WI: Virginia doesn't secede
- Thread starter Will Kürlich Kerl
- Start date
Assuming Virginia does not secede, Robert E. Lee becomes General in Chief of Union forces. Also, the South is even more screwed as Virginia not only supplied a lot of troops to the CSA, but the only significant foundry in the CSA was the Tredegar Works in Richmond. Now the start line for the Union is the VA/NC border, well away from Washington. Since the western part of North Carolina and the eastern part of Tennessee were strongly Unionist and are now bordering the USA not isolated in the CSA expect those areas to come under Union control quite quickly. Just a starting point but you can see how things go bad for the CSA quickly.
Anaxagoras
Banned
True, but even worse than that would be the fact that the Norfolk Navy Yard would not fall into Confederate hands. IOTL, literally thousands of cannon from Norfolk were sent to coastal and river fortifications throughout the Confederacy. No Virginia secession, and the coastal and river defenses of the South are much, much weaker than IOTL. Also, no capture and transfer of the armory facilities at Harper's Ferry.
In terms of military talent, Virginia remaining in the Union most likely means that the South would be deprived of the services of such men as Robert E. Lee, Joseph Johnston, Jeb Stuart, Stonewall Jackson, Jubal Early, and many others among the South's leading commanders.
Also, as already pointed out, if Virginia stays in, it's a fair bit that North Carolina and perhaps Tennessee and Arkansas will stay in, too.
The South is utterly screwed. It would be quite a feat for it to survive to see January 1, 1863.
David S Poepoe
Banned
WI Virginia doesn't secede but refuses to permit Federal troops to transit thru. It could declare itself neutral. One could disagree with the idea of secession yet also consider that it is a state's right to exercise it or that the Federal Government is clearly overstepping its authority.
Another point would be there would be no West Virginia. That would have an important effect on Virginia for years, likely meaning the state will develop on par with say, Pennsylvania.
Kentucky tried neutrality but found that it didn't work. While Lincoln bided his time, General Leonidas Polk invaded the state, forcing Unionists to get off the fence and appeal for federal troops. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonidas_Polk#Kentucky I suspect this would also happen in a non-secessionist Virginia, with the impulsive Beauregard playing the role Polk did in Kentucky. (I got this idea from Mike Stone's post at https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.history.what-if/04bYSX1rEV4/w0325PxJIz8J)
Can states even do that? i wasn't aware a state could refuse entry to federal troops.
This will definitely make the war shorter, as Virginia in this time has a huge smount of men and generals, and influence among the other upper south states. Though, even if Virginia stays with th Union, there will likely be some secessionists, maybe putting up a little resistance. Note interesting, however, would be the cultural impact of this. Maybe, with a less destructive war, secession would seem more acceptable. Also, from that point on, with only the Deep South and Texas in the CSA, the southern society will be more limited.
The North gets a considerable number of additional soldiers, several talented commanders, and the logistical and economic strength of Virginia in general. The South loses those things. To the North, it's a nice bonus. To the South, it's a devestating blow that cannot be overcome. Without Virginia, the South will be extremely short on troops, supplies, weapons etc. etc.
The legislatures and the people of North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas are no doubt aware of this. They will follow Virginia's lead, and stay in the Union. And on the off chance that they don't, considerable segments of the population will support the North, and those states will be quickly overrun by the Union.
Since the frontline is now much further away from Washington, the South has a snowball's chance in hell when it comes to an offensive strategy, so all they can really do is entrench and try to hold out. Considering their lack of men and supplies, that strategy won't work. At all. On the other hand, Lee will be commanding the Union armies. We must remember he was called "granny Lee" at the start of the war IOTL. One may expect his initial approach to be cautious, so the war may not be over as quickly as it could be.
Nevertheless, the Confederacy has until early 1863 at the very best. It'll be clear that they are going to lose much, much sooner. Considering Lincoln's viewpoints on the matter, there may still be an emancipation proclamation, but only if the war drags out long enough. The shorter it is, the less likely a proclamation will be. And even if it is issued, Lincoln will probably use it as a tool to manipulate the South into submitting: states that surrender at once will be exempt. And I expect that by that point, the South will surrender and keep their slaves, rather than fight on and certainly lose them.
Even if radical Republicans push for complete abolition after the war, there will be more slave-holding states in the Union (even considering that the former Confederacy will likely be under military rule for some time), and it is unlikely that abolition will pass. Especially if keeping slavery was the primary condition of the South's surrender.
All in all, a world where the Confederacy is smaller and the war is shorter may not be a better, brighter place. Not if you happen to be slave.
The legislatures and the people of North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas are no doubt aware of this. They will follow Virginia's lead, and stay in the Union. And on the off chance that they don't, considerable segments of the population will support the North, and those states will be quickly overrun by the Union.
Since the frontline is now much further away from Washington, the South has a snowball's chance in hell when it comes to an offensive strategy, so all they can really do is entrench and try to hold out. Considering their lack of men and supplies, that strategy won't work. At all. On the other hand, Lee will be commanding the Union armies. We must remember he was called "granny Lee" at the start of the war IOTL. One may expect his initial approach to be cautious, so the war may not be over as quickly as it could be.
Nevertheless, the Confederacy has until early 1863 at the very best. It'll be clear that they are going to lose much, much sooner. Considering Lincoln's viewpoints on the matter, there may still be an emancipation proclamation, but only if the war drags out long enough. The shorter it is, the less likely a proclamation will be. And even if it is issued, Lincoln will probably use it as a tool to manipulate the South into submitting: states that surrender at once will be exempt. And I expect that by that point, the South will surrender and keep their slaves, rather than fight on and certainly lose them.
Even if radical Republicans push for complete abolition after the war, there will be more slave-holding states in the Union (even considering that the former Confederacy will likely be under military rule for some time), and it is unlikely that abolition will pass. Especially if keeping slavery was the primary condition of the South's surrender.
All in all, a world where the Confederacy is smaller and the war is shorter may not be a better, brighter place. Not if you happen to be slave.
In short, the CSA is in real trouble. Virginia was considered a bellwether and a leader in the South. If they decide secession is a bad idea, it's entirely possible that the second wave of secession does not happen at all. Many competent generals came from Virginia, and while IMO Robert E. Lee is somewhat overrated, he was absolutely a great general and would have been perfectly capable of beating the absolute hell out of whatever Confederate forces mustered in North Carolina. So RE Lee would be seen as the savior of the Union, slavery probably would have been preserved, Sherman and Grant would have been minor footnotes, and hell, maybe McClellan would have ridden Lees coat tails somehow to great fame and glory.
David S Poepoe
Banned
Lee's 'slow' to move approach would be taking a cue from old Winfield Scott who had predicted a long war.
David S Poepoe
Banned
Virginia could refuse to aid the Federal Government in what would have been a violation of the Constitution. The interpretation of the Constitution was vastly different than we have of it today.
The capital would remain in Montgomery without a doubt. You'd likely not see a second wave of secession, as has been discussed already. With all of the fury of the Union Army focused on the states in the Deep South, you'd see a shorter war for sure, speculatively ending by 1863 with all the first wave states leveled into submission. You may not see slavery end for a while though, because the impetus to preserve the Union trumped abolition goals in the first half of the war. What this does to global geopolitics could be guessed at for days on end.
When that happens...
Virginia can contribute approx 120,000 soldiers to the Union Cause...
Not including the OTL 40,000 Virginians whom had served in the Union Military among with 6,000 African Americans
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_in_the_American_Civil_War
General Robert E. Lee among with General Stonewall Jackson and J.E.B. Stuart would probably fight for Virginia and since Virginia probably had gotten invaded by Southern forces, these three will probably get official commissions to lead these troops against the Secessionists whom invaded Virginia....
I think a good number of Virginians WOULD have joined the Confederacy even with the Old Dominion itself officially not doing so. Consider the citizens in the two Eastern Shore Counties [of the Delmarva Peninsula] that were almost immediately occupied by Union forces to secure the Chesapeake Bay to safeguard DC. Like other Border States, they were essentially left alone and allowed to keep their slaves -as long as the family heads would go to the county courthouses and take the Oath of Allegiance to the Union. Even with being spared virtually all of the Civil War's ravages and being left alone, there were still a great many Eastern Shore men of all ages who sailed across to the Virginia mainland to join the Confederacy and the two monuments to the Civil War there are to honor the Confederates NOT to thank the Union for leaving them be and letting them keep their slaves.
This is true, and by the same token there were men from loyal Union states who came South to fight in gray.
Anaxagoras
Banned
The situation would be rather like Kentucky, which sent 25,000 men to the Confederate army and 75,000 men to the Union army. Fact is that Kentucky didn't secede and most of its territory was held by the Union during the course of the war, making recruitment vastly easier for the Union than for the Confederacy.