Wrapped in Flames: The Great American War and Beyond
- Thread starter EnglishCanuck
- Start date
But either way it might mean no war against Austria at least not in 1866.
Very unlikely, Prussia and Austria are major European powers and Denmark and Sweden do not even play together in the same league as one of the two nations. Considering that the entire German Confederation was involved in this conflict, it should be clear that Denmark's dream of holding on to the primarily German territories was utopian and only possible through the direct intervention of another great power, which is highly unlikely.
At most i think Denmark would be able to retain a few disputed counties of otl.
I'm not very well-versed in the conflicts on Continental Europe during this time, what would Sweden have to gain by intervening against the Prussian steamroller? To my understanding Sweden and Denmark were rivals
Historically, yes, but I don’t think they were by the mid 19th century. I believe this was the height of pan-Scandinavianism.
I'm catching up on this after somehow missing the last three updates and I must say that I'm not disapointed with what I'm reading! I still love the writing style and these chapters -like a good book- basically read themselves.
My take on what's incoming:
I think there's one last round to be fought between the US and the British. Talks at Rotterdam will, albeit temporarily, fail and the Anglo-Canadian forces will have to put the last nail in the American's coffin by force of arms. But that's only a guess and frankly I wouldn't be surprised if peace held on.
Although in the past I was pretty convinced that the southern slavers were doomed, the increasingly apparent sorry state of the Union's war machine is starting to make me doubt. As some have pointed out, I also think that if needed the Union will fight beyond the economical breaking point, nations at war have a historical record of doing so. But if we look at the efforts it took OTL to bring down the Confederacy even in the position it was in 1864 and we try to make some estimates at what it will take to defeat it in ATL... I think people in Washington will soon start to wonder if the sacrifices would be worth the prize. Even if the war with Britain ended yesterday, shifting the troops, planning the logistics, elaborating the strategy and getting a new blockade in place (if that is still even possible at this point) is going to take time. Time that the South will be able to use to its advantage militarily of course, but diplomatically as well.
The clock is ticking for the Union to end this mess, I hope they're going to be able to make it.
Looking further (true) North, I'm seriously looking forward more Canadian political drama! This story is making me dive again in my old Canadian history books and I am loving it! I think we're heading for an early Dominion status, and with the context from which will come this iteration of the Canadian Confederation, I think we're also going to see a reform of the Permanent Active Militia. Maybe an actual Army? I think in this timeline it wouldn't be a luxury, I fear the Americans are not going to forget that one any time soon.
Wether or not the Union manage to destroy the Confederacy, there's going to be grave resentment against the British Empire. Either it's going to be "Without the Brits bastabbing us we would still be one country" or "The Brits backstabbed us to extract benefits from our moment of weakness" which I don't see as a great basis for building the kind of relationship both countries enjoyed OTL. Particularly interesting in my opinion is the influence this "War of 1862" will have on a 5-year-old boy from East 20th Street in New York when he shall join the political arena in a couple of decades... If he does of course.
My take on what's incoming:
I think there's one last round to be fought between the US and the British. Talks at Rotterdam will, albeit temporarily, fail and the Anglo-Canadian forces will have to put the last nail in the American's coffin by force of arms. But that's only a guess and frankly I wouldn't be surprised if peace held on.
Although in the past I was pretty convinced that the southern slavers were doomed, the increasingly apparent sorry state of the Union's war machine is starting to make me doubt. As some have pointed out, I also think that if needed the Union will fight beyond the economical breaking point, nations at war have a historical record of doing so. But if we look at the efforts it took OTL to bring down the Confederacy even in the position it was in 1864 and we try to make some estimates at what it will take to defeat it in ATL... I think people in Washington will soon start to wonder if the sacrifices would be worth the prize. Even if the war with Britain ended yesterday, shifting the troops, planning the logistics, elaborating the strategy and getting a new blockade in place (if that is still even possible at this point) is going to take time. Time that the South will be able to use to its advantage militarily of course, but diplomatically as well.
The clock is ticking for the Union to end this mess, I hope they're going to be able to make it.
Looking further (true) North, I'm seriously looking forward more Canadian political drama! This story is making me dive again in my old Canadian history books and I am loving it! I think we're heading for an early Dominion status, and with the context from which will come this iteration of the Canadian Confederation, I think we're also going to see a reform of the Permanent Active Militia. Maybe an actual Army? I think in this timeline it wouldn't be a luxury, I fear the Americans are not going to forget that one any time soon.
Wether or not the Union manage to destroy the Confederacy, there's going to be grave resentment against the British Empire. Either it's going to be "Without the Brits bastabbing us we would still be one country" or "The Brits backstabbed us to extract benefits from our moment of weakness" which I don't see as a great basis for building the kind of relationship both countries enjoyed OTL. Particularly interesting in my opinion is the influence this "War of 1862" will have on a 5-year-old boy from East 20th Street in New York when he shall join the political arena in a couple of decades... If he does of course.
Last edited:
There's going to be a more prevalent strain of Anglophobia running through American culture in the latter half of the 19th century than was the case otherwise (the New Men will be partially to blame for this) as well as a mistrust of Perfidious Albion in her dealings with North American affairs for a while no matter the outcome. The Republicans are, no matter what, going to face a lot of backlash as the Democrats can at the very least pin the opening of hostilities on Lincoln's mismanagement of foreign affairs. Though the Republicans do have a base of support outside the war, and unlike the Federalists post 1812, are unlikely to fade away.
And I can assure you things will be interesting in the 19th century for the US, both foreign and domestic...
Correct on both counts. Bismarck is giddy that France and Britain are jumping in with both feet overseas, and is quite pleased that neither will be able to do much more than raise modest objections to his plans in Europe, not that either really did much about it OTL, but he of course didn't know that.
The war will be a little different here that much is for sure. The Danes partially lost that war simply because of overwhelming numbers, but also firepower and relying on very outdated defences. They put up a good fight but were eventually swamped, but with a little more help they could maybe do enough to satisfy honor that would allow them to not be quite so gutted as OTL. I will lay out the war in brief when we get closer to the end of 1864 when I lay out the other changes in the world.
Let's just say that as it stands, the 1864 year in review will have to be divided into two parts for all that I have to cover.
In this period the two nations were friendly. They had good relations, there was good will between their peoples and they had no competing territorial ambitions, and both were leery of their immediate neighbors, Prussia and Russia respectively. Indeed, the tsar is leery enough of Sweden being potentially coopted by Britain in another war that he is willing to court a little Prussian ire by letting Sweden to what it wants in regards to Denmark and the question there.
Also in this period, as I understand it, pan-Scandinavianism was popular amongst many of the intellectual elites and populist politicians who felt the swan-song of nationalism. It probably reached its peak during 1864 OTL with the Schleswig-Holstein crises, but when there was no help forthcoming it quickly deflated as it showed that, unlike in the first war, there was no support from Sweden coming to help their fellow Scandinavians. Maybe this can give it a push in the right direction.
Many thanks! I can only hope I can make 1864 as riveting!
Well as Lincoln once said "By the progress of our arms, all else now chiefly depends" I paraphrased there!
The war weariness in the North in OTL's 1864 was very real. At the beginning of the year, despite the victory at Gettysburg, the Confederate forces in the East still seemed no closer to defeat than they had been the year last, while out West, despite cutting the Mississippi, Confederate armies still fought on and Sherman had a long slog to the coast ahead. Tens of thousands would die in the Overland Campaign, adding to a grim butchers bill that exhausted a nation.
Here, there have been two repulsed invasions of Canada - though they still hold Toronto - while the British now control the northern waterways and can prevent any third invasion and potentially embark on another attack against Albany. The Confederates are still a potent force, having only just been driven away from Washington and Grant has been all but ejected from Tennessee out West, with half of Kentucky still in Confederate hands.
As to the butchers bill TTL, well the figures from OTL's civil war are roughly 600,000+ dead. Here that number is much higher!
I'm thrilled that this can get people interested at all in Canadian history which is (criminally IMO) regarded as boring. There's definitely some drama left to be played out as events move forward in Canada but the circumstances of Confederation moving forward are going to be very different than they were OTL. Lots of competing claims as to what Canada needs to survive and many different visions for its future! A certain George Denison will have a role to play I can assure you!
Well that lad whose 5 years old now is mentioned as writing a book on the Naval War of 1862, so you can certainly count on the fact his father took part in the Second Battle of Annapolis Junction (or the Patuxent to the Confederates) he has a big interest in the war growing up! How is more pro-Southern mother shapes that view will be interesting as well...
I have the feeling that you have several wrong assumptions about the Second Schleswig-Holstein War / German-Danish War.
The Danes were not defeated by massive numerical superiority. At the beginning of the war, about 38,000 Danish soldiers faced 60,000 Germans (Austria & Prussia).
Sweden had offered OTL to send about 20,000 men, but by this time the main fortification line, the Danewerk, had already fallen and the Danish army was in retreat.
It is true that the German troops enjoyed a technological advantage, due to the fact that the Prussian contingent was completely equipped with firing needle rifles and largely with modern artillery, whereas the Danes still had to live with muzzle-loaders and old artillery.
However, the decisive factor for the quick success was rather that both the weather conditions facilitated the crossing of the troops (lakes and rivers were frozen) and the fact that the Danish government had given its field commander two targets which he could not both fulfil under the impression of the war and the fact that an attack during the winter was not expected.
The Danish general was simultaneously ordered to keep his army intact and to hold the Danewerk, which he was unable to do due to the successful Prussian crossing and the danger of his soldiers being surrounded by them, and ordered a retreat, which resulted in riots in Copenhagen and his dismissal.
It was only under the impact of this disaster that Sweden offered to intervene on Denmark's behalf, both with 20,000 men and in the diplomatic arena.
The diplomatic efforts of the OTL and ITTL look very likely to be similar, as the situation in Europe has not yet changed that much.
For the humiliation of Denmark in the peace treaty, the Danes can thank their government, which at a time when almost all troops in Jutland had already been defeated, insisted on a negotiation proposal that made only minimal territorial concessions to the Germans, which after the last troops had been defeated, led to Prussia imposing its maximum demands and not being satisfied with a border that runs somewhat north of the modern German-Danish border but still leaves a large part of the Danish population of the entire region in Denmark.
Therefore, I think it is unlikely, even with Swedish support, that the outcome of the war will be so different, as the Danish government will not necessarily become better at assessing its situation.
You're correct that the reasons I'm using are a bit oversimplified, but, the diplomatic situation is different at the end of 1863 in that Sweden is already petitioning the Great Powers on Denmark's behalf and urging Austria and Prussia to not go to war on the matter. Sweden is more confident to do so here because the tsar has issued covert assurances that he won't stand in Sweden's way. London is unable to intervene militarily and unwilling to diplomatically at the moment, and France is on the fence, so other than Sweden, Denmark is still on its own in December of 1863.
here's an article that might be interesting for the users of this thread
in it the late general Sherman responds to an article by then lord Woolsey about the civil war .
www.jstor.org
in it the late general Sherman responds to an article by then lord Woolsey about the civil war .
Grant, Thomas, Lee on JSTOR
W. T. Sherman, Grant, Thomas, Lee, The North American Review, Vol. 144, No. 366 (May, 1887), pp. 437-450
www.jstor.org
This is a really interesting read (and it also showed the original source for some quotes of seen repeatedly, namely the one comparing Grant and Thomas to Wellington and Nelson). I'm working my way through this TL right now, and so far its been a great in-depth read!here's an article that might be interesting for the users of this thread
in it the late general Sherman responds to an article by then lord Woolsey about the civil war .
Grant, Thomas, Lee on JSTOR
W. T. Sherman, Grant, Thomas, Lee, The North American Review, Vol. 144, No. 366 (May, 1887), pp. 437-450
Happy New Year friends and readers! I'm happy to report that we'll be getting deeper into 1864 in 2022, and so far I've made some progress on the novelization of the series. A more general update about that is here. If you'd like some idle speculation the Trent Affair in general I did some ruminating on it in a blog post earlier this month. Hopefully some of that tides you over, and I'll see you all next year!
Unfortunately we are still waiting on the next few chapters, they're in rough form right now and being ironed out as I have time. Until then, I sat down and wrote a short piece on a fascinating aspect of the naval war which I have alluded to in Wrapped in Flames thus far. The commerce war! Like I say in the post, I don't really talk about the battle fleets much because I alluded to them in the other post I did. If you're curious for some of my thoughts on the naval war and its consequences, you can see them in Chapter 16, in Chapter 24, and for the biggest naval battle of the war thus far in Chapter 74.
Hopefully this tides you over until then, and I am working on the upcoming events of 1864!
Hopefully this tides you over until then, and I am working on the upcoming events of 1864!
to bid time and start a discussion
my "Wrapped In flames general tier list"
using feats from the story only
S tier Dundas thomas Lee Jackson
A tier Grant Hancock johnston most British Corp commanders in Canada east Longstreet
B Rosecrans Pope sherman Sheridan Forrest whoever was in charge of Canada west for the British I admit I forget there name
Unsure everyone else
F tier McClellan
my "Wrapped In flames general tier list"
using feats from the story only
S tier Dundas thomas Lee Jackson
A tier Grant Hancock johnston most British Corp commanders in Canada east Longstreet
B Rosecrans Pope sherman Sheridan Forrest whoever was in charge of Canada west for the British I admit I forget there name
Unsure everyone else
F tier McClellan
Last edited: