Unused (?) potential American Civil War divergences

Just some ideas I want to get written down:

[Note: there are lots of ACW divergences which have been done many times. These are ideas which AFAIK have not been explored.]

1. Senator Abraham Lincoln, 1855-?. In the turmoil following the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Lincoln sought election as U.S. Senator as an "anti-Nebraska" candidate. He appealed to the nascent Republican party, the remnants of Whigs, and independents. He came within five votes of being elected: the first ballot was Lincoln 45, incumbent Democrat James Shields 41, and "anti-Nebraska" Democrat Lyman Trumbull 5. Lincoln lost ground on later ballots, and threw his support to Trumbull, who switched to the Republicans.

2. Senator Abraham Lincoln, 1859-?. Lincoln fought incumbent Democrat Stephen Douglas down to the wire, losing 54-46 in the legislature, though Republicans had gotten more votes. If Douglas had mis-stepped, Lincoln might have been won. Douglas would be out, leaving the Democratic Party to Buchanan's Doughface wing. Lincoln would be a front-runner for the Republican nomination in 1860 (OTL he was something of a dark horse); who would the Democrats pick?

3. Republicans nominate Seward in 1860. Seward was thought to be a lock for the nomination. After the platform was presented to the convention, Seward delegates moved that nominations be taken up immediately. But the chairman said the tally sheets weren't ready; they would arrive in a few minutes. So the convention adjourned till the next day. That night, Lincoln's managers made the deals that won it for him. If the tally sheets had been ready... Does Seward win the election?

4. President Seward, 1861-?. His ideas for the secession crisis were significantly different from Lincoln's. For one thing, Seward wanted to evacuate Fort Sumter, to keep the Upper South happy and put off secession there. He even promised Upper South emissaries that Sumter would be evacuated. (Lincoln had to remind him who was President.)

5. Confederate President Robert Toombs. He was a fervent secessionist from Georgia and an early favorite to be elected Provisional President. He declined consideration in deference to his fellow Georgian Howell Cobb, but Cobb didn't want the office. By the time Toombs learned that, the Provisional Confederate Congress had chosen Jeff Davis. Toombs had some very different ideas about how the CSA should conduct the war. To begin with, he opposed (quite eloquently) bombarding Fort Sumter, telling Davis
"Mr. President, at this time it is suicide, murder, and will lose us every friend at the North. You will wantonly strike a hornet's nest which extends from mountain to ocean, and legions now quiet will swarm out and sting us to death. It is unnecessary; it puts us in the wrong; it is fatal."

6. Stonewall Jackson killed at First Manassas, leading to Union victory. OTL Jackson was shot in the hand; it might have been his head or his heart. If Jackson is killed, the Virginia brigade will probably be shaken, and not provide the anchor for the crumbling Confederate left flank to rally. The Confederates will be driven off Henry House Hill, and Johnston and Beauregard will withdraw the remains of their army off the field. Now what? OTL, victory First Manassas seemed to confirm the braggadocio of the "Fire-Eaters"; it gave the Confederacy an immense psychological boost while checking the Union for months. It gave the CSA time and impetus to get "established". If it is a humiliating defeat instead - does the CSA unravel immediately?

7. The south flank at Fredericksburg. The main action at Fredericksburg was a massive frontal assault on Marye's Heights, directly west of the town, which failed with heavy casualties. Further south, the "Left Grand Division" of the Army of the Potomac attacked Jackson's corps, which was defending along a lower series of ridges. Meade's division struck a gap in Jackson's line and nearly broke through. Meade wrote later ''The slightest straw would have kept the tide in our favor.'' But his was the only division making the attack, with Gibbon's division in support; Franklin, commanding the Left GD, didn't understand he was to attack in force, and held back several additional divisions. If Franklin (or a different commander) had attacked strongly, Jackson's corps might have been swept away for a Union victory. Ambrose Burnside might be the hero of the Union.
 
Last edited:

Art

Monthly Donor
There's always the possibility of J. C. Fremont winning the 1856 election, or the Fugitive Slave Law being repealed or never passed. Also Kansas-Nebraska never screwing the Missouri Compromise.
 
You need someone other than Jefferson Davis as President, someone who could keep the radicals at bay.

Refuse to attack Fort Sumner, or any other US territory, while making an appeal to allow the South to peacefully go their own way.

No dumb ass cotton embargo.

Of course this has probably been done before.
 
1. The most likely alternative would be an easy and quick Union victory early in the war. That was always the probably result rather than a Confederate Victory.

2. Also, I would like to see a constant Confederate insurgency as called by some after the war ended.

3. Confederate California.
 
There's always the possibility of J. C. Fremont winning the 1856 election, or the Fugitive Slave Law being repealed or never passed. Also Kansas-Nebraska never screwing the Missouri Compromise.

Fremont has been done a couple of times. THe twist I would love to see is that Fremont is elected, but somehow its a disorganized mess and the Union loses the Civil War.

You need someone other than Jefferson Davis as President, someone who could keep the radicals at bay.

Problem is he is the best of the lot. Everyone else was considerably worse...
 
Seccesionist Oregon. Oregon's origin lies as a Whitopia, a "white homeland" where no blacks were allowed (a draft for its state constitution went as far as to punish blacks with flogging just for living there), could a proper propaganda campaign against the north by confederates and their sympathisers, stoking fears that abolition would then result in miscenegation, be the catalyst for secession?
 
There's always the possibility of J. C. Fremont winning the 1856 election, or the Fugitive Slave Law being repealed or never passed.

It was passed in 1850, before Fremont was old enough to run for POTUS. As for repeal, that requires a Republican Senate, a very remote prospect had the South not seceded.

Seccesionist Oregon. Oregon's origin lies as a Whitopia, a "white homeland" where no blacks were allowed (a draft for its state constitution went as far as to punish blacks with flogging just for living there),

Shows what a bunch of ninnies the proslavery people were. It's entirely possible that Kansas would have been the same, had the border ruffians left it alone.
 
It was passed in 1850, before Fremont was old enough to run for POTUS. As for repeal, that requires a Republican Senate, a very remote prospect had the South not seceded.



Shows what a bunch of ninnies the proslavery people were. It's entirely possible that Kansas would have been the same, had the border ruffians left it alone.
Actually, Oregonians were ANTI-Slavery. They wanted zero blacks, period.

Keep in mind even many abolitionists still firmly believed in White Supremacy.
 
A possible scenario is Mayor Fernando Wood's scheme to have New York City secede from the union, in an effort to retain commercial ties with Southern cotton planters. A New York insurrection could be plausible in scenarios without the bombardment of Ft. Sumter.
 
I have a book that has a number of scenarios, some plausible, some not, but it has some PODs that I have not seen anywhere else. It is worth a read if you are into Civil War alternate history.
Dixie Victorious.jpg
 
Actually, Oregonians were ANTI-Slavery. They wanted zero blacks, period.

Doesn't that imply wanting the Blacks who were around to stay where they were - down South? If the Blacks were freed, quite a few of them might try to move to the North or West. So any Northerner or Westerner who doesn't want a penniless negro competing with him on the job market would have an interest in leaving slavery undisturbed - just as long as it stayed confined to where it was.
 
Top