What Kind of Military Strategist Would Hannibal Hamlin Have Been?

Suppose if Lincoln dies in his first term, what kind of military grans strategist would Hannibal Hamlin have been? Would he be a hopelessly out-of-his-depth number, or an untapped military genius, indeed a very Hannibal?
 
Take a look at my thread on the topic of a Hannibal Hamlin presidency, which can be found here:https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...s-seat-a-president-hannibal-hamlin-tl.374818/ (I hope the link works, I am not accustomed to the new site yet).

I don't know if Hamlin would have been a better strategist or not. Like Lincoln, he was a politician with no military experience, so it is difficult to say. I don't think he would be another Hannibal, the ancient Carthaginian who was his namesake, but he probably wouldn't be completely inept either. My guess is that he would be similar to Lincoln, as he would have mostly the same roster of generals and cabinet members as Lincoln did in OTL. He did have a pettiness about him that Lincoln lacked, which can be seen in his attitude toward Gen. McLellan, and others that got on his bad side. He would probably have been much quicker to fire generals than even Lincoln was, for good or bad.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Suppose if Lincoln dies in his first term, what kind of military grans strategist would Hannibal Hamlin have been? Would he be a hopelessly out-of-his-depth number, or an untapped military genius, indeed a very Hannibal?

Hamlin had been commissioned field grade (major) as an ADC to Gov. Fairfield of Maine during the Aroostook crisis, and was active in the Maine mobilization and the confrontation with New Brunswick; his committee experience in Congress (and later the Senate) was fairly eclectic: Elections , Commerce, Printing, District of Columbia, Manufactures, Mines and Mining, Post Office and Post Roads, Foreign Relations; he had also served as governor of Maine, so he had executive experience.

So the contrasts with Lincoln are executive experience, wider legislative experience, and service as a field grade militia officer (as opposed to service as a company grade officer); Lincoln had more experience in private practice and as a corporate attorney. It's simply speculation, but I don't see Hamlin making mistakes that Lincoln did not. He might or might not be as adept as Lincoln was at many things, but do not see HH making any sort of fatal mistakes that end up benefitting the rebellion.

Best,
 
What do we know about his personality? Jefferson Davis checked every box you could for a prospective CinC (commanded a regiment, Secretary of War, Military affairs committee), but in the end failed the main task of a civilian CinC in putting together a national strategy, at least in part out of an arrogant and uncharitable demeanor. One of Lincoln's biggest strengths is that he recognized how unprepared he was for his job, and willingly listened to people who he didn't get along with if they had good advice to give. If Hamlin tries to exercise too much control (or just butterflies things; perhaps a Maine president will be less inclined to listen to an Illinois congressman re: a prospective brigadier general than an Illinois president), it might upset the string of victories that put Grant (and with him Sherman) at the top.

Also depends on the stage in the war you erase Lincoln; Hamlin was on the more Radical wing, and opposed the Peninsula as a base of operations. Too early, and it'll be before Lincoln has really put together his simultaneous pressure strategy, and might lead to premature Hard War, so you get fewer West Virginias and more Missouris. At least, Hamlin won't be considerably worse for the Confederates than Lincoln; he still has the anti-McClellan fixation in opposing use of the James River, so the East is going to stay stalemated until Summer 1864.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
It's speculation, but Hamlin did win the Maine governorship, although he chose to serve in the Senate, and there is a world of difference between a man of his day being able to win a popular statewide contest for the executive mansion and someone else never being elected to an executive position (akin to Davis); he was also something of a self-made man (not to the extent Lincoln was, but certainly not with the Davis family wealth); its' not conclusive, but Hamlin also chose to volunteer - as an enlisted man - in the Maine militia during the war; not exactly the gesture of a martinet, or someone with misplaced confidence.

Hamlin's "radicalism" seems about on par with Lincoln's positions, honestly; he was more outspoken than Lincoln, but a Maineman could be - no "Little Egypt" in Maine, after all. Hamlin seems first and foremost a practical politician, based on his career.
 
Yeah, if anything, Hamlin's military experience (limited as it was) would make him more competent than Lincoln during the Civil War. Perhaps a Hamlin presidency could avoid some of the blunders that befell the Union army initially.

Of course, I think a lot of Hamlin's strategy and the degree to which he is radicalized depends on the circumstances of Lincoln's death. If it's a simple bout of pneumonia that does Lincoln in, Hamlin is likely to be very reasonable and the Civil War is likely to go similarly to OTL. If, however, Lincoln is assassinated early on (either in the completely fictional inaugural assassination I use in my timeline or a more plausible successful Baltimore Plot or something completely different), Hamlin is likely to become somewhat more radicalized. Really, in my opinion, all this depends on your POD.
 
Given that he was dropped from the ticket OTL, Hamlin might have a tougher time with reelection in 1864; he doesn't have the appeal on the border and in the west that Lincoln brought to the table, though that's a bit outside the scope of the thread. As long as Grant, Sherman, Thomas, and Sheridan find their posts by 1864, the Union has a very high chance of winning the war even if the Republicans lose the election.

Not sure how he'd do with the touchy feely speechy side of the presidency, though. If he comes across as too sectional, with less than inspirational style of relations, then mustering the national will for the conflict is going to be that much harder.
 
As Canis Lupis says it matter massively how Lincoln dies. If he's murdered the response to that is going to overshadow Hamlin's personality at least in the short term.
 
You have to remember that Hamlin was dropped not because of incompetence or animosity wit the Lincoln administration. Indeed the decision to drop him from the ticket almost never came to pass; there was a good chance that Lincoln/Hamlin would have been the ticket in 1864.

What ultimately turned the tide was the fact that Lincoln and many other leading Republicans saw the writing on the wall, and knew that the Union was headed for a massive victory. The administration elected in 1864 would preside over a period of reconciliation with the South. Hamlin was deemed too radical for this reconciliation ticket, and thus Lincoln went with Andrew Johnson, one of if not the only Southern Democrats still in Congress, in order to appeal to the soon-to-be occupied South.

If Lincoln dies before 1864, it is likely Hamlin is still the Republican nominee. The only question about the election is two-fold. One: How do the Democrats react? IOTL, they split into the War Democrats, who sided with the Lincoln/Johnson campaign and advocated for seeing the war through to its logical conclusion, and the Peace Democrats, who sided with John C Fremont and advocated for a negotiated peace with the Confederate South. Does this split still occur, or do the Democrats remain united? Two: Do we see a split in the Republican Party in 1864? Hamlin is obviously going to be the Republican nominee in some shape or form, yet he is from the radical wing of the party. Some, like William H Seward, are from a more conservative wing of the party and are thus opposed to this radical wing. Without the moderating hand of Lincoln incentivizing the radical and conservative Republicans to work together, does a conservative Republican rise up and run their own campaign in 1864, running against Hamlin and the Democratic nominee?
 
If the Union is winning in 1864 than Hamlin wins. I can't see Hamlin winning the war and losing the election. He is going to get credit for it and the war was the most important issue in 1864.
 
Top