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 in 1864 Sherman replaced Meade as head of the AOTP as Meade feared would happen. Grant then would have stayed in Washington.
Do you think Sherman would have defeated Lee?
I'm not so sure since Sherman preferred raiding to fighting battles and the only way to beat Lee was to pound away at his army. Lee was not stupid enough to pull a Hood and do Sherman a favor by charging headlong into breastworks.
Sherman didn't want to leave the West. I believe he even suggested to Grant that Grant should take the promotion, but remain in the West and direct the war from there. (?)
My take is that he would have been a bad fit in the East. The armies of the East and the West seem to have had distinctly different characters/cultures. Also, he didn't like the limelight that would have been thrust upon him in the East. The politicians and editors there would have (shall I say it?) driven him CRAZY!
Sherman knew his army.
I think it would have been a mistake, at that point to start shuffling the top commanders around, just as the momentum had finally turned in favor of the North.
__________________ -
"It was a very peculiar time." - Franklin D. Cossitt
Ancestors in USA Army: 6th IA Inf, 11th IL Cav, 1st AL Cav; 122nd NY Inf; 6th MI Cav; 35th MA Inf; 100th IL Inf; 1st CO Inf/Cav; 22nd IN Inf
Meade did a creditable job of following orders, as did Sherman. I think swapping Sherman for Meade would have offered more problems than value.
The points about the difference between Western and Eastern Armies were well taken. Grant was unfamiliar with them, Meade was not. Two top men unfamiliar with the Eastern Armies would not have made the successful combination of Grant and Meade.
I equally admire the observation that Sherman may have been unable to cope with the slogging, hammering action brought to bear on the ANV -- and the subsequent losses. I don't believe he would have had trouble with the government, per se -- Grant would have isolated him from that. (Bill: that's known in the locker room as a s*** screen.)
In retrospect, Grant once again did the right thing. I wonder if he ever considered bringing his favorite with him? Or was it simply intuitive. Or was the decision made simply because Grant trusted only Sherman to continue the contest in the West?
Well, by 64 I don't think it would have made that much of its difference. Lee couldn't hold on forever. But assuming Grant was in Washington, I think Sherman would have been just as viable a choice as Meade. Both were far from brilliant. But Sherman was no fool. He might well have used the same flanking tactics in VA that he used in GA in the real event. So, he may have played out the same tactics as Grant. I don't think Sherman would have been willing to give battle in those awful bloodbaths. He was determined, but I just don't think it was in his nature to keep bludgeoning his army.
Respectfully
__________________ Up men, and to your post! And let no man forget today that you are from old Virginia!
Timing of joining the community calls for this delayed contribution but I believe hindsight in this particular subject is quite useless. First off, I don't believe Grant felt comfortable leaving the Western campaign with anyone other than Sherman, right or wrong. Nor can we look upon a potential organizational flow chart with Sherman AOP head with corps commanders Thomas ,Schofield, McPherson, Logan etc swapped out for the AOP corps commanders. Apples and oranges on the campaigns and leadership performance as we now know it. Would the above aformentioned have performed better or more aggressively than say Warren and Sedgewick on the Union right at The Wilderness and Spotsylvania respectively? Would they have carried the works at Cold Harbor where Baldy Smith, Hancock et al couldnt? Could those aforementioned commanders have done a better job of rolling up the Petersburg works early in the process when the Crole general in command admitted the place was for the taking? Could Sherman have done any more than Meade of expediting victory in 1865 with an arguably shell of an AOP that was dilluted of its veterans way beyond the level of it's brothers over in the AOT? Way too many variables for conjecture.
Respectfully,
Spartan
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
Ole,
You are a piece of work and I enjoy your comebacks. Shall we discuss the merits of Sherman's probable pursuit and defeat of Lee at the July 6 Battle of Chambersburg?
Respectfully,
Spartan