WI a faster Meade

What if Meade's pursuit of Lee after Gettysburg is a little quicker/more effective and he manages to catch Lee on the wrong side of the Potomac?

Is there any chance for Meade to inflict a proper, crushing defeat there and wrap up the Civil War quicker?
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Depends a lot on how fast and where north of the Potomac...

What if Meade's pursuit of Lee after Gettysburg is a little quicker/more effective and he manages to catch Lee on the wrong side of the Potomac? Is there any chance for Meade to inflict a proper, crushing defeat there and wrap up the Civil War quicker?

Depends a lot on how fast and where north of the Potomac...pretty good summary here:

http://www.civilwar.org/battlefield...ory-articles/battle-of-gettysburg-finale.html

Lee, after all, had 50,000+ veterans and was, at least, a day ahead of Meade at Williamsport, and the Army of the Potomac had fought long and hard, suffered heavy losses, and was down a number of important commanders, from Hancock on down; even on the north side of the Potomac and with high water, the rebels would have been on the defensive and - as demonstrated on battlefields from Malvern Hill to Fredericksburg to Gettysburg to Franklin - for an 1860s-era army to attack another one that was dug in was far from a recipe for success.

Best,
 

jahenders

Banned
I'm not sure a crushing defeat was in the cards because both sides were beat up, the Union had lost some key leaders, Meade was pretty new, and the Union didn't understand Lee's true state.

However, had Meade pressed somewhat harder they could (at least) have rushed Lee more, possibly causing him to abandon some supply train and/or artillery, and possibly forcing him to have a rearguard fight a (doomed) delaying action.

What if Meade's pursuit of Lee after Gettysburg is a little quicker/more effective and he manages to catch Lee on the wrong side of the Potomac?

Is there any chance for Meade to inflict a proper, crushing defeat there and wrap up the Civil War quicker?
 
What if Meade's pursuit of Lee after Gettysburg is a little quicker/more effective and he manages to catch Lee on the wrong side of the Potomac?

Is there any chance for Meade to inflict a proper, crushing defeat there and wrap up the Civil War quicker?

Well there's the problem of an immediate pursuit in that right after Gettysburg Lee has dug in expecting a Union counter attack, Meade making an assault there probably drives the Confederates from their trenches, but it only adds to the already appalling cost of the battle and leaves the AotP in absolutely no shape to pursue Lee as it did historically.

Let's assume that Meade begins a more immediate pursuit and gives the Confederates only say half a day, he's going to be plagued with the same problem that trapped Lee on the wrong side of the Potomac. Rain. OTL he was already advancing over roads that were quagmires thanks to Lee's men tearing them up before him, which slowed him down. Say that despite all that he still manages to be only just behind Lee come July 11th.

We run in to the same problem that was pointed out previously. Lee has his back to the wall and is dug in (and even rudimentary field defenses can offer a significant advantage here) his army is in a literal fight to the death situation and Meade has to attack them head on. Considering the disaster that was Pickett's Charge at Gettysburg I doubt Meade will be incredibly eager to repeat it on a grand scale.

All you're really guaranteed is a spectacularly bloody battle which has little hope of destroying the Army of Northern Virginia. Lee might retreat south again with fewer men, but Meade will be in absolutely no position to chase him.

IMO Meade made the right calls historically.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
The simplest move would be if the rebels had simply cut

I'm not sure a crushing defeat was in the cards because both sides were beat up, the Union had lost some key leaders, Meade was pretty new, and the Union didn't understand Lee's true state.

However, had Meade pressed somewhat harder they could (at least) have rushed Lee more, possibly causing him to abandon some supply train and/or artillery, and possibly forcing him to have a rearguard fight a (doomed) delaying action.

The simplest move would be if the rebels had simply cut their POWs and wounded lose; as it was, Lee tried to get them all south, which delayed the army's movement by a good part of the first day.

As Welch (linked above) wrote:

The Battle of Gettysburg was a major defeat for the South. Lee’s army, dangerous as it was until the very last, would never again have the punch — in numbers, morale, quality and quantity of officers — that it took into Pennsylvania in June 1863. Whether or not Meade could have made the wound he had inflicted a mortal one remains one of the great unanswerable questions of the war. Lincoln clearly oversimplified matters when he said that Meade had Lee in his grasp. The Army of the Potomac was itself grievously hurt at Gettysburg. Yet, with its superior resources, a more energetic pursuit might have bagged more prisoners and equipment before Lee got behind his entrenchments at Williamsport.

The odds of a successful Union frontal assault at the crossing, however, are problematic. Meade — too late — was willing to risk it even though most of his senior officers were against such an attack. Porter Alexander’s ultimate assessment comes remarkably close to Lincoln’s: If [Meade] had [attacked] he would not have had an easy task, though with his superior resources and forces, and the rare chance of ruining us which success would have given, he certainly should have tried it for all he was worth.

Best,
 
Is there any chance an overstretched AotP could run headfirst into semiprepared defences and been utterly trashed (insofar as that is possible in a clearly doomed attack)?

Seems to me that would undo much of the gain of winning Gettysburg, by somewhat repairing the 'mystique' of Lee and making the AotP much weaker.

Seems to me conserving the AotP was the surer method, even if it didn't give a sudden victory at least it didn't risk a nasty defeat.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Realistically?

Is there any chance an overstretched AotP could run headfirst into semiprepared defences and been utterly trashed (insofar as that is possible in a clearly doomed attack)? Seems to me that would undo much of the gain of winning Gettysburg, by somewhat repairing the 'mystique' of Lee and making the AotP much weaker. Seems to me conserving the AotP was the surer method, even if it didn't give a sudden victory at least it didn't risk a nasty defeat.

Realistically? Probably not...

By July 4 (i.e. after the battle), Meade's seven infantry corps had a total of 56,000 men assigned, not including various detachments; the VI Corps, for example, had almost 13,000 men, and it ranged down to the I Corps with about 5,500.

Lee certainly was capable of fending off a hasty assault at Williamsport; all in all, unless Meade could actually get a force across the Potomac ahead of Lee, Lee was presumably going to be able to cross the river once the flooding subsides.

Best,
 

The Sandman

Banned
The real question, I think, would be the consequences of Meade overrunning Lee's supply train. No booty from Pennsylvania and Maryland presumably has at least some effect on Lee's ability to feed his army in the coming months.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
They'd probably have to let the Pennsylvanians they

The real question, I think, would be the consequences of Meade overrunning Lee's supply train. No booty from Pennsylvania and Maryland presumably has at least some effect on Lee's ability to feed his army in the coming months.

They'd probably have to let the Pennsylvanians they'd enslaved go, at least.

https://books.google.com/books?id=Ma-XQ2KqkyIC&pg=PA137&output=html&source=gbs_toc_r&hl=en

As many as 1,000 men, women, and children were enslaved by the Army of Northern Virginia during the Gettyburg Campaign.

And, it is worth noting, with the knowledge and acknowledgment of senior rebel officers, including (at least) Longstreet, Pickett, and Sorrel:

http://valley.lib.virginia.edu/or/R151733

And an eyewitness:

Near Boonsboro, Md.,
July 15th, 1863

Dear Wife,
I seat myself to pen you a line, not knowing when I shall have another opportunity. We marched to this place today from Williamsport & a very
hot day it has been too. Yesterday morning it was found that the rebels had left our front, & we marched to the river at Williamsport. Our Cavalry
came on some of them on this side of the river & captured a few hundred of them & two pieces of Artillery. They kept their doings a secret
or I recon they would have not got over as well as they did. I suppose some will blame Gen. Meade for letting them cross the river, but it is
impossible to tell the doings of the enemy unless you attack in force or have means of getting around them for a thousand will make as good a
show as 100 thousand. I don’t know what our movement will be now, but make a guess that in a week we will be in the vicinity of Centerville &
Fairfax….

I saw a sight yesterday that beats all I ever saw. A Negro boy that the Rebels left in a barn, entirely naked. His breast cut & bowels were scratched or cut & the Dr. said that turpentine had been put on him & also his privates had been cut off. I went in the barn to see him but it was rather dark.
He lay on his back, his legs bent, knees up, & grinding his teeth & foaming at the mouth & seemed to take no notice of anything & breast & bowels
looked as if they had been cut & then burned all over. I understand the reason of the act to be because he would not go over the river with them….

Yours,
C.K. Leach

C. K. Leach was 1st Lieutenant Chester K. Leach, Company H, 2nd Vermont Infantry. His letter was published in Ted Alexander’s 2001 North & South article, “A Regular Slave Hunt: The Army of Northern Virginia and Black Civilians in the Gettysburg Campaign.”


Best,
 
Last edited:
Top