Had things been planned properly could there have been a breakthrough following the huge mine explosion and could Richmond have followed
Could the battle of the Crater have changed things
- Thread starter Derek Jackson
- Start date
It certainly could have gone a lot better than it did; IIRC, the black troops who had been training for the battle for a long time were replaced last-minute with white troops because the government didn't want to be seen using black troops as cannon fodder in case the attack failed. Keep the troops who have been training for it in the attack, and the attack will go much better.
If it had been successful, we could have seen the Siege of Petersburg end eight months before OTL. Given that Petersburg is vital for resupplying Richmond, I think Lee would have given up both cities, as he did in 1865 OTL. Assuming Lee manages to get most if the ANV out, he likely manages to resist from North Carolina for a little longer before Grant catches up to him.
With Richmond gone, I wonder how long the rest of the CSA holds out. At this point OTL, Atlanta hadn't fallen yet, and the boost of Richmond falling means that there isn't any political pressure on Sherman to push ahead. I think the CSA is likely to surrender if Richmond falls.
If it had been successful, we could have seen the Siege of Petersburg end eight months before OTL. Given that Petersburg is vital for resupplying Richmond, I think Lee would have given up both cities, as he did in 1865 OTL. Assuming Lee manages to get most if the ANV out, he likely manages to resist from North Carolina for a little longer before Grant catches up to him.
With Richmond gone, I wonder how long the rest of the CSA holds out. At this point OTL, Atlanta hadn't fallen yet, and the boost of Richmond falling means that there isn't any political pressure on Sherman to push ahead. I think the CSA is likely to surrender if Richmond falls.
What commander..in his right mind..with one army trapped in Atlanta..his nation split in two along it's largest and most important river, all it's major ports taken or blockaded, no help from foreign nations..and his own army (the best his nation has got) is being bled dry in a protracted seige..whose nation's economy has collapsed and land is half occupied by the invading forces...would, upon the collapsing of his lines (The Battle of the Crater) and the surrendering of his 'nation's capital', not immediately see the writing on the wall (if he hadn't already seen it)..and surrender?
Lee is seen as one of America's greatest generals...I see him, not only as a rebel..but as a fool. Once Grant had him pinned down in Petersburg he had to know he was beaten..with nothing but bad news coming from the West..and no hope of British intervention..once Lincoln was reelected..why didn't he counsel Davis to surrender? Even at the end he tried to fight on..is that praiseworthy? Not if your one of the thousands of soldiers that died in thse final days..or tens of thousands in those final months.
Great tactician..greater egotist and ass.
Lee is seen as one of America's greatest generals...I see him, not only as a rebel..but as a fool. Once Grant had him pinned down in Petersburg he had to know he was beaten..with nothing but bad news coming from the West..and no hope of British intervention..once Lincoln was reelected..why didn't he counsel Davis to surrender? Even at the end he tried to fight on..is that praiseworthy? Not if your one of the thousands of soldiers that died in thse final days..or tens of thousands in those final months.
Great tactician..greater egotist and ass.
Lee is seen as one of America's greatest generals...I see him, not only as a rebel..but as a fool. Once Grant had him pinned down in Petersburg he had to know he was beaten..with nothing but bad news coming from the West..and no hope of British intervention..once Lincoln was reelected..why didn't he counsel Davis to surrender? Even at the end he tried to fight on..is that praiseworthy? Not if your one of the thousands of soldiers that died in thse final days..or tens of thousands in those final months.
Great tactician..greater egotist and ass.
As Lee would defend himself, politics are not his responsibility.
And given Davis's record at listening to unwelcome advice, would Lee changing his tack there make any difference to anyone?
Defeat is a very bitter pill. You ask why Lee fought on. Why did his men fight on? Why did tens of thousands of other Confederate soldiers fight to the bitter end? Why did 20,000 Confederate soldiers attack at Franklin, in November 1864, or at Bentonville, in March 1865? Why did 300 Confederates fight at Palmito Ranch in Texas in May 1865?
Because beyond a certain point, one has committed everything to the war (or so it feels). You've said that you would die for the cause; that means death is preferable to defeat.
Accepting defeat can be a crushing psychological blow. It means writing off all the sacrifices made as worthless.
Why didn't Lee counsel surrender? Because that was above his pay grade. It was a political decision, and he had made a very conscious decision never to meddle in politics, but to follow the soldier's principle of submission to civilian authority. And Davis would never surrender.
Last edited:
The decision was made by Meade - who was thinking about the political fallout, but mainly WRT his own postwar career. Grant supported Meade.
General Ledlie, whose division was selected for the assault, was a drunken coward. He hid in a dugout with a bottle of whiskey and let his troops lead themselves.
Burnside also deserves considerable denunciation. When Meade interfered, Burnside went off in huff, and had the replacement division selected by lot. He made no further effort to see that his plan was actually followed.
I wonder how many troops Lee could get out. The sudden shattering of the line would allow no time to get a withdrawal started. OTL, after the defeat at Five Forks on April 1, Lee knew the defense was lost, and ordered the evacuation of Richmond and Petersburg. The next morning, Union troops broke the right flank of the Petersburg defenses, but many Confederates got away to the west or across the Appomatox through Petersburg.
A breakthrough at the Crater is a complete surprise, and a deadly thrust into the heart of the Confederate position. Burnside's original plan called for the breach to be followed by an immediate drive into Petersburg and the bridge over the Appomatox. It would have trapped an entire Confederate corps to the east. To the west, the Confederate line would be unhinged, and retreat in disorder.
I'd guess, though, that Lee could evacuate the troops north of the Appomattox (the blocking forces at Bermuda Hundred, and east of Richmond), and about half those to the south would get away. He'll pull Early's corps from the Shenandoah, too.
50,000 all up, I guess.
Four months, max.
There will be pressure to finish the job, to match the victory in Virginia. Sherman is not going to slack off. The demoralization on the Confederates will be considerable, and Atlanta will fall within two weeks (not a month).
Lee will retreat to North Carolina; Grant will pursue, driving the Confederates south. Sheridan gets assigned to scour the landward side of the advance.
Sherman might march directly from Atlanta to North Carolina, or due east into South Carolina. Alternately, Grant may pursue Lee to the southwest, and send Sheridan south to Raleigh and Wilmington.
By the end of August, Grant will have cleared North Carolina. Lee will have to retreat to South Carolina, where he will be joined by Hood, retreating in front of Sherman. Grant and Sherman will annihilate the remaining Confederate army in South Carolina in September.
October will be mop-up.
Lincoln wins in a landslide in November; the last rebels surrender that month.
Davis will never surrender. He'll be caught somewhere.
An interesting knock-on: the rehabilitation of Burnside's reputation. He's won one of the most important victories of the war. Even with his OTL reputation he had a considerable political career later, as Governor of Rhode Island and U.S. Senator. He was popular in spite of his defeats, serving as Commander-in-Chief of the Grand Army of the Republic for a year, and as the first head of the National Rifle Association.
If he is the Victor of Petersburg, then he could be President. He won't displace Grant, but he could succeed him in 1876.
Good points, but I'm not sure about Burnside becoming President. He may have won one battle, but there's still Fredericksburg to consider, and the utter hash he made of that. In addition, Meade and Grant are going to try to claim at least some of the credit for the battle. It might just cement Burnside's reputation as an excellent subordinate, but not cut out for the top job. Not the best reputation you want when running for the top slot.
If the crater succeeds and Petersburg falls the war ends sooner. No matter what Davis/government decides Lee will be forced in to an "Appomattox" situation and he will have no choice but to surrender his command based on military realities. Game over.
If this key breakthrough is made by USCT IMHO there will be more "positive" thinking about the Negro in the north, the war ending sooner means more Union soldiers come home/come home in one piece. You might see more Negro troops in the post CW army, and might see continued integration of enlisted in the navy (relegating blacks to steward ratings occurred after the ACW especially with the re-introduction of southern officers/men in the navy). Southern blacks may be emboldened to resist the reintroduction of "white power" in late Reconstruction & might get more support from the north to make it stick.
OTOH the butterflies from the war ending earlier this way may not include any improvement for the blacks in the USA after the ACW with things proceeding more or less the way they did OTL.
If this key breakthrough is made by USCT IMHO there will be more "positive" thinking about the Negro in the north, the war ending sooner means more Union soldiers come home/come home in one piece. You might see more Negro troops in the post CW army, and might see continued integration of enlisted in the navy (relegating blacks to steward ratings occurred after the ACW especially with the re-introduction of southern officers/men in the navy). Southern blacks may be emboldened to resist the reintroduction of "white power" in late Reconstruction & might get more support from the north to make it stick.
OTOH the butterflies from the war ending earlier this way may not include any improvement for the blacks in the USA after the ACW with things proceeding more or less the way they did OTL.
Unless they do something really important like capture Lee or something (I believe Snake wrote a TL about that once), their role in this battle will be just another footnote.
It would be poetic if the last stand of the Confederate armies was at Charleston before they were annihilated.
Grant lived down Cold Harbor.
As I noted, in spite of Fredericksburg, Burnside was popular enough to win three terms as Governor, two terms as Senator, and a term as Commander of the GAR.
Everyone in the AotP knew it was Burnside's project, and that neither Meade nor Grant had supported it.
Hayes, Garfield, and Harrison all became President, and Hancock was nominated, after serving as subordinate commanders in the ACW.
Grant had a lot of victories to his credit. Burnside, not so much.
Even if this became one in an ATL.
But how many people outside the AotP know?
But none of them had "but they blew it in high command" on their records.