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!
No denying McCulloch had some admirable attributes as a Ranger etc. but , and this is just me again I feel his conduct and his ongoing feud with Price who at one point was his Commander and his conduct after Wilsons Creek / Oak Hills hurt more than helped his cause in the Trans-Miss and led to the appointment of Earl Van Dorn as Department Commander, which further hurt the CS aspirations.
What the CS needed at this point in time when bringing Missouri into the CS was a great possibilty was a commander with a force of personality who could command and control the likes of Price, McCulloch ,Pike etc.
Without such a commander nothing is going to happen.
Yeah and what did Jeff Davis send. Earl VanDorn, a friend of Jeff who should have never commanded any force larger than a company.
As a what if it has merits. The loss of Missouri would have given the CS the control of St. Louis one of the biggest ports on the Mississippi if Kentucky had followed suit theres no doubt that Cario probably become untenable for Union Forces giving the CS control from St. Louis to Naw' leans at least for awhile.
Missouri and Kentucky were both on the cusp and this might have given the south a bit more leverage.
I don't think it ends the war but it certainly can throw a wrench in the works for the Union.
And in August / Sept of 61 as far as Missouri goes the Pro-Southerners were still most certainly in the state and activly campaigning. Prices Troops were Missouri State Guard in CS service. He picked up a number of recurits during the march from Wilsons Creek to the Lexington fight. Jo Shelby would also pick recruits on his 63 raid, and Price again in 64.
While the logic of the east applies to Maryland maybe Kentucky Missouri is a little different. Confederate forces seemed to be able to attract recruits throughout the war.
Missouri provided somewhere in the neighborhood of 86,000 troops to the CSA as it was.
Missouri provided somewhere in the neighborhood of 86,000 troops to the CSA as it was.
Not familiar with your numbers here, but do know that however many went gray, more went blue. Missouri was divided, like Tennessee and Kentucky, but Missouri remained a Union State. Without the pro-slavery governor, there might very well have been no more trouble there than in Maryland.
ole
__________________ 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
Not familiar with your numbers here, but do know that however many went gray, more went blue. Missouri was divided, like Tennessee and Kentucky, but Missouri remained a Union State. Without the pro-slavery governor, there might very well have been no more trouble there than in Maryland.
ole
You are right Missouri sent in the neighborhood of 120,000 troops to the Union, it has been a while since I actualy looked up the numbers. However, I think that might have been diffrent had the 1861 campaign succeded, which it could have.
A little Missouri CW trivia:
What city west of the Mississippi River sent more troops to the Union that any other city west of the Mississippi River and most cities East of the River?
What city west of the Missippi River sent more troops to the Confederacy thatn any other city west of the Mississippi River and most cities east of the river?
Since I am asking the question, you know the answer is St. Louis.
Among those Yankee troops was my Great Grandfather Corpral Henry S. Hamilton, of Kirksville Mo, 3rd Missouri Volunteer Cav. USA. Among the Rebs were some of my maternal ancesters from Cass County, the Burnt Zone Mo. Capt. Quantrill's Missouri Partisan Rangers CSA. I guess that proves your point about Missouri being divided.
I think that Lyon's declaration of war on a state which was not in rebellion, had as mouch to do with the troubles in Missouri as did Claybourn F. Jackson.
I think that Lyon's declaration of war on a state which was not in rebellion, had as mouch to do with the troubles in Missouri as did Claybourn F. Jackson.
,
John Fremont IMO had more to do with it than Lyon or at least provided Lyon the enviroment to conduct his style of pacification in Missouri. Fremont launched Lyon he was the commander of the Dept.. What Lyon did he did at Fremonts pleasure.
had known at the start of the war, they could never maintain an army in Missouri and hold the ground.
Richmond never intended to allow western troops to remain west of the river IMO. They thought that they could hold it with a skeleton force of regt's mustered into to CS service locally and State Guard troops like those commanded by Price. Cannon fodder for the eastern CS armies was more important.
Jeff and crew totally misread the Unions resolve to hold Missouri and the Unions willingness to maintain their troops in the west in order to due this.
And this is why the great icons of the east, Marse Robert, Stonewall, Stuart, and Davis hold very little sway over most students of the Trans-Miss. The old timers with southern sympathy felt betrayed by the southern leadership. Their icons are Price, J.O. Shelby, and it's also the reason that the Irregulars reached such iconic status.
And this is why the great icons of the east, Marse Robert, Stonewall, Stuart, and Davis hold very little sway over most students of the Trans-Miss. The old timers with southern sympathy felt betrayed by the southern leadership. Their icons are Price, J.O. Shelby, and it's also the reason that the Irregulars reached such iconic status.
By God Borderruffian, DangYankee or not, I like you.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
