WI: Braxton Bragg shot by his own men

Bragg was not a well liked man. More than once his own men plotted to assassinate him just to get rid of him. Let's say one day (you pick the year) one of Bragg's men gets tired of him and shoots him dead. All the officers swear up and down that it was an accident and the matter is largely laid to rest, to be talked about by later historians. What affect does this have on the war? Of course, the year in which he is killed matters loads, but I'll leave that to you. Thanks.
 
Let's say Bragg is killed in the aftermath of Chickamauga where the resentment of his corps commanders boiled over into outright mutiny. Because of this, Longstreet is never sent to Knoxville and the Confederate flank on Lookout Mountain is undiminished. And let's say that overall morale and performance by Confederate commanders improves.

What does Grant do if he can't flank the Confederates on the left and finds that Missionary Ridge is better defended. Grant has the numbers to force a Confederate withdrawal but it could come at a much higher price for his armies in this scenario.
 
Agreed, the timing of this is important. Hopefully Joe Johnson gets into command sooner and can hopefully put the brakes on Grant...
 
Bragg was actually fragged by his troops before the Civil War, the attack destroyed his cot but left him uninjured. I started a thread on this some time ago, asking what would happen if he was killed in the attempt.
 
Let's say Bragg is killed in the aftermath of Chickamauga where the resentment of his corps commanders boiled over into outright mutiny. Because of this, Longstreet is never sent to Knoxville and the Confederate flank on Lookout Mountain is undiminished. And let's say that overall morale and performance by Confederate commanders improves.

What does Grant do if he can't flank the Confederates on the left and finds that Missionary Ridge is better defended. Grant has the numbers to force a Confederate withdrawal but it could come at a much higher price for his armies in this scenario.
Anything that can slow down the Union and cause massive casualties will ultimately help the Confederate cause for Lincoln to lose reelection.
 
Bragg was actually fragged by his troops before the Civil War, the attack destroyed his cot but left him uninjured. I started a thread on this some time ago, asking what would happen if he was killed in the attempt.
I though the fragging incident happened during the civil war. My mistake.
 
Would it really slow down the Union though? Even if Lee rushes to appoint Johnson to command it'll still be some time before he can restore discipline, and in the meantime the disorganized rebels will be easy pickings for the North. Besides, it's rare in history when a mutiny achieving its chief objective does anything other than encouraging future mutinies. So while the opportunities of OTL never open up the uncoordinated and ill-disciplined mob of rebels might well give many others to Grant.
 
Last edited:
Would it really slow down the Union though? Even if Lee rushes to appoint Johnson to command it'll still be some time before he can restore discipline, and in the meantime the disorganized rebels will be easy pickings for the North. Besides, it's rare in history when a mutiny achieving its chief objective does anything other than encouraging future mutinies. So while the opportunities of OTL never open up the uncoordinated and ill-disciplined Confederate force might well give many others to Grant.
For one, Lee doesn't appoint anyone. He wasn't General-in-Chief until March of 1865. Second, it's likely General Hardee or someone else would be the interim general until the appointed general arrived. Hardee was one of the good ones and likely could've done more if given the opportunity. Hardee would be able to hold off Grant long enough for Johnston or who ever to arrive. Plus moral would probably skyrocket once the argumentative Bragg was gone. And now they have a real chance at Chattannooga.
 
Would Hardee automatically take command, or would there be a dispute over who the interim commander is? If there is, then the rebels aren't going to be able to easily ready any effective response if there's any disagreement whatsoever between corps commanders (which there almost certainly will be) and no overall commander who can give the final word.

Also, even if the mutiny helps morale in the long term, it will destroy discipline--many commanders, especially field officers, might not want to risk leading their men into situations that the men view as unfavorable, and the men have no real reason to do so at all unless and until discipline is restored, which will be hard to do while also fighting a campaign against a determined enemy. The rebels probably wouldn't melt away, but it's hard to imagine them having the discipline and confidence to properly respond to any assault.

Maybe I'm wrong, there might be reason to believe discipline would spontaneously restore with the removal of the unpopular commander. However, there are very few examples in history of any frontline mutiny ever resolving the issue so neatly.
 
Would Hardee automatically take command, or would there be a dispute over who the interim commander is? If there is, then the rebels aren't going to be able to easily ready any effective response if there's any disagreement whatsoever between corps commanders (which there almost certainly will be) and no overall commander who can give the final word.

Also, even if the mutiny helps morale in the long term, it will destroy discipline--many commanders, especially field officers, might not want to risk leading their men into situations that the men view as unfavorable, and the men have no real reason to do so at all unless and until discipline is restored, which will be hard to do while also fighting a campaign against a determined enemy. The rebels probably wouldn't melt away, but it's hard to imagine them having the discipline and confidence to properly respond to any assault.

Maybe I'm wrong, there might be reason to believe discipline would spontaneously restore with the removal of the unpopular commander. However, there are very few examples in history of any frontline mutiny ever resolving the issue so neatly.
There is no mutiny. It's one guy losing it and the others coming for him because they hate Bragg. And there would be no power struggle because the interim replacement is chosen by President Davis. So there is no question who is in charge because Davis picks directly. And he would most certainly pick Hardee in my opinion.
 
There is no mutiny.

There is a soldier or soldiers taking up arms against a superior officer, a mutiny by definition (insofar as the rebels were a legitimate military authority). These things have a habit of spreading. The other officers have a responsibility to restore discipline, which might provoke further mutinies if they don't handle it perfectly. There is no perfect comparison that I could find, but I think that of Mangal Pandey has enough similarities to be a possible worst case scenario.

And there would be no power struggle because the interim replacement is chosen by President Davis.

The south had a limited telegraph network that was not properly utilized for military purposes. Furthermore, there were almost no instances where Davis' appointments (or Lincoln's for that matter) early in the war were not slowed down and complicated by politicking, further slowing how long it might take to confirm Hardee (or anyone else) for command--even assuming that Davis has the political capacity to appoint Hardee. It might only take a week or two, but a week or two of combat without a clear chain of command and uncertain discipline is a military disaster in the making.

Oh, and going with immediately after Chickamauga as a POD, according to what I've found Hardee wasn't even at Chickamauga, and didn't take a corps command until Chattanooga. I could be wrong on that, but assuming I'm not then his challenges in restoring discipline and taking command would be doubled...not to mention the fact that merely the time it'll take him to get his orders and make it to the army will further lengthen the delay and the time Grant has to exploit a leaderless opposition.
 
Last edited:
There is a soldier or soldiers taking up arms against a superior officer, a mutiny by definition (insofar as the rebels were a legitimate military authority). These things have a habit of spreading. The other officers have a responsibility to restore discipline, which might provoke further mutinies if they don't handle it perfectly. There is no perfect comparison that I could find, but I think that of Mangal Pandey has enough similarities to be a possible worst case scenario.



The south had a limited telegraph network that was not properly utilized for military purposes. Furthermore, there were almost no instances where Davis' appointments (or Lincoln's for that matter) early in the war were not slowed down and complicated by politicking, further slowing how long it might take to confirm Hardee (or anyone else) for command--even assuming that Lee has the political capacity to appoint Hardee. It might only take a week or two, but a week or two of combat without a clear chain of command and uncertain discipline is a military disaster in the making.

Oh, and going with immediately after Chickamauga as a POD, according to what I've found Hardee wasn't even at Chickamauga, and didn't take a corps command until Chattanooga. I could be wrong on that, but assuming I'm not then his challenges in restoring discipline and taking command would be doubled...not to mention the fact that merely the time it'll take him to get his orders and make it to the army will further lengthen the delay and the time Grant has to exploit a leaderless opposition.
Once again, Lee can't appoint anyone at this point in time. All he is is the commanding general of the ANV.
 
The south had a limited telegraph network that was not properly utilized for military purposes. Furthermore, there were almost no instances where Davis' appointments (or Lincoln's for that matter) early in the war were not slowed down and complicated by politicking, further slowing how long it might take to confirm Hardee (or anyone else) for command--even assuming that Lee has the political capacity to appoint Hardee. It might only take a week or two, but a week or two of combat without a clear chain of command and uncertain discipline is a military disaster in the making.

While the OP asks what would happen if Bragg were murdered by his subordinates, we don't have to go quite as far ITTL because OTL Jefferson Davis personally traveled to the front at Chattanooga to assess the command situation after he received a petition from Bragg's subordinates. He ultimately left Bragg in command convinced the malcontents were in the wrong.

Naturally we can perhaps devise a POD where Davis does decide to relieve Bragg at Chattanooga, in which case he's right there to unambiguously appoint an interim commander until a new one is selected. I'm not enough of an expert to determine who present would be the best choice but the command situation would at least be settled for the time being.
 
While the OP asks what would happen if Bragg were murdered by his subordinates, we don't have to go quite as far ITTL because OTL Jefferson Davis personally traveled to the front at Chattanooga to assess the command situation after he received a petition from Bragg's subordinates. He ultimately left Bragg in command convinced the malcontents were in the wrong.

Naturally we can perhaps devise a POD where Davis does decide to relieve Bragg at Chattanooga, in which case he's right there to unambiguously appoint an interim commander until a new one is selected. I'm not enough of an expert to determine who present would be the best choice but the command situation would at least be settled for the time being.
This was in 1863 right? Even before Chickamauga.
 
This was in 1863 right? Even before Chickamauga.

My understanding is that Davis personally came to resolve the situation after Chickamauga, which is when tensions within the Army of Tennessee were at their highest. Hill, Polk and the others though Bragg was at fault for not completely destroying the Army of the Cumberland and letting them retreat to the safety of Chattanooga.
 
Couldn't it be nice semi ambigous not so friendly fire incident followed by a few "oh darns" that a few people quietly know it's murder?

As for who would be in command, it would probably be Hardee with Cleburne (who hasn't said anything controversial yet) succeeding as Corps commander.
 
Top