Civil War History - The Eastern TheaterDiscuss any and all battles, movements, and events occuring in the Eastern Theater here! This includes any actions in tha area east of the Appalachian Mountains in the vicinity of the river capitals of Richmond and Washington D.C.
Considering if the leadership was different in the AOP during the Fredericksburg Campaign could have the AOP found any possible way of defeating Lee at Fredericksburg under different circumstances.
It's my understanding that the attack took place much later than Burnside had originally intended.
The problem was that the pontoon boats necessary to build the bridge across the Rappahannock were late in arriving.
I'm a little fuzzy on the details, but I recall reading that, although the telegraph was available by that time, for some reason the Union high command failed to use it to check on the boats. Those in charge of the boats didn't find out that Burnside wanted them to move to Fredericksburg until well after the time when Burnside wanted them to move. Then Burnside didn't get the word, until long after he thought the boats would be on their way, that they hadn't even started yet.
The boats did not arrive until a week after Burnside had originally intended to mount the assault - giving the Confederates ample time to muster their forces and position them to meet the assault. Then Burnside dithered for another couple of weeks, giving Lee's forces even more time to get ready, before finally deciding to go ahead with the attack.
Had the Federals been able to build their bridge and mount their assault at the originally-intended time and date, when the Confederates were not so solidly positioned on Marye's Heights and in the Sunken Road behind the stone wall, perhaps the attack would have had a better chance of succeeding. By the time the attack actually did commence, I think the time when a direct frontal assault had any chance of succeeding had long since passed .
I have always felt that Burnside stole a march on Lee at Fredericksburg and that his plan was fundamentally sound. I think it can be shown that the quartermaster department let him down bigtime in his need for supplies (like pontoon boats) and Lee used the delay to dig in a formidable defensive line.
Having said that, it's hard for me to imagine what the likeable Burnside would have done with the advantage anyhow. I figure that he'd have botched up the attempt in any case. Burnside, or any other commander who would have been Little Mac's replacement, would have been under a lot of pressure to "act." I think Burnside made his disasterous attack out of desparation, regret (that he wasn't ready with his "advantage"), and a huge amount of pressure to act. It's very sad.
I don't even think the Federal army would have fared any better, under the circumstances, with Grant for example: Grant appears to me to have needed a lot of time to plan his strategies - like taking the formidable Vicksburg. He tried no fewer than seven times to take the Gibraltar, and those were mostly disasters.
In the end, my short answer is that I don't think the Federals ever had a chance at Fredericksburg. By the same stretch, I don't think Lee ever considered attacking them or following up his victory. The reason for this is that the Federals had good artillery on the other side of the river and plenty of it.
I love visiting Fredericksburg today (as long as the snipers aren't around). But it is one of those places where I need to "calibrate" myself to get a feel for what wartime Fredericksburg looked like. There's a ton of buildings and trees blocking my view!
What about the attack on the flank against Jackson? What if Franklin had put all his 60,000 men in, instead of the mere 4500? After all, that flank victory for the Confederacy was much due to the individual valor of the singular John Pelham who actually defied the order to retreat.
That one always made me wonder. The gap in Jackson's line was roughly 500-600 hundred yards. They did break the line and surprise Jackson's men pushing them back before the reserves arrived. There was an opportunity if Franklin had not taken Burnsides order so literal. I think they possibly could have pushed Jackson back.
Pelham was ordered back by Stuart and refused the order. Union troops first thought it was their guns falling short because of a heavy fog and mist.
I do not think they could have taken the "Stone Wall" however, I think pushing Jackson could have been a real possibility. Hell, that may have lead to the battle at least being considered a draw. I have been to Fredericksburg and still think a larger force may have changed the battle on that end of the field. Once in the woodline artillery could not play the part like it did at the "Stone Wall" besides Jackson did not have near the guns and Union artillery had torn his handfull up so bad Confederate troops were calling it "Dead Hill" due to so many artillery support animals being killed along with the men.
I'm of the opinion, that timing was everything as far as Burnside is concerned, the delay in the pontoons was critical to any success. Despite this, the First Corps did give the Union a glimmer of hope. However, the fact that Franklin didn't choose the follow up the early successes of Meade and Reynolds was crucial.
Burnside was not a brilliant mind as far as strategists are concerned. However,if Franklin and other Generals followed the game plan, there might have been a modest chance of success.
Actually I have always been of the mind that Burnsides was a much maligned general. His misadventures were due more to execution that statagy or tactics.
At Fredrickburg the failure could easily been blamed on others. The plan itself may have worked far better if cared out as he desired. I heard that Pope hated him and tried to thwart him at every turn.
As to attacking Jackson. To follow up with the success there instead of the suicide at the wall, there was a reason for the success. I do not know if it was by design or fortune of war but the penetration was due to a gap in the lines.
The fault gap in the lines in front of Jackson must fall squarely upon the shoulders of A. P . Hill. The way I recall it, when the Rebs formed up there was swampy ground that they bracketed. Since attack through there was unlikely. Yet as the weather turned colder the swampy ground froze. Making it the perfect place to attack. If it could have been exploited then there is no telling how the battle could have came out.
One other thing I would add. A.P. Hill was mysteriously absent from this fight. Not sure but I seem to recall there never was an official explaination. I think though this was just about exactly the time his daughter died.
All my reference books are currently packed, but I seem to remember reading that elements of Burnside's army found a ford where he could have moved the entire army across the river shortly after arriving on site. That may have given him an advantage. However, Burnside doggedly refused to change the plan, and waited for the pontoons. Perhaps a fatal mistake.
I think Burnside's plan was not a bad one. The delay waiting for the pontoons allowed Lee to build up forces opposite Burnside.
By the time Burnside got the pontoons, the ANV was well dug in behind the wall, and in the town, and the we can see the results. I think Burnside had a good original plan, but, by the time everything was ready, the correct move would have been to cancel the river crossing and assault. A very hard thing to do, once the momentum of the movement and preparation were done, and it would have taken a strong commander to do it. See Meade at Mine Run. Burnside didn't have the stones to cancel the assault.
Once the battle started, Burnside fixated on the wall. There is a basic axiom of military tactics, and that is: 'reinforce success'. Burnisde reinforced failure. How many assaults were made on the wall? I've heard numbers like 7, or 11.......
Franklin's attack on the gap on the Union left was the 'success' at Fredericksburg. A good commander would have piled troops thru the gap on the ANV right.
Interesting to speculate..Grant might have reinforced that success on the Union left...but...he might have also called off the battle.....or, would he have been on top of the pontoon delivery?
As to A.P. Hill, James Roberton's book on A.P. Hill is pretty interesting, and sheds some insights. A.P. Hill was in the middle stages of kidney disease at that time, and was ill often during the war. Gettysburg and Chancellorsville are other examples. Hill probably would not have lived long after 1865, if he had survived the war.
I have always marveled at the fortitude of the men of the AOP. They had to KNOW they would not be able to reach the wall alive, and yet they went, wave after wave...
Even setting aside the delay, had Burnside concentrated on the Confederate right flank, he may have succeeded. Remember Meade did break through but being unsupported, had to retreat.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
