WI: Virginia doesn't secede

What happens if Virginia opts for neutrality, and is followed by Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina and maybe Arkansas and Tennessee?

This is a wholly different scenario to Kentucky trying to maintain neutrality on its own. And makes it harder for the two sides to fight.

Who blinks first: North or South?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
What happens if Virginia opts for neutrality, and is followed by Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina and maybe Arkansas and Tennessee?

This is a wholly different scenario to Kentucky trying to maintain neutrality on its own. And makes it harder for the two sides to fight.

Who blinks first: North or South?

It's a coin toss. Suppose a secessionist militia unit with an overzealous commander decides to seize the Norfolk Navy Yard, runs into trouble with Federal troops, and a few Confederate regiments just over the border in North Carolina decide to pitch in to help them? Or what if the Union commanders in Washington get anxious when "neutral" Virginia militia occupy Alexandria and Arlington, right across the Potomac, and cross over the river to occupy those towns in order to make sure Washington is defensible?

Something like that would happen sooner or later. Virginia trying to be neutral wouldn't work any better than Kentucky's attempt IOTL.
 
There is no way 100% of the population would be pro-Union, but if the state government chose a side, most likely the majority would side with them. I also think that if the Federal Government, especially Lincoln, released something saying they did not intend to outlaw slavery, they would gain a bit more support.
 
I dont believe Viginia would join the Union cause. Could it try to remain neutral? Sure, it could TRY. I am not at all sure that Lincoln would let states be neutral. Otoh, cutting all that population and industry away from the csa might just tempt him to do so.

However, if Virginia is neutral, how the heck does the Union attack?

Amphibious assaults on SC? Thats going to be fighting with one arm tied behind her back.

Assuming Kentucky does the same, as OTL, and so does Missouri, then the Union cant drive down the Mississippi, either.

The CSA might actually win in this scenario, despite being far weaker.

If Virginia goes neutral, might New York, especially if draft riots are as bad or worse than otl?

To keep Virginia in, Lincoln might have to avoid the draft completely, which would also massively harm the Union cause.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Amphibious assaults on SC? Thats going to be fighting with one arm tied behind her back.

IOTL, they captured Port Royal in South Carolina with ridiculous ease in November of 1861. ITTL, without the capture of the naval artillery at the Norfolk Navy Yard, Confederate coastal defenses in pretty much the whole of the Deep South are going to be considerably weaker than IOTL.
 
IOTL, they captured Port Royal in South Carolina with ridiculous ease in November of 1861. ITTL, without the capture of the naval artillery at the Norfolk Navy Yard, Confederate coastal defenses in pretty much the whole of the Deep South are going to be considerably weaker than IOTL.

Hmmmm... OK. You know, I WAS going to remark on logistics problems, but its actually much cheaper to carry stuff by sea than overland. So if they capture and hold a decent port..... ya. That might work well.
 
If Virginia stays, then so does North Carolina and maybe Tennessee. I don't see the other states impacted by Virginia's decision one way or the other. That said, the rebels are in a far weaker starting position under these circumstances.
 
What happens if Virginia doesn't secede from the union?

The capital of the Confederacy would've probably been in Mobile.

Under these circumstances I don't the Civil War lasting any longer than a couple of months as Lee would be on the Union side (he was a proud Virginian so he would be on whatever side Virginia fought on) and he was arguably the best general of the time, and the only reason why the CSA stuck around as long as it did IOTL.
 
There is a fundamental problem in this entire thread. The secession of Virginia and the rest of the upper South was an immediate response to Lincoln's call for volunteers to suppress the insurrection in the deep south. Barring a much earlier POD (VA adopts gradual emancipaton in 1830?VA has an equitable apportionment of legistative seats?) the reaction in Virginia does not change. So either Lincoln accepts the departure of the 7 state Confederacy or Virginia seceedes in response to the call for volunteers. Without this earllier POD Virginia (and its military heroes) never become part of the Union military force. That said, if the OP is accepted, forget the Generals, the Confederacy is dead meat in months from the disparity on strength.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
The capital of the Confederacy would've probably been in Mobile.

Probably not. Too vulnerable to a naval attack. I'd say that they'd either keep it in Montgomery or move it to Atlanta (which lobbied for it heavily IOTL).

Under these circumstances I don't the Civil War lasting any longer than a couple of months as Lee would be on the Union side (he was a proud Virginian so he would be on whatever side Virginia fought on) and he was arguably the best general of the time, and the only reason why the CSA stuck around as long as it did IOTL.

The thought just occurred to me. . . Lee vs. Longstreet!
 
General Lee would be the commander of the Union army, as stated above. Hell, down the line he very well may replace Grant as President.

Tennessee would stay union, they only succeeded because Virginia did. Same with NC and maybe Arkansas. If for some reason Tennessee succeeds then the Eastern Appalachian counties won't stand for it. Some petitioned in OTL to be separated from Tennessee like with West Virginia. It would probably be accepted ITTL because of Unionist Virginia. Say hello to the State of Franklin. Maybe the western NC counties join as well, if NC goes Confederate too.

If Tennessee doesn't succeed though, while yes you have a less powerful confederacy, one of the Union's most strategic victories never occurs, unless the Confederates are dumb enough to attack Memphis via the Tennessee, and from there everything goes as in OTL.

Also though the Confederates don't have a complete train line to the Atlantic without Tennessee, limiting them more.


Sorry, I live in Tennessee so that's the Civil War history I know most about.The rest I'm not so sure about.
 
I really have difficulty imagining a situation in which Virginia stays loyal; even many of the nominal "Unionists" at the secession convention were opposed to allowing Lincoln to suppress the rebellion (which is why they seceded as soon as he made clear that he was calling up troops to do so). About the only approach that might work would be something a la the situation in Missouri, where local Unionist militias basically staged a coup against the secessionist governor, but I can't imagine there are enough pre-existing Unionist forces already in Virginia to pull off such a thing.

Nor can Virginia exactly bar federal troops, seeing as how there are already federal military institutions in the state (most prominently the arsenal at Harper's Ferry and the naval yard at Norfolk).

That said, assuming that these barriers are somehow overcome, Virginia staying unionist almost certainly sees North Carolina and Tennessee staying loyal (I don't know enough about the Arkansas secession movement to make a judgement on that case, but Arkansas is comparatively inconsequential anyway).

Robert E. Lee will not become overall Union commander (that position will stay with Scott, and then probably shift to another Northerner if he is replaced as OTL) but he likely will get some reasonably prominent command. I doubt he parlays it into a post-war political career, as he doesn't seem to have been particularly interested in one OTL, and he certainly seems unlikely to join the Republican Party (who will probably still dominate presidential elections post-war as OTL).

The South is vastly weaker, with its most populous states OTL now arrayed against it (and while there will probably be significant defections as with the OTL border states, most of the soldiers from these new border states will end up fighting for the Union ITTL), it's industry vastly weakened, it's position much less defensible (especially if they don't pull a Kentucky and thus allow Union troops to move through e.g. North Carolina). Nor should we forget that the vastly shorter coastline will make the blockade hit harder, faster.

But honestly, this probably means a much shorter war; slavery may or may not survive (I suspect that if we see a Reconstruction analog, the Reconstructed governments will abolish slavery during the period of Republican dominance, and revert to something resembling OTL Jim Crow once *Redemption gets underway).

However, as I said, I don't see a way to get Virginia to stay loyal without a POD so early that it will radically alter the contours of the Civil War as we know it.
 
If Virginia stays in I don't think that will affect Missouri much where local passions amongst the pro-CSA folks would still rule. Tennessee with more support for the pro-Union east..maybe tries a Kentucky.

As far as slavery goes, if you abolish it in the states that secede, but not in the states that stay in the Union, you'll still see slavery go away. Slavery in the upper south was on the way out for economic reasons. If the core of slavery in the deep south is gone - Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, (? Tennessee) will eventually get rid of it over the next 10 years perhaps with a federal mandate and compensation. Of course the fugitive slave law will be toast so that will be interesting.
 
True, but even worse than that would be the fact that the Norfolk Navy Yard would not fall into Confederate hands. IOTL, literally thousands of cannon from Norfolk were sent to coastal and river fortifications throughout the Confederacy. No Virginia secession, and the coastal and river defenses of the South are much, much weaker than IOTL. Also, no capture and transfer of the armory facilities at Harper's Ferry.

Any chance that either Buchanan or Lincoln could have had those guns etc transferred further north prior to the outbreak of war?
 
Top