What if Gen. Longstreet had gone West in the Spring of 1863?

[samgrant]

Oz, better, but how does he lick Grant? What does he know (aside from being bestman at Grant's wedding (tho some say it was Cadmus Wilcox)) about Grant's movements that Johnston/Pemberton don't know?

I can't buy it in the least.

[Ozark Iron John]

Originally Posted by samgrant

I can't buy it in the least.

He don't have to "lick" Grant. He just has to nip at his heels. Grant was cut off from the river and operating behind the lines without lines of communication. He could not have successfully seiged Vicksburg if Johnston would've done ANTHING. If old Pete had been there, I reckon it would've been all samgrant could've done to get his arse back up to Tennessee.

Anyways, he did not have to "lick" Grant. The mere fact that he was in the Area of Operations would've forced Grant to take some action to defend himself against another Corps, a harden veteran Corps in his rear.

Vicksburg does not fall.

Hmmmm!

No Gettysburg. No Vicksburg. On the Heels of Chancelorsville and Fredricksburg.

I'm thinkin' old honest Abe's not doin' too well in the eyes of them that brung him. I'm thinkin' little Mac and Salmon Chase makes a run at the WhiteHouse that get's 'em all excited and by the summer of 1864, we're one big happy family again.

and we're all speakin' a might differently today.

[richard]

I must say that Longstreet was not very impressive in East Tennessee. Could not do anything but sit outside Knoxville.
And then found a whole and slept for the rest of the winter.
How do you think that he could have made such a difference in the west with performace such as that.

[johan_steele]

Longstreet would have to raise the siege, via an attack on the Union troops entrenched around the city. Not very likely. They were not "behind" Vicksburg but encircling it, and they were receiving supplies... enough to feed an Army, Vicksburg wasn't. If Vicksburg hadn't surrended on the 4th of July it likely would have fallen on the same day.

You're giving Davis far too much credit for military competance.

"I'm bettin' the war's over by the Spring of 1864 and all's forgiven. Slavery exists south of the Ohio and Missouri Rivers from sea to shinin' sea.

Some abolistionists will have to be lynched and some rabel rousers will have to be shot, but for all intents and purposes, we're all one big happy family again." Ozark, you're showing your true hopes and dreams again...

[OpnDownfall]

The original 'What If' has some substance, reinforcing the West was comtemplated by Richmond and Longstreet (Lee didn't) but Longstreet replacing Johnston or Bragg, was never really an option.
If Longstreet was unhappy under Bragg, he would have been no happier under Johnston.
Johnston managed to scrape together something like 35000 men (approx. 3 Div's and 1cav. div.) and this was only just before Vicksberg's capitulation. The best scenario for the Confederates is a close parity in numbers 'With' Longstreet. Again I say, If we know anything about the Civil War, it is that 'close' parity, was no a safe enough cushion for Johnston to risk his reputation.

[cw1865]

They would have to have done one of two things, either Johnston, and Longstreet would actually be under his command, would have to drive straight for Vicksburg, in conjunction with Pemberton, or he'd have to veer to the northeast and threaten Grant's rear to hopefully make him voluntarily relinquish his grip on Vicksburg.

[OpnDownfall]

Grant was aware that Johnston was trying to raise a relieving army and formed a special corps of 3 Div's under Sherman to keep watch towards the Capital of Jackson (along the Big Black River, I believe). Johnston would have to fight his way towards Grant (Vicksberg or his supply base).
Johnston would have to make Grant retreat, threatening his supply base would not do it
From his communications with his superiors, Pemberton did not seem to have much confidence in his army's abilities in actual campaigning. It is likely that at best Pemberton would be reluctant and/or slow in the attempt, to break out of Vicksberg to link up with Johnston's relieving army.
Johnston would probably have to break into Vicksberg to raise the seige.. A difficult assignment with many problems that Johnston would be all too quick to discern and proclaim.

[ole]

Longstreet, under Johnston, in 1863, would have made a difference only if Johnston actually did something. The difference? Several hundreds more of blue- and gray-clad bodies somewhere east of the Big Black. Vicksburg still folds.

ole

[matthew mckeon]

I can understand why Longstreet might have wanted to go west, ambition. Under Lee he would always be number two man. And I can see why Davis wanted to keep the ANV at full strength: it was the only CSA army that was winning. Why would he take away troops from the only army that was successful, and keep that army inactive, while reinforcing armies that were consistently unsuccessful? After all, Longstreet was going as a subordinate, not as theatre or army commander.

Maybe Davis should have kept Longstreet in the East, and shipped Lee and the rest of the ANV west. Linked up with western troops, commanded by someone competent, who knew how to bring out the best in his subordinates, and to shunt aside the less able, maybe the CSA could have inflicted a decisive defeat on the Union forces. Maybe.

The real issue was that Davis didn't have a spare Lee, and neither he or the various commanders send to the West really focused and organized CS resources in the region in a coherent way.

I don't know what the second Lee would have done, but Pemberton, Bragg and Johnston, all who would have been competent in lower levels of responsibility, were unable to work together, or command effectively.

[OpnDownfall]

It was precisely, because the war was being lost in the West, that relief from the only successful army was required.
Lee was only a little less adamant in his resistence to sending reinforcements West from the ANV than he was in resisting himself being sent West.