Civil War History - "What if..." DiscussionsWhat if they had attacked instead of digging in...? What if he was in charge of the army instead...? Did you ever have a "What if..." question, and you weren't sure where to post it? Here's the place to ask these speculative questions!
what if after Gettysburg Lee refused to continue leading the ANV even after Davis refused his resignation and Longstreet was given command of the army? how well would he have done? i think Longstreet would've probably shook things up a bit and replaced some generals, he would probably replace A. P. Hill since he and Hill hated each other and he'd try to have Hood and D. H. Hill brought back from the AOT. the disaster at Knoxville was really not Longstreet's fault in my opinion, Bragg sent him there knowing he would not succeed and Bragg didn't care, he just wanted Longstreet out of his hair. but even if Knoxville was Longstreet's fault, you cannot judge whether or not someone is a good independent commander based on just one battle. personally i think Old Pete would probably have done an excellent job as head of the ANV, although not as good a job as Jackson would have, Jackson was the best Confederate general ever in my opinion, but by that time Jackson was dead. so what do yall think, would Longstreet have been a good choice to command the ANV? what do you think he would've done differently?
Let's say Longstreet did succeed Lee. Bringing Hood back would be mistake #1. While it would have saved the AoT, it would have been a disaster for any corps that Hood commanded. Hood was very much like Lee's protege and too aggressive. He would have thrown away the lives of his men. To Longstreet's credit though, he would have fought defensively all the way. However, to fight he would have to get there on time to intercept Grant - something Longstreet was never noted for. Remember that Grant could be elusive and did evade Lee several times. With Longstreet, it would have been worse.
Read Robert Krick's "The Smoothbore Volley that Doomed the Confederacy." He has an essay on the shortcomings of Old Pete. Also read the papers of Evander McLaws whom Longstreet placed the blame for his setbacks. McLaw's papers rebut Longstreet quite well.
Who else then to lead the ANV? Johnston? Johnston would have retreated past Richmond. If he had the opportunity at the North Anna, he could have struck a fatal blow to Grant. Lee created such an opportunity, but was too enfeebled by illnesses to take advantage of it and his subordinates lacked initiative (no Jackson again). But as mentioned, Johnston would refuse to allow himself to be pinned down and would have traded land for a site to fight a battle to his advantage. That's why Davis wouldn't want Uncle Joe. Richmond would have fallen in late '64 and Johnston would have pulled back into the Valley.
Perhaps Gordon would have been a better choice. But Gordon's tenure as a Corps commander was very short. My pick? Forrest.
it'd be interesting to see what kind of corps commander Hood would've made. in my opinion Hood was the worst indepent commander of the entire war but he seemed to perform brilliantly as long as he was folowing someone else's orders, so he'd probably be a good corps commander. Hood's aggressiveness would've been just what the ANV needed at the Wilderness and North Anna.
Johnston abandoning Richmond in late 1864 would've been very sound strategy, and that's what Lee should've done. he should've abandoned the trenches at Petersburg and moved south to link up with Johnston in late 1864 instead of 9 months later when he actually tried to do so. as for Forrest, i think he was too much needed in the west to be transferrred to the eastern theater, but he should've gotten command of the AOT.
i think you're right about Longstreet being too slow, he probably would've had a hard time catching up to Grant and Longstreet would've never got to Spotsylvania first. the best man to have headed the ANV would've been Stonewall Jackson, it is truly a shame that he died so soon.
While Fool Tom was brilliant, I wonder how much info he would have given or shared with with his Corps Commanders had he lived and succeeded Lee. Remember that Jackson was very secretive and once said that if his greatcoat knew his plans, he'd burn it. His Corps Commanders would march but their movements may become uncoordinated because of the secrecy. Still, I'd take Jackson over Longstreet as ANV commander.
yes, Jackson was secretive but brilliant. so brilliant that if he had lived then we'd have our own country right now, sometimes one man really can make a difference. although i think Longstreet would've done a much better job than most as head of the ANV, he was no Jackson, or even Lee for that matter.
If Lee had pulled himself from the ANV command, I think Longstreet was the only man to take over. The only other option I can see is pulling Kirby Smith from the Trans- Miss. Bragg or Pemberton would never do. And the ANV was safe from Johnston, Davis would never bring him back. There was Beauregard, but the ANV was just too close to Richmond for Davis to be able to stomach having the little Creole that near. He actually would have been the best option, but you still have to work with the president, and like Johnston, this was something by this time that Beauregard could no longer do, let alone Davis's inability to work with him. There was no way Davis could afford to nor would conceivably allow Lee to withdraw. The Congress, aye the whole South, would have implored Lee to return to where he must be. The only way Lee would be out was if he became deathly ill, or seriously enough wounded.
I think Beauregard was nimble enough and well- liked by the troops enough to be effective before Grant. Longstreet was much like Pap Thomas, and though an exemplary defensive fighter and strategist, and deadly counterpuncher, his style of warfare may not have been best suited to Grant's tactics. Lee won the race to Spotsylvania Courthouse by uncanny intuition and by no more than the skin of his teeth. Though too Longstreet would have moved into the Wilderness to derail Grant, that nifty side step to the left should have meant disaster for the Confederates, but by the grace of Lee. Had Grant held the Courthouse, then its sacrifice of a corps so the rest of the army can flee pellmell into the Richmond defenses, hopefully unoccupied by Yanks.
As to Hood's return to command Longstreet's corps in the ANV, that has the sounds of a good move. In fact, I see it as probably having been done. Hood was familiar with these troops, beloved by them in fact- had most recently commanded them in the breakthrough of Rosecrans lines at Chickamauga, and was used to Longstreet's style of command. It could well have been a very effective partnership a la Lee- AP Hill.
i agree that Longstreet would have wanted AP Hill out and DH Hill in his place. But he might also have recognized Powell Hill's value to the ANV, his Jackson so to speak. More likely though, he'd have wanted Hood for that sort of thing. Then AP Hill could go to Johnston in Georgia, with whom he got on with, and functioned in the role Hood had in the Army of Tennessee, punch it up a bit, lend an aggressive spirit. And would have done it better.
As to Jackson as ANV commander, I'm afraid I must differ with you gentlemen. Though without question a brilliant commander, I am rather certain he would be an unmitigated disaster as leader of this army at this time. What was required was defensive warfare, more Longstreet's forte, and the necessity of keeping the Bluebellies out of Richmond. Let's examine this issue: Jackson worked wonders in independent command, and as Lee's scythe to Longstreet's hammer. But he was always under the leadership of an overall commander- one wise enough to allow Jackson to do what Jackson did best, but still under overall direction. As a commander providing his own direction, that is truly a scary apparition, for both sides. When Jackson fought defensively, it was always to gain some advantage to leap offensively. Though a prime maxim of war, this strategy was just the one Grant meant to refuse the Confederacy by clutching their throat with all his might to let go not ever. This was not Jackson's style of warfare at all. It puts him at an immediate disadvantage to the Eastern Union forces. He was apt to throw everything at a perceived weakness, by swift march then striking like a fury of demons. This is a philosophy of one time does all, and is a losing proposition for the Confederates. Why? Because if it were feasible, Lee would have done the like. Lee in '64 was in a boat like Johnston's north of Atlanta- husband strentgh, don't let the bad guys around me, strike when I can do so to my advantage. This Lee, like Johnston, did masterfully. But Jackson? I don't see it. Furthermore, both Lee and Johnston got the most out of their subordinate often proud, irritable, intense, and cranky commanders. Lee had a velvet hand at keeping these horses in the ANV harnessed and pulling together. Conversely, everywhere Jackson went, he created fractuous, chaotic, malevolent relations with his subordinate commanders. It is practically a litany- and nothing new- going back to his Mexican War days. Under a Lee or a Johnston or a Beauregard, even Longstreet, was where Jackson was going to flourish and excel.
One other option had Lee really withdrawn from command- Jefferson Davis to the fore. Not inconceivable given the magnitude of the loss of Lee. It was something Davis always held in his pocket, if an occasion demanding its use compelled. If there was ever going to be a time to play that trump, this would be it.
Excellent reasoning and analysis on your part on the strength and weaknesses on potential Lee replacements.
Gary, very much liked your views and input also to an extremely interesting 'what if' question proposed by neo. Thanks for the good info.
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Hood did command a corps in the AOT under Johnston from Dalton to Atlanta. He performed pretty well, but had some short comings also. Johnston blamed him for the lack of fight at Cassville, which was supposed to be Johnston's counter-punch on Sherman.
He only served in corps command for about 3 or 4 months - not much time to perfect that position as should have been done, before moving on to one of greater authority and experience as Army commander.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
What If Longstreet Had Gotten Command Of The ANV? 
Linear Mode
