A Glorious Union or America: the New Sparta

Main thing I remember is where Grant blames himself for getting surprised in the Battle of Four Armies while Sherman blames it on the lack of scout cavalry. Better scouting might also allowed the Union to catch the rebel army as it escaped Gettysburg.

There might be a more obvious lesson to be had about the problems of political generals and excessive political interference maybe. On the other hand, Rhett can kinda show what happens when military wrecks things for the political side. There is also the issue with the training and recruitment of soldiers potentially as well(many soldiers rushed to the frontlines that they don't even practice shooting).

I would really have to review how the battles went to really say anything concrete.
 
I got the sense that there were a lot fewer senseless head on attacks. Kearny's attack at Charlotte, though doomed to fail, served it purpose nonetheless. In fact Kearny seemed to turn the siege of Charlotte to his purpose.

Cavalry use by the Armies of the Potomac and James seemed very effective by the end of the war: the modern dragoon Buford wipping the floor with Stuart the cavalier of yesteryear. Though it is interesting that Kearny allowed a brigade/division under Wyndham to behave like European cavalry: all swords and charges.

Lots of Union innovation. Hooker's battlefield use of prefab bridges and the telegraph. The more successful deployment of repeaters perhaps. Rodman's combined service action at Charleston might encourage broader marine infantry interest.

Kearny's obsession with regimental tradition and morale (in the European/British mold) might mean we see geographic regiments? Possibility.

African-american troops will have a good reputation in this TL and significantl there are mixed units, albeit with segregated companies.
 
Besides the importance of Battlefield Scouting, the development of an permanent Military Intelligence service, and the establishment of a battle replacement system so future conflicts don't repeat the ever diminishing Regiments being whittled down to Companies. :(
 
A question and bit of a critique on this (generally excellent) TL:

You don't seem to have mentioned the 1862 elections, but I have to imagine that they'd have gone better for Republicans than IOTL, thanks to the comparative military success they enjoyed.

If true, this would have significant future political repercussions. Horatio Seymour, for instance, who you have as the Democratic Governor of NY in 1864, only won election very narrowly (~10,000 votes out of 600,000) in 1862, and I think it's likely that the different military circumstances could have butterflied Wadsworth* into victory, with significant political ramifications.


*Well, Wadsworth or whoever else took up the Republican nomination - since Kearny offered him a command in TTL's October 1862 before the election, that might see Wadsworth withdrawing from the election in favor of a different contender. It's unlikely this would change the direct results given just how narrowly distributed the Democratic/Republican vote totals were for NY state across the different races (295,897-296,945 for Republicans across 5 races, 305,467-307,316 for Democrats across the same number); people were evidently voting for party rather than person.
 
Hrm.

Well I'll go off on a completely different angle from these others.

The American peace movement is going to be quite different. Historically American culture was peculiarly anti-war. It was a tendency that tended to fade during "righteous" wars and declined over time, but didn't really get shut out and relegated to the counter-culture until Pearl Harbor. Here it is happening much earlier. The conscientious objector idea will be pretty weird, and may have a very different relationship to (off the top of my head) suffrage and civil rights movements.

And those same anti-war folks also tended to be the anti-colonialists. One major response to things like the annexation of Hawai'i or seizure of the Philippines was, well, embarrassment. There was a feeling that America was supposed to be above things like colonial empire. My gut says that's on the dustheap of history for these Americans.

I'm also going to watch with interest what happens regarding the original (19th century) Great Depression. It came out of the end of bimetallism, which was triggered by Bismark dropping silver when he united Germany. I'm not sure how contingent that decision was, but it is pretty important to what America becomes. It tore the beating heart out of the economy of the American West, where the great new silver mines were operating. Even occurring a decade earlier or later would have significant effects on politics in the western states. If it was ten years late, for example, the Chinese American population would be much higher, and that in turn would make the Exclusion Acts harder to pass when and if the Depression finally did rally Sinophobic sentiment.
 
Sorry for the delay in the next chapter - Spent part of the day yesterday firing the Remington New Model 1858 Army Revolver with the Irish Rifle Club at Bisley. For all the Americans out there it is a very very rare treat for an Irishman living in England to fire a gun (any gun) without having to be a member of a proscribed organisation! :D

They were also testing WWI era machine guns: Maxim, Vickers, Lewis, and something American (I think it was a Gatling?). No film can prepare you for the noise or the smell of cordite. The chap operating the maxim managed to dig a hole in the earthen bank with the maxim!
 
Last edited:
Sorry for the delay in the next chapter - Spent part of the day yesterday firing the Remington New Model 1858 Army Revolver with the Irish Rifle Club at Bisley. For all the Americans out there it is a very very rare treat for an Irishman living in England to fire a gun (any gun) without having to be a member of a proscribed organisation! :D

They were also testing WWI era machine guns: Maxim, Vickers, Lewis, and something American (I think it was a Gatling?). No film can prepare you for the noise or the smell of cordite. The chap operating the maxim managed to dig a hole in the earthen bank with the maxim!

Sweet! Never fired a gun myself (and not sure I really have the desire too either) but it must have been a fun experience.
 
I've come some what late to the party, so I haven't read all the posts concerning the fighting.
What I don't recall being mentioned, was observation balloons. In the OTL ACW, I recall there was some use of tethered hydrogen balloons for observation, and a quite mobile system had been developed that used 2 or do wagons to transport the equipment. Alas, as many other innovative ideas, the balloon corp was treated rather poorly, because certain officials and higher officers didn't like the newfangled things.

So, what about ballooons in this timeline? I believe there had even been some experiments in France with powered lighter than air flight around this time OTL.
 
Hmm...I'm trying to remember all the campaigns and battles but that maybe mobile warfare was better than entrenched positions (for the most part) as overwhelming fire support will overcome them. It seemed that every time the Confederates tried to entrench they were just overwhelmed by Union artillery or naval guns if not just out flanked. However when the Confederates went mobile it was easier to defend. On the Union side being mobile easier to bypass or destroy static defenses if enough material and men were present.

But I could be remembering things wrong so take my two cents for what it is worth.

You are quite right that there was not a lot of trench warfare. The siege of Vicksburg had some but Charlotte seemed a more fluid affair.

Main thing I remember is where Grant blames himself for getting surprised in the Battle of Four Armies while Sherman blames it on the lack of scout cavalry. Better scouting might also allowed the Union to catch the rebel army as it escaped Gettysburg.

There might be a more obvious lesson to be had about the problems of political generals and excessive political interference maybe. On the other hand, Rhett can kinda show what happens when military wrecks things for the political side. There is also the issue with the training and recruitment of soldiers potentially as well(many soldiers rushed to the frontlines that they don't even practice shooting).

I would really have to review how the battles went to really say anything concrete.

I got the sense that there were a lot fewer senseless head on attacks. Kearny's attack at Charlotte, though doomed to fail, served it purpose nonetheless. In fact Kearny seemed to turn the siege of Charlotte to his purpose.

Cavalry use by the Armies of the Potomac and James seemed very effective by the end of the war: the modern dragoon Buford wipping the floor with Stuart the cavalier of yesteryear. Though it is interesting that Kearny allowed a brigade/division under Wyndham to behave like European cavalry: all swords and charges.

Lots of Union innovation. Hooker's battlefield use of prefab bridges and the telegraph. The more successful deployment of repeaters perhaps. Rodman's combined service action at Charleston might encourage broader marine infantry interest.

Kearny's obsession with regimental tradition and morale (in the European/British mold) might mean we see geographic regiments? Possibility.

African-american troops will have a good reputation in this TL and significantl there are mixed units, albeit with segregated companies.

The problem with a critique of the political generals if there is a different but no less valid critique to be made about the quality of West Point generals. Buell (D.C.), McClellan, Burnside etc. And in TTL Lincoln did give Kearny a substantial amount of political leeway and unqualified support. That is especially significant given Kearny was overtly critical of many politicians and their comments on the conduct of the war in a way Grant never was.

The cavalry will be interesting. Kearny's heart is that of a hussar, but his leading cavalryman is Buford the dragoon. The development of the cavalry will be interesting. The post-war inspectors of cavalry will be important...

Innovation and reform will be key post war themes for the next few administration. The next Inspector General of the Army will have a major role in technical innovation...

I am interested to know what people think of a British-type regimental system in the US army: 20th USI (Maine), 54th USI (Massachusetts Colored), 68th USI (New York Highlanders), 69th USI (New York Irish) etc etc.

Besides the importance of Battlefield Scouting, the development of an permanent Military Intelligence service, and the establishment of a battle replacement system so future conflicts don't repeat the ever diminishing Regiments being whittled down to Companies. :(

I think the OMI will be one of the most significant developments.

A question and bit of a critique on this (generally excellent) TL:

You don't seem to have mentioned the 1862 elections, but I have to imagine that they'd have gone better for Republicans than IOTL, thanks to the comparative military success they enjoyed.

If true, this would have significant future political repercussions. Horatio Seymour, for instance, who you have as the Democratic Governor of NY in 1864, only won election very narrowly (~10,000 votes out of 600,000) in 1862, and I think it's likely that the different military circumstances could have butterflied Wadsworth* into victory, with significant political ramifications.


*Well, Wadsworth or whoever else took up the Republican nomination - since Kearny offered him a command in TTL's October 1862 before the election, that might see Wadsworth withdrawing from the election in favor of a different contender. It's unlikely this would change the direct results given just how narrowly distributed the Democratic/Republican vote totals were for NY state across the different races (295,897-296,945 for Republicans across 5 races, 305,467-307,316 for Democrats across the same number); people were evidently voting for party rather than person.

Because of the recent death of McClellan after the disaster of the Seven Days; the fact that many saw Rappahannock as a defeat (Pope died as well!); Mount Vernon was another defeat for the Union (the Rebels did better in TTL), I felt that there would not be a big shift in the voting in 1862. Calculated decision but I quite agree it is an arguable one.

Hrm.

Well I'll go off on a completely different angle from these others.

The American peace movement is going to be quite different. Historically American culture was peculiarly anti-war. It was a tendency that tended to fade during "righteous" wars and declined over time, but didn't really get shut out and relegated to the counter-culture until Pearl Harbor. Here it is happening much earlier. The conscientious objector idea will be pretty weird, and may have a very different relationship to (off the top of my head) suffrage and civil rights movements.

And those same anti-war folks also tended to be the anti-colonialists. One major response to things like the annexation of Hawai'i or seizure of the Philippines was, well, embarrassment. There was a feeling that America was supposed to be above things like colonial empire. My gut says that's on the dustheap of history for these Americans.

I'm also going to watch with interest what happens regarding the original (19th century) Great Depression. It came out of the end of bimetallism, which was triggered by Bismark dropping silver when he united Germany. I'm not sure how contingent that decision was, but it is pretty important to what America becomes. It tore the beating heart out of the economy of the American West, where the great new silver mines were operating. Even occurring a decade earlier or later would have significant effects on politics in the western states. If it was ten years late, for example, the Chinese American population would be much higher, and that in turn would make the Exclusion Acts harder to pass when and if the Depression finally did rally Sinophobic sentiment.

Ha! Too much pre-shadowing. My stance is "no comment" for the moment.

I've come some what late to the party, so I haven't read all the posts concerning the fighting.
What I don't recall being mentioned, was observation balloons. In the OTL ACW, I recall there was some use of tethered hydrogen balloons for observation, and a quite mobile system had been developed that used 2 or do wagons to transport the equipment. Alas, as many other innovative ideas, the balloon corp was treated rather poorly, because certain officials and higher officers didn't like the newfangled things.

So, what about ballooons in this timeline? I believe there had even been some experiments in France with powered lighter than air flight around this time OTL.

Balloon observation is one of the few areas were innovation stopped with McClellan. It would be something Hooker might toy with but only in reasonably static positions which did not occur in the west. I have thought about launching observation balloons from specially designed railroad cars but that requires the fighting to follow railroads...which isn't impossible.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Geographic recruiting in the US in the 20th Century? Just say no!

TheKnightIrish;9799687 - I am interested to know what people think of a British-type regimental system in the US army: 20th USI (Maine), 54th USI (Massachusetts Colored), 68th USI (New York Highlanders), 69th USI (New York Irish) etc etc.

Not sure what you mean by the above; the militia and volunteers WERE recruited on a geogrpahic basis through to WW I, and even then, in an era where there was conscription, the National Guard units that were federalized were organized into divisions on a geographic/regional basis, and the NG personnel provided much of the cadre.

Fillers and replacements were assigned based on need, but in a mass mobilization of 4 million men, there was no other way to do it. Same truth in WW II, Cold War, and today...

If you're considering something like the British regimental system for infantry (The Royal Fusiliers (City of London regiment) is the parent unit, the tactical units are the 1st-whatever battalions, Royal Fusiliers) even that broke down during mass mobilizations, and even more so during the Cold War and after - hence the "plastic paddies" of the nominally "Irish" regiments, etc.

Best,
 
TheKnightIrish;9799687 - I am interested to know what people think of a British-type regimental system in the US army: 20th USI (Maine), 54th USI (Massachusetts Colored), 68th USI (New York Highlanders), 69th USI (New York Irish) etc etc.

Not sure what you mean by the above; the militia and volunteers WERE recruited on a geogrpahic basis through to WW I, and even then, in an era where there was conscription, the National Guard units that were federalized were organized into divisions on a geographic/regional basis, and the NG personnel provided much of the cadre.

Fillers and replacements were assigned based on need, but in a mass mobilization of 4 million men, there was no other way to do it. Same truth in WW II, Cold War, and today...

If you're considering something like the British regimental system for infantry (The Royal Fusiliers (City of London regiment) is the parent unit, the tactical units are the 1st-whatever battalions, Royal Fusiliers) even that broke down during mass mobilizations, and even more so during the Cold War and after - hence the "plastic paddies" of the nominally "Irish" regiments, etc.

Best,

I always found the numbering of US regular army units rather dull/sterile. I think I may have to save my enthusiasm for military flair and fun naming conventions for our fleeting glimpses of the Mexican Army.

Yes. I think you have hit on the major problem. Although it looked like the British regimental system was very impressive that was perhaps the illusion of small wars. The era of the effectiveness of regimental espirit de corps is coming to an end in the next 50 years of TTL (it will still have an effect in small actions but in the era of mass mobilization I agree it cannot be a major battle winning factor). It is probably already coming to an end in the next few decades in Europe.

There will still be a Cardwell Reforms equivalent for the postbellum US army but it will have more to do with education, staff corps, equipment first and perhaps doctrine second. I suspect my organisation reforms will revolve around numbers and a more structured militia...
 
Because of the recent death of McClellan after the disaster of the Seven Days; the fact that many saw Rappahannock as a defeat (Pope died as well!); Mount Vernon was another defeat for the Union (the Rebels did better in TTL), I felt that there would not be a big shift in the voting in 1862. Calculated decision but I quite agree it is an arguable one.

Fair enough. The dates were throwing me off, since they aren't mentioned very much - for some reason, I'd thought that the Rapidan campaign was pre-election when I wrote that comment, but I see now that that's not the case, and so the pre-election military record looks much more similar to OTL now.

I do, however, still think that the election results would be much different. The reason is that OTL's Emancipation Proclamation was pre-election, and TTL saw that occur in December, after the election. So as a result, Republicans would likely do much better ITTL in states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and New York where they saw a backlash from emancipation IOTL and lost War Democrat support that they had relied upon. Conversely, they'd probably do more poorly in more radical pro-abolitionist states such as Massachusetts, Kansas, etc. where radical Republicans pushing for immediate emancipation might split the vote.
 
Last edited:
Chapter One Hundred and Forty Two The Trials that United a Nation – Part I
Chapter One Hundred and Forty Two

The Trials that United a Nation – Part I

From “The Unyielding Office – the Presidency of Jefferson Davis” by James L. Caney
Buffalo


“It was surely with mixed feelings that Jefferson Davis received the news that he was not to be tried for treason. Ultimately the Attorney General had been convinced by outside counsel that such a charge would open a Pandora’s Box of legal debate that victory in the war had surely closed. However if Davis thought he would be placed on the first ship out of Boston Harbor he was sorely mistaken. He had been indicted in Virginia for the murder of 57 civilians, mostly women, during the Richmond Bread Riots. Further the Boston Military Commission moved charges against him for the murder of Major General David Hunter. To everyone’s astonishment Davis was transferred to Richmond to face the state trial first…”

From "The Fallen Idols" by Teddy Braddock
Grosvenor 2003


“Through the direct intervention of Attorney General Speed and, one suspects, the President, Jefferson Davis was to face multiple capital charges in a Richmond Courtroom before answering any Federal charges. The Richmond Bread Riots were still fresh in the minds of the Richmond citizenry, many of whom hated Davis with the red hot glow once reserved for Yankees. Sedgwick’s administration had done much to restore a modicum of grudging respect for the Federal Government. No such thaw had occurred in attitudes to “Bloody Jeff”…

It was a masterstroke. Davis would be placed on trial for the murder of Virginians. He would be tried by a Virginian judge and a Virginian jury. The witnesses against him were overwhelmingly Virginians and all were southerners (even the transplanted Englishman, Collett Leventhorpe, had held a rebel commission). Most singularly and to the astonishment and outrage of Davis himself, he could not testify on his own behalf, as the accused in murder trials in Virginia were prohibited from doing so…”

From “An Uncivil War” by Dr Guy Burchett
LSU


“The trial lasted eighteen days. Davis was lucky to survive them. On two occasions Union troops had to disburse assemblies with a riotous aspect that was entirely anti-Davis. The fact that the troops were mostly freed negros helped ensure order was maintained. On the eleventh day a would be assassin took a shot a Davis, injuring one of the Union guards. Henry Scroggins was found to be insane, having lost his wife to the riot and his daughters to typhoid fever…in the end Davis received as fair a trial as Virginia state law allowed…”

217leg.jpg

The Virginia Trial of Jefferson Davis

From "The Fallen Idols" by Teddy Braddock
Grosvenor 2003


“Davis found himself, or rather his counsel, making the invidious argument that Davis, as President of the Confederacy, had been vested with the lawful authority to give the order to the army to suppress the rioters and restore order. Whether Davis was recognized President of the Confederacy or the rogue leader of a rebel band was irrelevant argued the prosecution. In any event only the lawfully constituted state offices and bodies had the responsibility and the authority for policing Richmond. In a terrible twist of irony Jefferson Davis was painted as a usurper of state power. He became the tyrant and enemy of states-rights that he had accused Lincoln of being…”

From "The Great Constitutional Crisis" by Dr. Lee M. King
Carlotta 1962


“Leventhorpe testified in order to save himself from the hangman’s noose. He was only following orders as a good soldier does and those orders were Jefferson Davis’. It was an ill made bargain and Leventhorpe would still hang…

Howell Cobb was a longtime political enemy of Davis and like many was already heaping much of the blame for the south’s “behavior” in the war on Jefferson Davis. His own refusal to carry out Davis’ orders would stand him in good stead with the Federal authorities…

In short, with friend and foe alike lining up to testify against him, and nary a soul to speak in his defense, Davis’ conviction was inevitable. He was found guilty by the Unionist jury (expatriated former citizens being barred from such duty) on all 57 counts and sentenced to hang…”

From “A Day That Will Live in Infamy - the Hunter Controversy” by Prof. J. K. Lang
LSU 2003


“It could have ended there for Jeff Davis but the ghost of David Hunter would not rest…”

To the tune of "Battle Hymn of the Republic"
David Hunter lies a-moldering in the grave,
While weep the sons of bondage whom he ventured all to save;
But tho he lost his life while struggling for the slave,
His soul is marching on.
(Chorus)
Old Hunter was a hero, undaunted, true and brave,
And the nation knows his valor when he fought her rights to save;
Now, tho the grass grows green above his hallowed grave,
His soul is marching on.
(Chorus)
With the Fighting Lambs he marched, a gentleman volunteer,
And frightened the damned rebels till they shook in awful fear
They shot him with his brothers, freed men and pioneers
But his soul is marching on.
(Chorus)
The cause for which he died he looks from heaven down to view,
On the army of the Union with its flag red, white and blue.
And heaven shall ring with anthems o’er the deeds those men did do,
For his soul is marching on.
(Chorus)
Ye soldiers of Freedom, then strike, while strike ye may,
The death blow of oppression in a better time and way,
For the dawn of General Hunter has brightened into day,
And his soul is marching on.


attachment.php

The Hunter Memorial at Blackwater Park
 
Last edited:
Okay, I love this new update. Jeff Davis sentenced to hang from the sour apple tree... by Virginians for the murder of Virginian citizens? The irony burns.
 
Looking forward to seeing Davis tried alongside Robert Barnwell Rhett. Will Davis even try to defend himself if he is due to hang anyway? Rhett I suspect will spontaneously combust on the stand!
 
Wasn't the original Battle Hymn of the Republic written in 1861?

The tune was around from early in the century. The John Brown lyrics appeared on 1861 and the Battle Hymn lyrics about a year later. It is safe to say there were many variations of both and now we have the Battle Hymn of General Hunter.
 
Top