Alternate History Theories Needed

What would of Lee's best chance for a victory in Pennsylvania in 1863?

  • Force a defensive battle

    Votes: 8 38.1%
  • Have Hood swing behind Little Round Top

    Votes: 1 4.8%
  • Use Pickett's division for an attack on the right flank

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Use Pickett's division for an attack on the left flank

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Waited until Stuart's Calvary could arrive

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Attack Harrisburg directly

    Votes: 3 14.3%
  • Swing southward to Baltimore and/or Washington D.C

    Votes: 5 23.8%
  • Other

    Votes: 4 19.0%

  • Total voters
    21

americono

Private
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Location
State College, Pennsylvania
I was thinking what would of made the Battle of Gettysburg end differently. I read somewhere were the author said, "Gettysburg was not a battle of how the Union won, but how the south lost a battle they should've won." I wanna see what your opinions on how Lee could have won. Let's saddle up Civil War buffs and refight Gettysburg!!!
 
Lee lost the battle after day one. He should have taken his victory that day and either swing south towards Washington or keep heading to Harrisburg. It was his hubris that made him stay an attack a larger army in a strong position. On day two Lee should have had his army marching either south or north.
 
Last edited:
I was thinking what would of made the Battle of Gettysburg end differently. I read somewhere were the author said, "Gettysburg was not a battle of how the Union won, but how the south lost a battle they should've won." I wanna see what your opinions on how Lee could have won. Let's saddle up Civil War buffs and refight Gettysburg!!!

I dont know for sure, but in my opinion, I think Lee's original plan was to head for the Carlisle Army Barracks, get there befor the Union army, take the weapons and supplies, and then set up a defensive battle somewhere in the mountains of northern PA. If he would have taken the barracks, headed south to Harrisburg, then fought the Union army, and headed south for Baltimore or Washington D.C. then he may have ended the war right there. There are some other facts that play into my theory and battle plan.
 
Lee has a second heart attack on day one as he arrives on the battlefield and watches Ewell's men smash into the union army and command of the ANV is transferred to Longstreet. On day two all fighting stops as the word Lee death spreads through both armies. Longstreet send over a flag of truce and meets Gen, Meade and discuss Lee's body being returned Virginia. As Lee's wagon begins to head out leaving between both armies men from both armies come out to meet the wagon and escort... At the end of a five days truce Longstreet has found the place to move the army to fight from a defensive position and Meade armies lead by Hancock and Sickles smash into Longstreet's plan... you decide what happens''''
 
He should have not sought a pitched battle there. He ought to have pillaged new territory on his way back to Virginiia.

If his goal was to give Virginia farmers a break, he succeded. If his goal was to get supplies for his army, he succeded. If his goal was to destroy the AotP on ground of his chosing, he failed.

The reason for all the "if's" is that Lee had multiple reasons for the invasion, but he had one reason for confronting Meade -- he wasn't the kind who would flee, even when fleeing was the best choice.
 
I think Lee's heart disease was acting up and he wasn't thinking as clearly as he did at Antietam. Combined with the heat, lack of knowledge of the Union army's whereabouts and his belief in his army's capabilities (invincibility ?), he did what he thought his army was capable for doing. He did not take into consideration the command changes that Jackson's death brought about and was not content to rest on his first day victory. He thought his army was able to do more than it did; perhaps if Jackson had lived? Or if Ewell has allowed Trimble to take a division, even a polyglot one, up into XI Corps's hill position near the end of the first day?

I would suggest that if Lee had taken his victory on the first day and then gone to Harrisburg, he could have fought a defensive battle in the streets. This probably would have been the end of his army. He could have set up a battle on hills in the Harrisburg area, which his army would have stood a fair chance of winning, depending on how his ammo held up. A move to Carlisle Barracks might have done his logistics some good, in fact, wasn't Early on his way there when he was redirected to Gettysburg? Taking a Northern capital would have been quite the accomplishment for his army, but I'm not sure his army would have been up to battling its way back through a very angry Army of the Potomac and being far away from his ammo resupply.

Alan
 
There's an entire literature of alternate history on Gettysburg - more than the rest of the war put together, most likely. I have always found this a bit ironic, as it seems to me that a smashing Confederate victory might not have made much difference in the ultimate outcome of the war. A crushing Confederate victory could only be achieved with crippling losses being inflicted upon the Army of Northern Virginia as well and Lee would have to retreat into Virginia sooner or later anyway. Moreover, we can see from letters and diaries that many people at the time saw Gettysburg more as a standoff than a Confederate defeat.

Confederate victory in 1863 is impossible, because no matter what happens, Lincoln is going to stay in office and he will continue the war to the bitter end. Confederate victory in 1864 is possible, because the election gave the Confederates the chance, through battlefield success, to cause Lincoln's defeat at the polls and ensure a pro-peace administration comes into the White House. That's why I consider the Overland Campaign, the Atlanta Campaign, and the 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign far more important to the ultimate outcome of the war than the Gettysburg Campaign.
 
There's an entire literature of alternate history on Gettysburg - more than the rest of the war put together, most likely. I have always found this a bit ironic, as it seems to me that a smashing Confederate victory might not have made much difference in the ultimate outcome of the war. A crushing Confederate victory could only be achieved with crippling losses being inflicted upon the Army of Northern Virginia as well and Lee would have to retreat into Virginia sooner or later anyway. Moreover, we can see from letters and diaries that many people at the time saw Gettysburg more as a standoff than a Confederate defeat.

Confederate victory in 1863 is impossible, because no matter what happens, Lincoln is going to stay in office and he will continue the war to the bitter end. Confederate victory in 1864 is possible, because the election gave the Confederates the chance, through battlefield success, to cause Lincoln's defeat at the polls and ensure a pro-peace administration comes into the White House. That's why I consider the Overland Campaign, the Atlanta Campaign, and the 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign far more important to the ultimate outcome of the war than the Gettysburg Campaign.


I looked up your book and you choose an alternate history of the Atlanta Campaign... You pick your story up on Kennesaw Mountain... You ended it in Atlanta.... You make Cleburne(Southern favorite) and Thomas( fellow Virginian) the main actors of the play.... My question is why did Forrest or Gen. S. Lee not cut Sherman's long supply lines while Sherman marched towards Atlanta..?
 
Here is another one for Gettysburg... There was an impassable man made pond around and just south of Culp's Hill. Yes there was, for some reason historians leave this detail out when writing about the Gettysburg Battle( There is a thread on this pond in the Gettysburg Forum) This man made pond made it impossible to flake Culp's Hill so instead Ewell destroys his Corps on Culp's Hill.

Lets say Ewell men find a way drain the pond so it floods south towards the union line leave a large gap south of Culp's Hill. Johnson's and Early's Divisions smash through the gap turning the flank of the union line on Cemetery ridge forcing it into a panic for the union men have nowhere to go but fight or die. To add good measure Meade headquarters was near Culp's Hill and is overrunned and Meade and other generals are captured. But not to make a total loss for the union another Union general ( Howard or Hancock maybe or a lesser General like Barlow or Wright) not captured rally's the union men and hold Cemetery Hill Long enough for rest the union army to retreat to Pipe Creek Line before being overwhelmed... Later union army smashes Lee's Army in the famous Longstreet Charge at Pipe Creek and union counterattack...
 
Last edited:
I dont know for sure, but in my opinion, I think Lee's original plan was to head for the Carlisle Army Barracks, get there befor the Union army, take the weapons and supplies, and then set up a defensive battle somewhere in the mountains of northern PA. If he would have taken the barracks, headed south to Harrisburg, then fought the Union army, and headed south for Baltimore or Washington D.C. then he may have ended the war right there. There are some other facts that play into my theory and battle plan.

The geography here is all over the place, as far as Carlisle and Harrisburg goes. Harrisburg is NE of Carlisle and across the Susquehanna
Also, Ewell did occupy Carlisle for 3-4 days or so. No supplies and/or weapons there...
 
I would suggest that if Lee had taken his victory on the first day and then gone to Harrisburg, he could have fought a defensive battle in the streets.

Well...
Ewell who was around Harrisburg and had scouted Harrisburg, suggested that Lee come up and join him and go after Harrisburg full force, around 3 days before day 1, when Harrisburg was practically undefended. No battle to fight in any streets because the Union army would had been 2 days too late, other than the NY and PA militia that would do nothing against the ANV. They were there. That was an option and Lee turned it down.
 
E_just_E:

I can't imagine the Lincoln Administration tolerating the thought of any Northern capital city being taken by the ANV, or any other CSA army, for any great length of time. The pressure put on Meade by the administration to move FASTER would have been tremendous, not to mention what the papers, public and the Pennsylvania politicians would have brought to bear on Meade. This is made even worse because of Harrisburg's proximity to Washington.

I am not disagreeing with your timeline, far from it. I do think this would have been an opportunity for the ANV to do things like acquire shoes, clothing, etc., perhaps on the five-finger at gunpoint discount plan if the troops were so inclined. I'm thinking it is possible for the ANV to squander at least one day and maybe both days, allowing the Union Army to catch up and attack. However, that would have required Lee to do what Ewell suggested right away to keep that two day advantage-and Lee didn't do that.

What I am suggesting is the if Lee had taken his first day victory and then headed to Harrisburg, he would have been there before the AotP. Lee could have set up for a defensive battle in the streets (or the nearby hills) and made the cost unbearable for the AotP and the administration-not to mention what the cost would have been to his army and supplies. The end result, and I think most likely, is exactly what happened at Gettysburg by remaining there two more days. The political damage to the administration would have been far greater with Lee going Harrisburg.

Alan

Edit: The unknown here is if Lee somehow wins at Harrisburg, how does Vicksburg's surender affect the administration? Is it enough to offset a Harrisburg loss? A great question beyond my ability to answer!
 
Last edited:
Here is another one for Gettysburg... There was an impassable man made pond around and just south of Culp's Hill. Yes there was, for some reason historians leave this detail out when writing about the Gettysburg Battle( There is a thread on this pond in the Gettysburg Forum) This man made pond made it impossible to flake Culp's Hill so instead Ewell destroys his Corps on Culp's Hill.

Lets say Ewell men find a way drain the pond so it floods south towards the union line leave a large gap south of Culp's Hill. Johnson's and Early's Divisions smash through the gap turning the flank of the union line on Cemetery ridge forcing it into a panic for the union men have nowhere to go but fight or die. To add good measure Meade headquarters was near Culp's Hill and is overrunned and Meade and other generals are captured. But not to make a total loss for the union another Union general ( Howard or Hancock maybe or a lesser General like Barlow or Wright) not captured rally's the union men and wholes Cemetery Hill Long enough for rest the union army to retreat to Pipe Creek Line before being overwhelmed... Later union army smashes Lee's Army in the famous Longstreet Charge at Pipe Creek and union counterattack...

Are you talking about the McAllister's Mill pond on Rock Creek?
 
Lee has a second heart attack on day one as he arrives on the battlefield and watches Ewell's men smash into the union army and command of the ANV is transferred to Longstreet. On day two all fighting stops as the word Lee death spreads through both armies. Longstreet send over a flag of truce and meets Gen, Meade and discuss Lee's body being returned Virginia. As Lee's wagon begins to head out leaving between both armies men from both armies come out to meet the wagon and escort... At the end of a five days truce Longstreet has found the place to move the army to fight from a defensive position and Meade armies lead by Hancock and Sickles smash into Longstreet's plan... you decide what happens''''
Hahahaha
 
I wanna see what your opinions on how Lee could have won. Let's saddle up Civil War buffs and refight Gettysburg!!!

As you see americono Lee going to have to move and chose his next place to meet the defeat the union army for Lee to win. You can see that is the wisdom of this forum.
 
Lee lost the battle after day one. He should have taken his victory that day and either swing south towards Washington or keep heading to Harrisburg. It was his hubris that made him stay an attack a larger army in a strong position. On day two Lee should have had his army marching either south or north.


So you want an army commander to move south or north with no intelligence as to where the enemy forces are. Right
 
Edit: The unknown here is if Lee somehow wins at Harrisburg, how does Vicksburg's surender affect the administration? Is it enough to offset a Harrisburg loss? A great question beyond my ability to answer!

I don't see the two as comparable. Vickburg was lost permanently to the Confederacy, along with the army defending it. Lee settling down at Harrisburg, or anywhere else in the vicinity, would be besieged, cut off from supplies or reinforcements. Even if political pressure forced Meade to attack, and that attack was repulsed, that doesn't mean the AofP would be destroyed; the federals would simply settle down and await reinforcements, which would be coming from all over the Union. If it went on long enough, we could even see some of Grant's troops, and perhaps Grant himself, arriving via the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers and the Pennsylvania Railroad. There would be no corresponding help coming to Lee. He would have minimal ability to forage for supplies in a fixed position in hostile country with the enemy army in close proximity. He'd have no supply lines to home for ammunition or evacuation of casualties. The Union cavalry had now shown itself a match for the Confederate. The big question might be whether Lee's army could ever get home.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ole
Back
Top