Impact of a CS Victory of Gettysburg?
- Thread starter Anaxagoras
- Start date
Marginal increase in the Confederacy's chances of victory. Lee's not going to capture Washington and force Lincoln to recognize the CSA, a la Sam Houston and Santa Anna. The Army of Northern Virginia couldn't even stay very long; they expended a lot of ammunition, and have a ridiculously long and vulnerable supply line. So the war will still be fought in Virginia in 1864, and the fundamentals are still very much against the Confederates. But the CSA's best chance for victory is a peace candidate winning in 1864; and a Confederate victory on northern soil will have a negative effect on Northern morale, one that Vicksburg is unlikely to negate. A Confederate victory at Gettysburg won't matter much if Atlanta is in Union hands and Petersburg besieged come Election Day; but the butterflies of Lee winning at Gettysburg might result in the South being in a better position come November.
Anaxagoras
Banned
The best outcome for the South would be for the AoNV to trounce the AotP in battle at Gettysburg, forcing them to withdraw to the Pipe Creek line to cover Washington and Baltimore (neither of which were in any particular danger, despite what panicked newspaper headlines might have said). Then Lee could have spent a few weeks foraging off the Pennsylvania countryside and tearing up railroads before withdrawing back into Virginia. The campaign was obviously a raid rather than an outright invasion, so the withdrawal back into Virginia might not have even appeared like a retreat.
In any event there will have to be another victory on Northern soil for the UK to pitch in with Richmond.
I think it depends on the margin of victory and how the CS army looks afterwards. If they are weary and it is a near-loss, the AoNV will probably head back into Virginia with minimal difference from OTL other than a propaganda victory, the currency improves a little but I doubt it has more than a 6 week impact on the war overall.
If the AoNV is in better shape, they might decide to gamble. The Susquehanna River is not too far from Gettysburg, and it the CS can take York and perhaps Aberdeen or Havre de Grace, Maryland they could isolate Baltimore and Washington from the rest of the country. I had considered writing a timeline about this with Jackson surviving and becoming the ruin of the CSA by allowing the army to be trapped and decimated after a three-day battle with Lee killed early on day two. Without the AoNV the Army of the Potomac regroups and besieges Richmond a year earlier than OTL with the war ending in early 1864.
Should the CSA be able to take the western Susquehanna I think they stand a very good chance of gaining recognition from the UK, and they would have an interesting position at the peace table at that point, especially if pro-CSA Marylanders arose and made trouble elsewhere.
I think it depends on the margin of victory and how the CS army looks afterwards. If they are weary and it is a near-loss, the AoNV will probably head back into Virginia with minimal difference from OTL other than a propaganda victory, the currency improves a little but I doubt it has more than a 6 week impact on the war overall.
If the AoNV is in better shape, they might decide to gamble. The Susquehanna River is not too far from Gettysburg, and it the CS can take York and perhaps Aberdeen or Havre de Grace, Maryland they could isolate Baltimore and Washington from the rest of the country. I had considered writing a timeline about this with Jackson surviving and becoming the ruin of the CSA by allowing the army to be trapped and decimated after a three-day battle with Lee killed early on day two. Without the AoNV the Army of the Potomac regroups and besieges Richmond a year earlier than OTL with the war ending in early 1864.
Should the CSA be able to take the western Susquehanna I think they stand a very good chance of gaining recognition from the UK, and they would have an interesting position at the peace table at that point, especially if pro-CSA Marylanders arose and made trouble elsewhere.
It might be worth noting in regards to the issue of Washington's safety that the garrison, barring the heavy artilery, has been stripped to the bone - and there's a lot of ground for the heavies to cover.
Not something I'd feel 100% secure in IF the Army of the Potomac wasn't getting in the way.
Not something I'd feel 100% secure in IF the Army of the Potomac wasn't getting in the way.
Anaxagoras
Banned
You'd have to kill Longstreet, too. He was senior to Jackson and would have taken command of the AoNV if anything happened to Lee.
UrbanRedneck
Banned
Sorry, I just cant see the north losing after they begin to field more repeating rifles.
Perkeo
Banned
The only significant imact that I expect is the impact on morale, since morale was the only thing that the Union wasn't wastly superior in. If the Confederates show no sighn of defeat until the presidential elections in 1864, the North MIGHT elect a president who accepts the secession under certain conditions.
In OTL, the Spencer was mostly used by the Federal cavalry; it didn't replace the Springfield for the infantry (mainly because the Federal supply chain couldn't handle the huge amounts of extra ammunition that would be needed if every soldier was supplied with a Spencer). It gave the Federal cavalry a distinct edge, but it wasn't a war-winning weapon.
Unless Longstreet is occupied elsewhere and not available for immediate command.
Meade falls back on the Pipe Creek Line, where he wanted to fight in the first place until the confederate army entered Gettysburg and a few corps decided to make a stand. Lee loses men at Gettysburg and has to batter into another Buzzsaw at Pipe Creek, this time with all of Meade's forces present from the get-go plus reinforcements. Lee loses, retreats to save his army.
In short there's no real change.
In short there's no real change.
I can't see how a CS victory at Gettysburg could assure a definite victory in the long run but it would certainly bolster the Confederates chance of a slight victory. Both sides felt fairly confident about their chances before Gettysburg. If it had resulted in a Union defeat, morale would be down, and if Lee exploited this efficiently, a much different outcome might have occurred.
Having said that I still don't see the militarily superior North losing outright the entire Civil War. Perhaps just sustaining the idea of a CS victory for a few months among the troops.
Having said that I still don't see the militarily superior North losing outright the entire Civil War. Perhaps just sustaining the idea of a CS victory for a few months among the troops.
UrbanRedneck
Banned
At the same time as Gettysburgh, didn't the union navy also take Vicksburg therefore capture the Mississippi and cutting the Confederacy in two?
After then it was only a matter of time before Shermans march to the sea which I doubt the south could stop.
After then it was only a matter of time before Shermans march to the sea which I doubt the south could stop.
The Army of Tennessee has to be pushed out of the way before that can even be contemplated, and even with the (also simultaneous) Tullahoma campaign, that's a ways off.
Perkeo
Banned
Maybe sustaining the idea of no CS defeat in sight until 1964's presidential election - a necessity - no sufficiency - for a successful CS secession.
Anaxagoras
Banned
Either you meant the 1864 election or you think the South could have lasted far longer than I do.
Looking at the voting, it would take 9% of the Republicans voting Democrat to put McClellan in the White House in 1864. and Lincoln would still have 55% of the popular vote. That heavy of a swing is going to take a lot more than a single won battle by the CSA.
And just how is Lee supposed to win Gettysburg, anyway?
Hancock eats a bullet late on the first day, Sykes lives up to his nickname ("Tardy George"), Pickett makes it up early - and him, Anderson, and Pender smash in the center.
That's about all I can think of. Lee can win a battle in this campaign, but Gettysburg is not the place I'd want to try it. The terrain favors the defender both in the ground fought over and the way the ANV was positioned relative tot he Army of the Potomac. It's not even about the high ground, it's much easier to move from one hill (Culp's) to the other (Little Round Top) from the Federal position than the Confederate.
BlondieBC
Banned
Add Gettysburg and Vicksburg CSA wins, and you get a lot closer. At the time, many consider Vicksburg a more important battle. I tend to agree. And if you want to find the big memorial to the civil war, it is in Mississippi and Lee had nothing to do with the battle.
I can't come close to giving plausible POD for both to happen. I can see Union mistakes or better CSA decision in the east. But what stops Grant from grinding down the CSA on the Mississippi?
Johnston doing something with the Army of Relief is probably a must.
We can go over why he didn't, but the point is that it needs to be involved - not just drawing troops from other theaters.