Special Order 191- Under Better Supervision? A World Without Sharpsburg

As you all probably know, special orders 191 was Robert E. Lee's set of commands right before Antietam that were intercepted by Union cavalry and brought to McClellan, who, armed with the enemies positions, attacked Lee at Boonsboro Gap, and Sharpsburg. What would have happened if the orders had not been intercepted?

Well, for one, neither the Battle of Boonsboro Gap, nor the battle of Sharpsburg would have happened. Lee was in a horrible position in Sharpsburg, and he would not have stayed into that position under different circumstances. Another battle, of similar size to Sharpsburg, would have probably occured near Boonsboro, with the Confederates in a much better position in the high ground. It's fair to say, considering in our time line Antietam was very nearly a draw due to McClellan's desire not to advance, that this new Battle of Boonsboro would have been a Confederate victory. Two major changes spring from this Confederate victory from our time line. With no victory at Sharpsburg, Lincoln would not be able to declare the Emancipation Proclamation, and Europe would likely join the war soon. Lee would know that he needed another victory, or at least no defeats as he marched through Maryland, to keep France and England on the tracks to joining the Confederacy. Being the overdramatic Lee, he would decide something along the lines of, 'Maryland is too close to vastly impress Europe. I shall win a victory on their own soil!', and would likely go through with his pet project of invading Pennsylvania, but carefully, always sticking to the best defensive ground and making absolute sure the supply lines were in order. He wouldn't want any defeats to turn off potential allies.

So with no Emancipation Proclamation, a much less risky, more defensive invasion of Pennsylvania, and the European powers beginning to wish to join the Confederacy against America, what happens next?
 
Britain and France were not close to joining the Confederacy.

Why would Britain, for example, aid a slave holding state against its biggest and most important economic partner?
 
Britain and France were not close to joining the Confederacy.

Why would Britain, for example, aid a slave holding state against its biggest and most important economic partner?
Actually, they got VERY close to doing it. Southern cotton was important back then, before India started churning out the stuff nonstop.
 
Actually, they got VERY close to doing it. Southern cotton was important back then, before India started churning out the stuff nonstop.
Citation needed.

They were never close to recognising the South. The premier anti-slavery nation is not going to support the premier slaving nation at the expense of its relationship with the North, its largest economic partner, unless the North declared war (which it wouldn't do because it was led by rational leaders)
 
Citation needed.

They were never close to recognising the South. The premier anti-slavery nation is not going to support the premier slaving nation at the expense of its relationship with the North, its largest economic partner, unless the North declared war (which it wouldn't do because it was led by rational leaders)
You clearly haven't studied up on that time period. The British and French kept sending diplomats and envoys, as well as reporters.
 
You clearly haven't studied up on that time period. The British and French kept sending diplomats and envoys, as well as reporters.
Insulting me is not providing a citation. How do you know how much I have studied the period?

Britain never recognised the South. They never exchanged ambassadors. Sending reporters is not the same as support.

While there were some in Britain who supported the South, popular opinion was always with the North.
 
Last edited:
Actually, they got VERY close to doing it. Southern cotton was important back then, before India started churning out the stuff nonstop.

Common misconception. The projected debate in Parliament in 1862 proposed by Lord Russell was an offer of mediation between the two side, not the same as recognition of Southern independence (doubtless the North would reject that interpretation though). The British government was never close to recognizing the Confederacy as an independent nation, they only granted them status as a belligerent as in Lord Russell's words "The question of belligerent rights is one, not of principle, but of fact." and the fact that the South was in de facto control of over 700,000 square miles of territory, had a functioning army and government was a pretty convincing point that they were belligerents.

The closest the South ever came to being recognized internationally was in the summer of 1863 when Napoleon III was casting around for it (in order to alleviate cotton shortages in France at the time) by requesting a "joint diplomatic effort" by Britain, France and Russia to recognize the Confederacy and mediate the conflict by fait accompli and end the whole business there. There were some MPs in Britain who were warm to the idea, but the cabinet rejected it. Russia scoffed at the offer outright. And thus the whole plan floundered.
 
I think the unspeakable seamammal is more likely to suceed than Britain and France activel supporting the South aside from several severe northern blunders - like attacking Canada for example...

Saphronets TL is a prime example how it COULD happen, but even that needed a northern action of insame proportions ;)
 
and would likely go through with his pet project of invading Pennsylvania, but carefully, always sticking to the best defensive ground and making absolute sure the supply lines were in order. He wouldn't want any defeats to turn off potential allies.
Gee, this seems exactly how Lee invading Pennsylvania would have turned out.
 
I hate to say this Same but I seriously think you need to research the American Civil War more to not get hammered on this site. Great Britain, as most people here have been telling you, never came close to recognizing the CSA. Also recognition is NOT intervention. Lincoln would have to be repeatedly handed the idiot ball for GB to be willing to send troops 3.000 miles to an area where they gained nothing in the two previous wars it had. The first resulted in the loss of the 13 colonies , the second wound up with merely status quo ante bellum. The British Empire wasn't eager to spend many millions of pounds and many thousands of lives to help a slavocracy in a war where victory wasn't assured and would cause hostility of a rising Great Power they had no real way of controlling. If a war similar to WWI happened in TTL the US would likely ally with the Germans and the Brits would be really screwed.
 

EMTSATX

Banned
Sametheon, do you have a kindle? There is a pretty good free book that I could reccomend to you that covers some stuff I think you would like. It covers an alternate Sharpsburg and Kentucky campaign. I think it would answer a lot of questions for you.
 
Sametheon, do you have a kindle? There is a pretty good free book that I could reccomend to you that covers some stuff I think you would like. It covers an alternate Sharpsburg and Kentucky campaign. I think it would answer a lot of questions for you.
Nah, I usually do physical books. The idea of a kindle never really appealed to me for some reason.
 
As you all probably know, special orders 191 was Robert E. Lee's set of commands right before Antietam that were intercepted by Union cavalry and brought to McClellan, who, armed with the enemies positions, attacked Lee at Boonsboro Gap, and Sharpsburg. What would have happened if the orders had not been intercepted?

Well, for one, neither the Battle of Boonsboro Gap, nor the battle of Sharpsburg would have happened. Lee was in a horrible position in Sharpsburg, and he would not have stayed into that position under different circumstances. Another battle, of similar size to Sharpsburg, would have probably occured near Boonsboro, with the Confederates in a much better position in the high ground. It's fair to say, considering in our time line Antietam was very nearly a draw due to McClellan's desire not to advance, that this new Battle of Boonsboro would have been a Confederate victory. Two major changes spring from this Confederate victory from our time line. With no victory at Sharpsburg, Lincoln would not be able to declare the Emancipation Proclamation, and Europe would likely join the war soon. Lee would know that he needed another victory, or at least no defeats as he marched through Maryland, to keep France and England on the tracks to joining the Confederacy. Being the overdramatic Lee, he would decide something along the lines of, 'Maryland is too close to vastly impress Europe. I shall win a victory on their own soil!', and would likely go through with his pet project of invading Pennsylvania, but carefully, always sticking to the best defensive ground and making absolute sure the supply lines were in order. He wouldn't want any defeats to turn off potential allies.

So with no Emancipation Proclamation, a much less risky, more defensive invasion of Pennsylvania, and the European powers beginning to wish to join the Confederacy against America, what happens next?

The order was lost on the 12th, found on the 13th, and the battle of South Mountain happened on Sunday the 14th.

Sharpsburg might not have happened, but South Mountain probably would have. The Union Army was on the western side of Frederick, which is only a few miles away from South Mountain. It's just too close not to make contact (although Lee didn't know how close McClellan was; in a preview of greater things, Stuart was asleep at the wheel). Best case scenario, Hill realizes how close the Army of the Potomac is and moves to protect the passes on the 13th. Since Mac doesn't know the actual strength of the forces in front of him, he's more cautious when he makes contact on Sunday, the 14th, and waits to get all his forces together before proceeding. This gives Hill's division time to fortify their position, and it gives Longstreet the opportunity to join Hill's division before an attack happens, rather than while it is happening. If they can hold out for a day, they've got a really good shot at winning an impressive victory. If Jackson can force a surrender at Harper's Ferry a little sooner, he could have elements of his Corps joining the main body of the army as soon as the 16th. There are numerous passes in the South Mountain ridge. Jackson could have used any one of them to flank McClellan's position.

The reason Lee is stuck fighting at South Mountain or at Sharpsburg is precisely because Mac was already too close when the order fell into his hands. There's no alternative--if Hill pulls back to Hagerstown to join Longstreet, Mac can move in between the two halves of Lee's army. Same thing applies if Hill was to go South instead.

Lee could have won a decisive victory at South Mountain had the orders not fallen into McClellan's hands, but no more than that. He won't destroy the Army of the Potomac in the battle, and he won't be strong enough to pursue them in the event of a victory. There's no making it into PA or anything like that. His only hope is to fight at South Mountain, fight at Sharpsburg, or run away and pray that McClellan doesn't split his army while he's trying to escape. South Mountain is the best of those options.
 
Top