Decisive Confederate Victory at Chickamauga

Generic Username

Corporal
Joined
May 12, 2019
Location
Yes
With the 160th anniversary of the Battle having just taken place (The reenactment is this weekend, highly encourage everyone to come!), I felt a thread was in order.

Historically, while successful in derailing Federal efforts into Georgia until the following campaign season, the Confederate success was "fruitless"; the Army of the Cumberland was able to survive and Bragg's Army of the Tennessee failed to recapture the critical rail hub of Chattanooga. The failed siege and resulting Federal retention of that crucial city would thus set the stage for the Atlanta Campaign in 1864, which would be a Union success and allow for the re-election of Lincoln. However, it did not have to be this way as noted by Dave Powell, who is generally considered the modern expert on the battle. In fact, Bragg had a golden opportunity on the morning of the 19th to divide the Federal Army in two and defeat it in detail:

mc-IMG_5979.jpeg

By moving forward his forces, Bragg would have smashed Crittenden in his exposed flank. More importantly, this would've cut off the means of retreat to Chattanooga for the five divisions under Crittenden and McCook, and allowed Bragg to focus his other Corps solely upon the remaining five divisions under Thomas to the North. Cut off in McLemore's Cove, Crittenden and McCook both would've both been forced to surrender on the 20th, cut off as they were from supply and any viable means of escape in McLemore's Cove. To get an idea of the situation, attached is the tactical map of the situation on the morning of the 19th, from Dave Powell's Decisions at Chickamauga (and from where our PoD comes from, also):

unnamed(1).jpg

This would also create a very serious situation for Thomas as the 20th arrived, as he would not receive Negley's Division and would thus have a seriously exposed left flank. Even worse, with the Federal Army divided in two by Bragg's actions, Longstreet's Corp would be going into combat fresh against a much weaker, more exposed Thomas than IOTL. It thus stands to reason Thomas would be much more easily routed, with higher casualties, than historically occurred:

IMG_5983(1).jpeg
IMG_5984(1).jpeg

Even worse, seven of the Army's 10 divisional hospitals filled with wounded are at Crawfish Springs, while two brigades of cavalry and a fair portion of the Army's supply train would likewise be exposed to destruction by the Confederates. Between those losses, Thomas being routed off the field and roughly five divisions being forced to surrender, you're easily looking at 35,000 losses by the Army of the Cumberland, which would have to abandon Chattanooga and likely fall back on Nashville given a now decisive Confederate numerical advantage and the loss of sufficient supply capacity with the damage to the baggage trains.

This would definitely not be a fruitless victory, and could very easily set the stage for French intervention to end the war or so damage the Federal war effort as to allow a peace by exhaustion in 1864.
 
Grant can easily send thousands of reinforcements, though ... the major Confederate forces in Mississippi have been wiped out. He had over 20,000 troops garrisoning West Tennessee already (the only Confederates there were Robert V. Richardson's guerrillas), and he could easily send the Fifteenth and Seventeenth Corps (30,000) more even minus the First Division (which historically garrisoned Vicksburg)

Additionally, by two weeks after the battle, Hooker's 20,000 in XI and XII Corps were in North Alabama.

Historically, at Chattanooga, Sherman took three of the four divisions of XV Corps, none of the four divisions of XVI Corps, and one of the four divisions of XVII Corps. Essentially, if it was needed, Sherman could bring up three times the number of troops he brought.

IMHO, the only thing that could come out of this would be the recapture of Chattanooga. With the reinforcements pouring in, I feel like the next step would be an Atlanta-style campaign to retake Chattanooga, with the same troops but about a year earlier.
 
Grant can easily send thousands of reinforcements, though ... the major Confederate forces in Mississippi have been wiped out. He had over 20,000 troops garrisoning West Tennessee already (the only Confederates there were Robert V. Richardson's guerrillas), and he could easily send the Fifteenth and Seventeenth Corps (30,000) more even minus the First Division (which historically garrisoned Vicksburg)

Additionally, by two weeks after the battle, Hooker's 20,000 in XI and XII Corps were in North Alabama.

Historically, at Chattanooga, Sherman took three of the four divisions of XV Corps, none of the four divisions of XVI Corps, and one of the four divisions of XVII Corps. Essentially, if it was needed, Sherman could bring up three times the number of troops he brought.

IMHO, the only thing that could come out of this would be the recapture of Chattanooga. With the reinforcements pouring in, I feel like the next step would be an Atlanta-style campaign to retake Chattanooga, with the same troops but about a year earlier.

Confederate forces in the Mississippi haven't been wiped out though, as the units of Johnston's Army of Relief are still around and are somewhere between 20,000 to 30,000 strong. If Grant denudes the Mississippi Valley, the Confederates can do likewise and you then end up with a situation where the Federals have, at best, parity against entrenched Confederates fortified along mountain lines. Leaving that aside, you're double counting some of the numbers there too, given the units you mention in various Corps include those in West Tennessee.

It's also worth considering the quality and actual numbers of the formations in question. The 17th Corps had taken several thousand losses in the Vicksburg Campaign and was left to demonstrate against the Confederates for the remainder of 1863; it had about 15,000 present before the battles for Vicksburg began.
 
Considering Johnston as a commander, he probably would not be that aggressive with his army.

I don't think I double counted ... I did not count Lauman's or Sooy Smith's divisions, and estimated the District of East Arkansas, and included the forces in West Kentucky as well (Paducah, Columbus). As to your point about XV and XVII Corps; Lauman's division augmented XVII Corps after the campaign, becoming its Fourth Division, and Sooy Smith's division augmented XV Corps, becoming its Fourth Division as well. That would still leave the four divisions of XVI Corps at Corinth, Jackson, Memphis, and Columbus, not to mention the cavalry.
 
Considering Johnston as a commander, he probably would not be that aggressive with his army.

I don't think I double counted ... I did not count Lauman's or Sooy Smith's divisions, and estimated the District of East Arkansas, and included the forces in West Kentucky as well (Paducah, Columbus). As to your point about XV and XVII Corps; Lauman's division augmented XVII Corps after the campaign, becoming its Fourth Division, and Sooy Smith's division augmented XV Corps, becoming its Fourth Division as well. That would still leave the four divisions of XVI Corps at Corinth, Jackson, Memphis, and Columbus, not to mention the cavalry.

Johnston wouldn't have to be aggressive, he just needs to joins Bragg's Army which will probably winter at Chattanooga while the Federals spend their time reconstituting in Tennessee after the core of their Western Armies have been gutted. No Meridan Expedition and the like in early 1864 as a result. The Trans-Mississippi Department can probably make some plays in this strategic situation too.
 
Johnston wouldn't have to be aggressive, he just needs to joins Bragg's Army which will probably winter at Chattanooga while the Federals spend their time reconstituting in Tennessee after the core of their Western Armies have been gutted. No Meridan Expedition and the like in early 1864 as a result. The Trans-Mississippi Department can probably make some plays in this strategic situation too.
Then it's just the Atlanta Campaign, months earlier, with less troops, isn't it?
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top