Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Vicksburg and Gettysburg / a question

Expand Messages
  • carlw4514
    Longstreet to Johnston might have just been what it took to get that pessimist (Johnston) out of his funk. In any case, I really think this is what could have
    Message 1 of 51 , Mar 1 12:40 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Longstreet to Johnston might have just been what it took to get that
      pessimist (Johnston) out of his funk. In any case, I really think this
      is what could have changed really prevented the July '63 disasters. As
      for things collapsing in the east without the troops, Chickamauga also
      proved that that was not in the cards - necessarily. Taking advantage
      of interior lines should have been Secesh priority from day one.
      carl

      --- In civilwarwest@y..., "wh_keene" <wh_keene@y...> wrote:
      [...]
      > I think that if a force like Longstreet's had been transferred to
      > Bragg in May or June rather than months later, Rosecrans would not
      > have gotten as far with manouvering from Mufreesburo to Chattanooga.

      > Instead of losing it on the Georgia border, Rosecrans would have
      lost
      > it around Manchester, TN.
      >
      > Alternatively, if Longstreet had been sent to Johnston in June, they
      > might have had the force to actually accomplish something like a
      > drive at Hurlbut to recapture Memphis.
      >
      > If Lee had remained on the defensive using the natural line of the
      > Rappahanock/Wilderness his position by the end of 1863 would have
      > been the same without the heavy losses incurred at Gettysburg.
      >
      > Additionally, if Longstreet had been sent to Bragg the previous
      year,
      > after the retreat from Antietam, I think it likely that the outcome
      > of Stone's River would have been more like Chickamauga, and we would
      > be reading of the seige of Nashville.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In civilwarwest@y..., "carlw4514" <carlw4514@y...> wrote:
      > >
      > > I think you are right. Here is a question for everybody: does the
      > > Confederate victory at Chickamauga prove that the Lee-opposed
      > sending
      > > of troops west was actually the right course of action for the
      > > Confedracy?
      > > carl
      > > --- In civilwarwest@y..., "wh_keene" <wh_keene@y...> wrote:
      > > > I was browsing old messages and came across a comment by Bob
      > > > Huddleston ("One of the hard parts of doing a campaign -- or a
      > > > battle -- is keeping everything in perspective, things happening
      > at
      > > > the same time, often scattered apart by miles. How many think of
      > > > Morgan's Raid into Ohio as being part of the Gettysboourg
      > > Campaign?")
      > > > and I had an interesting thought:
      > > >
      > > > How many think that the Gettysburg campaign is really a part of
      > the
      > > > Vicksburg campaign?
      > > >
      > > > Most books I have read suggest that Lee's northward movement in
      > the
      > > > summer of '63 was a direct result of Grant's success in
      > Mississippi:
      > >
      > > > Davis wanted some action taken in response to the encirclement
      of
      > > > Vicksburg; Lee was oppossed to sending a portion of his army
      west
      > > but
      > > > suggested a threatening move into Maryland/Pennsylvania which
      > might
      > > > counterbalance Grant. From a broad perspective, Gettysburg
      was
      > an
      > > > unsuccessful sideshow to distract from Grant's capture of
      > Vicksburg.
    • hartshje
      ... Will, 1. Of course, it was Grant who captured Fort Donelson, opening the Cumberland R. all the way to Nashville. But when A.S. Johnston retreated from
      Message 51 of 51 , Mar 7 8:35 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In civilwarwest@y..., "wh_keene" <wh_keene@y...> wrote:
        > Joe,
        > I always thought Grant had something to do with the initial
        > evacuation of Nashville. Maybe score the point for Foote with an
        > assist by Grant. (Sorry, basketball terminology sneaks in
        > sometimes.)
        > With an alternative outcome to Stone's River and a recapture of
        > Nashville, I think the challenge for Bragg would be to contest any
        > effort of Grant to cross the Tennessee.
        >

        Will,

        1. Of course, it was Grant who captured Fort Donelson, opening the
        Cumberland R. all the way to Nashville. But when A.S. Johnston
        retreated from Bowling Green, he didn't even try to defend Nashville
        against Buell coming down from Kentucky. He knew he couldn't do
        anything to stop Foote's flotilla, nor could he keep them from
        helping Buell to cross the river. So Johnston chose to abandon the
        city and hook up with Beauregard at Corinth. (Here's another what if:
        what if Beauregard had come to Nashville instead, and their combined
        forces struck Buell after he crossed the Cumberland?)

        2. Assuming, in our hypothetical scenario, that Bragg scores a
        knockout at Stone's River, and recaptures Nashville, I think the best
        next move on his part would be to go after Grant who is still in
        northern Mississippi at this time, hopefully linking up with
        Pemberton's army. Here again, we see that an overall commander in
        this theater would be needed. Logically, that would be Bragg. Do
        you think he could have managed a hook-up with Pemberton? What do
        you think Grant's reaction to all this would be?

        Joe
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.