"The Confederates win at Gettysburg, then what?" Topic

Interesting thread….

link

Amicalement
Armand

And thus a hundred new wargames ACW campaigns begin.

From the Military History Online website.

All depends on what you mean by "win."

#4 is the most plausible. Neither general planned on fighting at Gettysburg. If the Confederates did not bring on a general action there is a small battle and both sides move on to someplace else. If somebody took the initiative and Confederates captured Culp's Hill there is a sharp action and the Union goes somewhere else.

I won't weigh in on anything that happened on the second or third day, by that point there was no likelihood of either side disengaging and fighting a major battle elsewhere.

No Gettysburg Address, I presume.

Some bad novels along the line of "What if the North Won at Gettysburg?"

Thanks!

Amicalement
Armand

Poorly written concepts ignoring some major factors while focusing a lot on others.

1: What is meant by "win"…first they talk about "winning Gettysburg", and then move on to "Well if he wins Day 2."…So is "winning gettysburg" all on the first day, (which seems like where this was going), or winning an entire 2-3 day battle?

2: Like it's been said, neither army planned to fight at G'burg. Meade wanted Pipe Creek, which is ignored here.

3: The idea for the ANV tactically was to get between DC and Harrisburg causing concern and alarm in both the PA capitol and the national capitol. Lee's fixation on the ground at G'burg was a major mistake. The strategic idea was to take the war away from Virginia.

4: Yes ammunition was currently in short supply, but if we are talking an ANV victory then you are seeing a short term resupply using captured equipment from the AOP. Muskets, cannons, horses, shoes, bullets, caps, powder and any rations. All equipment captured would have been foraged and used.

5: It didn't matter at that exact moment if Lee DID win at G'burg. The loss of Vicksburg would've offset his victory so that he was now pressed for even more time. So does he dig in on the high ground and wait for Meade or whatever new AOP commander that just replaced Lincoln to come booming at him with rabid congressman pushing him to "attack attack attack!"?…or does he continue to move in the direction and force the strategic objective, or does he go tactical and press upon Harrisburg or perhaps Northern DC itself?

6: With a CS success at Gburg will Lee write to Davis requesting urgent resupply and reinforcements? Will Davis respond quickly by stripping the Richmond/Petersburg defenses, or will he respond at all?

Too many questions to give an accurate answer.

The war goes on. The South was at a HUGE disadvantage from the start.

The only advantage they had was a FAR better officer corp and better class of troops to draw on.

Industry ? The North had a over whelming edge.

Manpower ? Same, a HUGE edge goes to the North.

World support ? Not without taking DC. Which with even a victory at Gettysburg would have done them any good. DC at that time had just as many garrison troops behind good fortifications, as the Army of the Potomac. Than the Army of Northern Virginia at the beginning of the Gettysburg battle.

So the war would have just dragged on. Grant would have came in and did the very same thing. Attrite and BLEED the Army of Northern Virginia white till Lee surrendered.

Haven't we been down this road before.

Lee did win Gettysburg on Day 1. He got the best opportunity he could hope for, a chance to engage part of the Army of the Potomac beyond immediate supporting range of the rest of the Army. Because the Confederate army was also divided and because of Confederate mistakes the victory was less than it could have been.

That the battle continued on into Day 2 was as much the choice of Hancock as it was Ewell's decision not to storm the hills south of town. This was the correct move by the AoP. The ACW was as much a political contest for the U.S. as it was a military one. Whatever the military considerations, having the Union army retreating before Lee's army on northern soil could have had a major political impact.

Focusing on Lee's ammo situation is the wrong way to look at it. If the Union army is beaten on Day 2 or Day 3 there are fallback positions they can use. What they would not have that they had after Day 1 was a large number of veteran reinforcements. This means that the Army of the Potomac would likely not be in a position to seize the initiative. Lee would not only be able to use supplies he captured on the field, he could also re-establish his own supply lines to the south.

The Confederates win at Gettysburg, then what?

1. Storm the Capital

2. Hang Lincoln

3 Retire to a family style restaurant where Lee can treat his men to unlimited breadsticks.

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

I notice people forget that here was a huge army at Washington. not as good as army as potomac but it also does not have to attack just defend. I think Lee was going to have problems after Gettysburg. Plus what would happen when he finds out Vicksburg had fallen.

Plus what would happen when he finds out Vicksburg had fallen.

Get the breadsticks to go?

I am aware of a number of garrison formations Greyalexis, but I don't believe there was much in the way of mobile field troops.

Another unusual thing about ACW formations after a defeat they reformed and returned to fight. In previous wars often a defeated army wasn't as able to return to the fight. Perhaps this might be the result of poor follow-up by cavalry forces to harass the defeated enemy.

All the ANV's trips north of the Potomac were raids. Win or lose, the Confederates would be heading back across the river soon after the battle.

The only advantage they had was a FAR better officer corp and better class of troops to draw on

I question both of those assumptions.

DC at that time had just as many garrison troops behind good fortifications, as the Army of the Potomac.

I don't know the numbers, but I doubt that statement also. Hooker had stripped Washington of almost all moveable troops. There was still one brigade of the Pennsylvania Reserve Division there, but all the rest were garrison-type units, artillery, quartermasters, etc.

The other minor detail is how and when it was won. Given Lee actually lost, it needs a change in events to turn that around. Some or all of what followed on the day would therefore not have happened.

Given that, how badly did Meade loose and how many Confederates were killed and wounded in the process?

Lee might have been able to resupply though some captured Union material but it might not be enough. Then there would have been the veterans he could not replace, plus thousands of wounded to deal with.

How would this effect the next moves of the ANV?

Its really not possible to sum up these "what if" questions about the Civil War, without a truck load of analysis, and come to any real conclusions

What if Beauregard had been struck by lightning on April 11th 1861? What would have happened if McClellan had a backbone? etc etc etc

It's all a bunch of nonsense. Ultimately the end would have been the same. The rebellion is crushed. End of story.

Just like how Alexander was eventually defeated by the Persians. There are plenty of examples in history of a weaker opponent defeating a stronger one. When this happens we are treated to a round of explanations about how the supposedly stronger opponent had weaknesses that the weaker opponent was able to exploit. The ACW was no different. The U.S. with its larger industrial base, larger population and navy went into the war the odds on favorite. The faults were there though.

My take. Gettysburg was a side show. That same week The south lost Vicksburg, the Miss River, the Trans Miss, and the war. The only thing that Lee could have done that would possibly have made a difference was send Longstreet west early and crushed Grant at the Big Black river. I understand this was discussed in Richmond and turned down.

That same week The south lost Vicksburg, the Miss River, the Trans Miss, …

… and the rest of Middle Tennessee (Rosecrans' Tulahoma campaign).

Considering how long it took to move troops west when they decided to I'd say shifting troops away from the ANV sooner would have ended the war earlier rather than later. Really the south wasn't in a position to be strategically railroad mobile like the north was.

They did it 3 months later, Sept 1863. Longstreets corps moved west for an edge at Chickamauga. It was discussed in the planning for Gettysburg, but Lee didn't want to hear it. After his loss at Gettysburg, he had been knocked down enough to agree to it. Yes downlowry, everyone forgets about Rosecrans because of Chickamauga, but at the time he was highly though of for Tulahoma. A master stroke of generalship forcing the rebels out of Tennessee with very minimal cost.