Grant After Shiloh

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

Two What Ifs:

1. Grant resigns from the Army from Halleck's treatment of him after Shiloh. Maybe Sherman doesn't persuade him to stay. Who leads operations against Vicksburg? When and how does Vicksburg finally fall? How is the war different as a result?

2. Halleck decides not to take personal command of the combined armies of Buell, Grant, and Pope during the march on Corinth. What happens if Grant is in charge instead? I have read he was interested in making an aggressive push on Corinth and trying to use the vast superiority in numbers to encircle Beauregard.

Alternatively, might Pope or Buell have been given command? I find they were made Major Generals on March 21, 1862. I can't find Grant's date of promotion (all the sources I found said "after Fort Donelson"). As I recall, Halleck didn't like Buell. Could he have placed Pope in command, with Grant and Buell commanding wings? Pope's competence seems difficult to judge and I have no idea what he thought of Grant.

In the event Buell is in command I see him putting Grant, Pope, and Thomas as three wing commanders and being much faster than Halleck, but not aggressive enough to result in anything different (just sooner - no digging his way to Corinth like Halleck).

 

[NedBaldwin]

Two What Ifs:

1. Grant resigns from the Army from Halleck's treatment of him after Shiloh. Maybe Sherman doesn't persuade him to stay. Who leads operations against Vicksburg? When and how does Vicksburg finally fall? How is the war different as a result?

there would be competition between Sherman and McClernand to lead it. Sherman had support of Halleck; McClernand had the rank and the friendship with Lincoln. I see McClernand taking charge as he did in actual timeline, but campaign flounders; then Sherman takes over and restarts campaign from Memphis along railroad (as he suggested to Grant). Goes very slowly. Maybe Vicksburg falls in 1864.

2. Halleck decides not to take personal command of the combined armies of Buell, Grant, and Pope during the march on Corinth. What happens if Grant is in charge instead? I have read he was interested in making an aggressive push on Corinth and trying to use the vast superiority in numbers to encircle Beauregard.

Grant might have a week or so off the timeline, but otherwise the capture of Corinth goe the same.

Alternatively, might Pope or Buell have been given command? I find they were made Major Generals on March 21, 1862. I can't find Grant's date of promotion (all the sources I found said "after Fort Donelson").

Grant's promotion came in February so he was senior to both.

In the event Buell is in command I see him putting Grant, Pope, and Thomas as three wing commanders and being much faster than Halleck, but not aggressive enough to result in anything different (just sooner - no digging his way to Corinth like Halleck).

Buell was a part of the reason for Halleck's delays. I see no reason to think he would move any faster based on his track record.

 

[rbasin]

Always have to love the "Halleck was mean to Grant" statement.

 

[Andy Cardinal]

there would be competition between Sherman and McClernand to lead it.

I am not sure how much competition there would have been. Sherman was just coming out if the cloud of being "insane." His performance at Shiloh helped with this but I'm not sure he had reached the point where anyone would have trusted him with an independent command. Grant kind of brought him along, and without Grant, I'm not sure if he'd risen in the same way.

McClernand had Lincoln's support so without Grant I think it more likely he would have replaced Grant, at least to begin with. When McClernand came down the river, he commanded the expedition to Arkansas Post with Sherman as a subordinate.

Supposing McClernand failed, then I see Sherman moving to the top. Or maybe someone like Thomas or even Rosecrans would have gotten a chance.

 

[NedBaldwin]

I am not sure how much competition there would have been. Sherman was just coming out if the cloud of being "insane." His performance at Shiloh helped with this but I'm not sure he had reached the point where anyone would have trusted him with an independent command. Grant kind of brought him along, and without Grant, I'm not sure if he'd risen in the same way.

I wrote " Sherman had support of Halleck".
Without Grant, Sherman would still have risen becuase of Halleck.
Halleck would have pushed for Sherman to lead the forces down the river against Vicksburg, just as he did in reality.
McClernand would still have pushed for a command from Lincoln to do the same.
The result would be competition among the commanders.

 

[rbasin]

1. Grant resigns from the Army from Halleck's treatment of him after Shiloh. Maybe Sherman doesn't persuade him to stay. Who leads operations against Vicksburg? When and how does Vicksburg finally fall? How is the war different as a result?

While I disagree with Halleck mistreating Grant, I'll give this a shot:

McClernand. Lincoln did assign him that task. Had he failed (he likely would have), then Pope. Pope had some experience with Madrid and Island #10. He knew Lincoln, and Lincoln brought him east to command an army, so I see no reason for him not to take command. He likely would have come slowly down the Mississippi river' eastern bank, using the river for supplies, and to avoid another Holly Springs fiasco. It would have been a campaign of posts, to paraphrase. Pope would eventually besiege Vicksburg.

 

[rbasin]

2. Halleck decides not to take personal command of the combined armies of Buell, Grant, and Pope during the march on Corinth. What happens if Grant is in charge instead? I have read he was interested in making an aggressive push on Corinth and trying to use the vast superiority in numbers to encircle Beauregard.

If Grant follows the same objective as Halleck, that is, to take Corinth, then the time frame is similiar.