" as a state capital and as the national capital....
I think what is now Birmingham AL would've been a good location... centrally located, essentially nothing there in the 1860's except for 3 small villages... it's a city that basically sprang up out of nothing post-war, but is also just upland from the historic 1st Confederate Capital... alternately Atlanta would be good, especially if the torching of it were averted somehow. It was already a fairly sizable and growing town, and especially well-located in regard to rail transport. Also since the capital of GA was in Milledgeville at the time, you wouldn't have one city doing "double-duty" as a state capital and as the national capital....
Ficboy
Banned
Alternatively there's Charlottesville which largely avoided the death and destruction of the Civil War. It also helps that its where Thomas Jefferson's Monticello Plantation is located here and the home of the University of Virginia. I'd say that it's a good option for Virginia's new capital since Richmond is taken over by the Confederate government.
I've always had the Virginia state capital to Charlottesville with Jefferson's Monticello playing the hone if the governor and a new capital built just down the mountain
That would make for some nice propaganda positioning the Confederacy as the 'real heirs' of the founding fathers.
They might go a different route with the monuments with more resources. The Northern states really went for some premium high end Greco-Roman style architecture. Grant's tomb is case and point for what can be achieved when money is not an issue.
For the South money and resources was a much bigger issue, they loved their Greco-Roman architecture as well and weren't about to be shown up by the North in the monument construction post war competition. Richmond in the 1890s wasn't economically happening compared to the major cities in the North that were putting up monuments in the same time and it showed.
One wonders if Richmond might go for more triumphal arches and Roman basilica designs as New York was able to do rather then the flood of statues for individual figures if they weren't economically hurting.
Last edited:
Ficboy
Banned
The Confederate monuments in Richmond, Virginia up until very recently were those that depicted Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson, J.E.B. Stuart, Matthew Fontaine Maury, Jefferson Davis, Southern soldiers and sailors/Confederate Soldiers and Sailors, A Southern lady/Lady Confederacy, Joseph Bryan, the Richmond Howitzers, William Carter Wickham and A.P. Hill. That's a total of 11 statues and that's not counting the other statue that depicts Jefferson Davis, To Our Confederate Dead granite pyramid, George Pickett and J.E.B. Stuart altar all of which are located in the Hollywood Cemetery as well as the statues, busts and memorabilia in the Virginia State Capitol. The United States has plenty of monuments and memorials to the Founding Fathers and I expect the Confederate States to do the exact same thing here. The alternate Monument Avenue would have the exact same statues minus perhaps J.E.B. Stuart who is replaced by George H. Thomas assuming if we go down the route of an early Civil War in the early to mid 1850s.They might go a different route with the monuments with more resources. The Northern states really went for some premium high end Greco-Roman style architecture. Grant's tomb is case and point for what can be achieved when money is not an issue.
For the South money and resources was a much bigger issue, they loved their Greco-Roman architecture as well and weren't about to be shown up by the North in the monument construction post war competition. Richmond in the 1890s was poor compared to the major cities in the North that were putting up monuments in the same time and it showed.
One wonders if Richmond might go for more triumphal arches and Roman basilica designs as New York was able to do rather then the flood of statues for individual figures if they weren't economically hurting.
They might go a different route with the monuments with more resources. The Northern states really went for some premium high end Greco-Roman style architecture. Grant's tomb is case and point for what can be achieved when money is not an issue.
For the South money and resources was a much bigger issue, they loved their Greco-Roman architecture as well and weren't about to be shown up by the North in the monument construction post war competition. Richmond in the 1890s wasn't economically happening compared to the major cities in the North that were putting up monuments in the same time and it showed.
One wonders if Richmond might go for more triumphal arches and Roman basilica designs as New York was able to do rather then the flood of statues for individual figures if they weren't economically hurting.
I think even in a CSA wins scenario they would still be less economically prosperous than the North.
They would still be less prosperous then the North, but they would have much more capital to throw around on turning their cities marble with such projects then they had.
Thomas1195
Banned
But, the North can fuck up the Mississippi to screw the South. The hard solution is build a giant dam to fuck up river flows. The easier solution is to dump pollutants near in a border area.