What if Gen. Jackson lived.

[18TH TEXAS VOL INFANTRY]

What if General Jackson survived to press his attack the second day. Would he stayed under Lee or maybe given Command of The Army of Tenn?

[r_moody]

Originally Posted by 18TH TEXAS VOL INFANTRY

What if General Jackson survived to press his attack the second day. Would he stayed under Lee or maybe given Command of The Army of Tenn?

Since this is a "What If" IMO he would have stayed with Lee as I don't think he had earned independent command. By the second day the Federals were dug in and the surprise was over. Jackson would not have been nearly as effective. Being a great fighter didn't make one qualified for that level of command, example, Hood. Hood was a great division commander but his field success didn't transfer into quality army command. Jackson was too reckless IMO. When he was in the Valley, logistics were not an issue. In the west logistics were a nightmare after the fall of Vicksburg. IMO a JE Johnston Longstreet combination would have been a much greater challenge for Sherman. JEJ's logistical and strategic abilities and Longstreet's fight would have been a great team. My 2 cents.
Rick

[ole]

18th and Rick:

While reading your posts, a thought kept nagging in the background: on both sides of the conflict, how many of the subordinate generals proved themselves capable of independent command?

If there's any interest, I'll start a separate thread designed to explore the question.

Ole

[Admiral_Porter]

Jackson would have continued to command the 2nd corps.

I don't think Jackson's presence at Gettysburg would have changed the outcome. The terrain there is just too favorable for the defender. I don't think any attacking army could have won on that ground.

While Jackson was very adept at manuevering his forces he was a poor battlefield tactician.

I think he would have failed in command of a large independent force like the AOT. Jackson was too secretive and judgmental of his fellow officers. His personality would probably have created the same internal strife which Bragg's did.

I would take Pete over Jack any day.

[nbforrest]

Jackson had not previously had much success with organizing and carrying out effective assaults. I don't know why he would have started at Gettysburg. Sure, he probably would have had his men charge up Cemetery Hill and get his men massacred up there amongst the guns.

[MobileBoy]

I really don't understand all of the revisionist theories criticizing Jackson.The man only lost one time for crying out loud.Who in either army was present in that many battles with only one setback?He wouldn't have had the same problem as Bragg did.Jackson was already a celebrated general at that point and his men fought their butts off for him because he was a winner(whether they liked him a not).Longstreet operated independently one time at Knoxville and it was a pitiful failure.I don't think Jackson could have led the Army of TN to victory, but I don't think Lee could've either.The army of Northern Virginia reached its zenith while Jackson was alive.I don't think that was merely coincidence despite some modern day authors take on his ability.You have to compare him to commanders at that time and the tactics etch..It's easy to sit back from a long way off and say he did this and that wrong.All of the commanders on both sides made blunders during the war.Logistically you have to consider the Confederate logistical situation which never seemed to run as smoothly as their Northern counterparts.
Jackson would have seized the high ground at Gettysburg on day 1 without a doubt.If Meade stayed there to fight Confederate artillery on the heights would have made their position totally untenable.Gettysburg with Jackson would have been another Confederate route.Meade would have fallen back to the Potter Creek defenses he had prepared (where he planned to fight the battle anyway)most likely after day 1 rather than foolishly sat there while his ranks were enfiladed and massacred by artillery.At that point the Northern defenses were strong and the Union would have slaughtered the oncoming attackers and won a great victory if it happened that way.Gettysburg however would have been a done deal in my opinion.I like Lee but I can't help but notice his quote brilliant maneuvers occured while Jackson was alive and providing input.Many battles were determined by the courage and guts of the fighting men.Jackson seemed to have an abundant amount of courage which was rather contagious to his men.Just my take on General Jackson.

[Admiral_Porter]

I really don't understand all of the revisionist theories criticizing Jackson.

If I am harsh towards him it's because the Lost Cause has made him into some kind of infallible superman who could have won the war singlehandidly.

The operations we hear the most about regarding Jackson are 1st Manassas, the Valley, and Chancellorsville. Rarely mentioned are his Seven Days, Brawner's Farm, Cedar Mountain, and Fredericksburg blunders. Most of the Valley battles were so close that Jackson could have lost them just as easily as he won them.

Jackson routed one corps at Chancellorsville. Hooker still had 5 corps with him and he didn't even use two of them, the first and fifth. The battle was decided on the third day when Hazel Grove was lost after Jackson was already wounded. Hooker easily could have launched a counterattack into Lee's left with Meade and Reynolds if he wanted to thereby regaining the initiative.

Longstreet operated independently one time at Knoxville and it was a pitiful failure.

He operated in southern Virginia during Chancellorsville and it was a success.

Jackson would have seized the high ground at Gettysburg on day 1 without a doubt.If Meade stayed there to fight Confederate artillery on the heights would have made their position totally untenable.Gettysburg with Jackson would have been another Confederate route.

Based on Jackson's combat record I don't see what supports the conclusion that he would have successfully occupied the high ground especially since the terrain was so favorable to a defender and his tactical handling of a battle was lacking. The Yanks were no pushover either.

Plus, the high ground in question was always Cemetary Hill and not Culp's Hill. By the time Ewell's men got through the town of Gettysburg Cemetary Hill was already fortified with troops. Culp's Hill being the high ground on July 1 is another Gettysburg myth along with the shoe factory.

[FSPowers]

It is possible that if Jackson survived Chancellorsville, the Second Invasion might have been decided at Harrisburg, not Gettysburg.

He would have kept Stuart close to him.

[Calicoboy]

Jackson won battles because he pushed his men to the limit, not because he had great talent as a tactician. He marched his men so hard that they fell out by the hundreds. He considered these men weaklings and useless. His "I'm fighting for God" would have gotten old fast. His deployment of his troops at Brawner Farm was amateur at best. The untried Iron Brigade gave his a whippin' he never forgot (he even admitted it was as such). Lee was a better general. Longstreet was a better general. Both Johnsons were better generals. Both Hills were better generals. Early was a better general. My secesh friends always like to think he would have somehow been the South's salvation if he had lived. I think not. As the war went on I believe Jackson would have become more and more a liability. Good generals are centered and look out for the welfare of their men. Tired, starving soldiers may win a few battles on pure adrenalin; but to ignore the needs of the men that carry the rifles dooms an army every time. Perhaps the 14th North Carolina was part of Jackson's perceived plan that God had for him. Who can fight Kismet?


Calicoboy

[nbforrest]

I really don't understand all of the revisionist theories criticizing Jackson.The man only lost one time for crying out loud.Who in either army was present in that many battles with only one setback?

My main criticism as a tactician. Generals are not great at all areas of command, but he fact that he was a poor tactician means that he does not deserve the God like status some hold him in. The cliche that Jackson only lost Kernstown is rather disengenious. "Lost" is a flighty term, but it is safe to say that Jackson had little to do with the outcomes of many of his battles. And one can't forget the Seven Days fiasco.

Longstreet operated independently one time at Knoxville and it was a pitiful failure.

Not so. He had an independent command at Suffolk and accomplished the goals Lee had set for him. His independent command in East TN was hardly pitiful. Bragg forced him to attack Knoxville when Longstreet knew the assault would fail...hence Ft. Sanders was the only attack on the defenses. And folks forget the rest of the East TN campaign. Both before and after the Knoxville "siege" Longstreet gave the Army of the Ohio several good drubbings. And he wanted to capture Cumberland Gap and move into KY. (Not the foot dragging, defensive general image of him, is it?)

Jackson would have seized the high ground at Gettysburg on day 1 without a doubt.

No one can say "without a doubt" anything would have happened. Jackson choked during the Seven Days, Brawner Farm, etc. Why would Gettysburg have been different?

Let's look at the battles Jackson fought with the ANV:
Seven Days- Jackson totally screwed up twice by not attacking.
Cedar Mountain- Jackson deployed his line poorly and nearly got whipped by an inferior force led by, of all people, Banks
Brawner Farm- only King's division was in front of Jackson put he refused to pitch in and sent in piecemeal attacks that were cut up by the Iron Brigade and the two regts of Doubleday's brig.
2nd Manassas- nothing special here. His men just stood their ground. Jackson had no chance for great maneuvers here.
Harpers Ferry- Jackson wins by maneuver, not a battle
Antietam- again, Jackson's men hold their ground; Jackson displays no brilliance here
Chancellorsville- a good flank attack (orchestrated by Lee's brilliant set up) but poor deployment. His attack only routs the XI Corps before his inability to control the situation exposes itself. His attacks ground to a bloody halt.

Respectfully