Anniversary of Lee’s Surrender at Appomattox

Weatherman2020

Diamond Member
Mar 3, 2013
91,084
61,724
2,605
Right coast, classified
Appomattox was not just a battle that Lee lost. It was the finale of an 11 month battle with Grant trying to take Richmond, the Confederate Capitol.

After 11 months of some of the worst fighting of the war Grant was finally able to cut the supply line to Richmond, forcing Lee to retreat. This was the last week of the Army of Virginia. Lee’s plan was to travel to south and link up with the North Carolina Army. Three groups of Lee’s Army were to link up at Amelia’s Courthouse to the south where supply trains would arrive and feed his Army that had not eaten in days. But when they arrived the trains had ammo but no food. This caused a delay and led to Union forces beginning to tighten a noose around Lee. So Lee was forced to move West. At Saylor’s Creek Lee lost 1/3 of his Army, mostly captured. High Bridge and Cumberland Church battles took more. Lee took his remaining Army to Farmsville where there was food, but they had to keep moving as Union forces were moving in keeping Lee moving West. Here at Farmville Grant wrote Lee requesting his surrender, Lee declined.

As you can see in the map, Lee’s retreat was a running battle.

0F62EF7E-B7F9-4269-ABAD-9F1E268C4288.jpeg

Two days later Lee would find himself surrounded and did surrender this time after a limited battle at Appomattox. One of the last men killed was a young man who served under Lee the entire war, from beginning to end.

On this road General Chamberlain ordered his men to attention as the Army of Virginia marched by to surrender their arms.

6E3D810B-6D9B-4ADB-969C-9284F42A82B0.jpeg

791E78EE-B3AB-4A92-BE85-221B528C27B5.jpeg


Grant himself did not remain long after the negotiations were concluded. As he left the McLean house a little after four in the afternoon he heard the firing of salutes in the Union camp in celebration of the news of the surrender. He at once issued orders to discontinue it. 'The war is over,' he said. 'The rebels are our countrymen again .... Many of his staff were disappointed, but Grant had no curiosity to look upon the conquered army. He was much more eager to restore harmony and prosperity to the reunited nation.
 
The South never had a chance at winning the war. The best they could do was to force the Yankees into a truce that would allow them to leave the relatively young United States. Lee's failure at Gettysburg and Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South. Historians tend to drool over Lincoln's legacy and claim that he "preserved the Union" but the Union actually fell apart under his watch and he foolishly thought he could defeat the South in a couple of months.
 
The South never had a chance at winning the war. The best they could do was to force the Yankees into a truce that would allow them to leave the relatively young United States. Lee's failure at Gettysburg and Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South. Historians tend to drool over Lincoln's legacy and claim that he "preserved the Union" but the Union actually fell apart under his watch and he foolishly thought he could defeat the South in a couple of months.

It was an unwinnable battle with how a couple things went in my opinion.

Confederacy was unable to get a single foreign power to recognize them. So while they had some under the table support and individuals offering support, they were basically on their own.

2nd, was like you said, the best way was to force a truce. To take on George Washingtons strategy of fighting a war of attrition. But Washington could let Philadelphia or NY fall, and pick and choose which battles favored his armies, then come back later. He could retreat out of bad situations and regroup. In the Confederacy, states were asking for a full defense of their lands and that every city was fought for even if it meant a major engagement they may not win and would be very costly to an army which struggled to replenish itself (people and supplies/weapons).

As for murdering civilians, that happened on both sides. It was War. Remember the first civilian casualties of the war was when Confederate supporting civilians took the war into their own hands attacking a Massachusetts brigade. It was a total war. Civilians in the Confederacy like the story of John Burns who grabbed his shotgun from the kitchen and joined the war effort. Likewise the story of Jennie Wade, killed baking bread in her kitchen by a Confederate sharpshooter.

Word spread about Sherman. Not willing to let the rich land owning aristocrats to send young people off to their war to perpetuate and expand race based slavery while living apart from it. He burned and razed.. And treated those who surrendered with the best care according to Confederates. Those stories were blown up and rather than full engagements, allowed his army to avoid that and instead gain surrenders, saving thousands of lives.

As for the lie that the union fell apart under Lincoln, the truth was secession was occurring even before he took office. It was his predecessor, James Buchanan who said the rebellion was illegal.

I do believe you are right about Lincolns beliefs it would be over quickly. He underestimated the desire of those southern leaders to hold together to support their "peculiar institution". He thought they would believe him on his claims he wouldn't try and end slavery if he had the chance. They didn't, and makes sense from their perspective not to believe those promises, since when given the chance, he fought to end slavery.
 
The South never had a chance at winning the war. The best they could do was to force the Yankees into a truce that would allow them to leave the relatively young United States. Lee's failure at Gettysburg and Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South. Historians tend to drool over Lincoln's legacy and claim that he "preserved the Union" but the Union actually fell apart under his watch and he foolishly thought he could defeat the South in a couple of months.

It was an unwinnable battle with how a couple things went in my opinion.

Confederacy was unable to get a single foreign power to recognize them. So while they had some under the table support and individuals offering support, they were basically on their own.

2nd, was like you said, the best way was to force a truce. To take on George Washingtons strategy of fighting a war of attrition. But Washington could let Philadelphia or NY fall, and pick and choose which battles favored his armies, then come back later. He could retreat out of bad situations and regroup. In the Confederacy, states were asking for a full defense of their lands and that every city was fought for even if it meant a major engagement they may not win and would be very costly to an army which struggled to replenish itself (people and supplies/weapons).

As for murdering civilians, that happened on both sides. It was War. Remember the first civilian casualties of the war was when Confederate supporting civilians took the war into their own hands attacking a Massachusetts brigade. It was a total war. Civilians in the Confederacy like the story of John Burns who grabbed his shotgun from the kitchen and joined the war effort. Likewise the story of Jennie Wade, killed baking bread in her kitchen by a Confederate sharpshooter.

Word spread about Sherman. Not willing to let the rich land owning aristocrats to send young people off to their war to perpetuate and expand race based slavery while living apart from it. He burned and razed.. And treated those who surrendered with the best care according to Confederates. Those stories were blown up and rather than full engagements, allowed his army to avoid that and instead gain surrenders, saving thousands of lives.

As for the lie that the union fell apart under Lincoln, the truth was secession was occurring even before he took office. It was his predecessor, James Buchanan who said the rebellion was illegal.

I do believe you are right about Lincolns beliefs it would be over quickly. He underestimated the desire of those southern leaders to hold together to support their "peculiar institution". He thought they would believe him on his claims he wouldn't try and end slavery if he had the chance. They didn't, and makes sense from their perspective not to believe those promises, since when given the chance, he fought to end slavery.

It's speculative fiction, but Harry Turtledove has a whole series of books on a Southern Victory and the repercussions of this through the 1940's.

Southern Victory - Wikipedia

Before the Battle of Antietam, Federal troops accidentally recovered a copy of Special Order 191, which detailed Lee's plan for the invasion of Maryland. Using this intelligence, Federal forces under George B. McClellan moved north and forced the Battle of Antietam, ending the invasion.

In Turtledove's alternate history, C.S. troops recover Lee's orders before the papers fall into Union hands. The resulting C.S. advance catches McClellan and the Union Army by surprise. General Lee forces McClellan into a battle on the banks of the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania and destroys the Army of the Potomac in the Battle of Camp Hill on October 1, 1862.

After this decisive C.S. victory, Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia move eastward to occupy Philadelphia. The Confederate States earns diplomatic recognition from the United Kingdom and France. The two European nations force mediation on the United States; the C.S. achieves independence. This "War of Secession" ends in less than two years.
 
Appomattox was not just a battle that Lee lost. It was the finale of an 11 month battle with Grant trying to take Richmond, the Confederate Capitol.

After 11 months of some of the worst fighting of the war Grant was finally able to cut the supply line to Richmond, forcing Lee to retreat. This was the last week of the Army of Virginia. Lee’s plan was to travel to south and link up with the North Carolina Army. Three groups of Lee’s Army were to link up at Amelia’s Courthouse to the south where supply trains would arrive and feed his Army that had not eaten in days. But when they arrived the trains had ammo but no food. This caused a delay and led to Union forces beginning to tighten a noose around Lee. So Lee was forced to move West. At Saylor’s Creek Lee lost 1/3 of his Army, mostly captured. High Bridge and Cumberland Church battles took more. Lee took his remaining Army to Farmsville where there was food, but they had to keep moving as Union forces were moving in keeping Lee moving West. Here at Farmville Grant wrote Lee requesting his surrender, Lee declined.

As you can see in the map, Lee’s retreat was a running battle.

View attachment 255217
Two days later Lee would find himself surrounded and did surrender this time after a limited battle at Appomattox. One of the last men killed was a young man who served under Lee the entire war, from beginning to end.

On this road General Chamberlain ordered his men to attention as the Army of Virginia marched by to surrender their arms.

View attachment 255222
View attachment 255223

Grant himself did not remain long after the negotiations were concluded. As he left the McLean house a little after four in the afternoon he heard the firing of salutes in the Union camp in celebration of the news of the surrender. He at once issued orders to discontinue it. 'The war is over,' he said. 'The rebels are our countrymen again .... Many of his staff were disappointed, but Grant had no curiosity to look upon the conquered army. He was much more eager to restore harmony and prosperity to the reunited nation.
Thank you! I enjoy learning Americas amazing history.
 
The South never had a chance at winning the war. The best they could do was to force the Yankees into a truce that would allow them to leave the relatively young United States. Lee's failure at Gettysburg and Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South. Historians tend to drool over Lincoln's legacy and claim that he "preserved the Union" but the Union actually fell apart under his watch and he foolishly thought he could defeat the South in a couple of months.


"Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South."


how evil!

isn't it interesting that when WE do it to others we defend it by saying "it had to be done" or "things happen in war" or "we were just following orders"....

but when the bad guys do it to US we are OUTRAGED!

"THIS PROVES HOW EVIL OUR ENEMIES ARE!"
 
The South never had a chance at winning the war. The best they could do was to force the Yankees into a truce that would allow them to leave the relatively young United States. Lee's failure at Gettysburg and Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South. Historians tend to drool over Lincoln's legacy and claim that he "preserved the Union" but the Union actually fell apart under his watch and he foolishly thought he could defeat the South in a couple of months.

Do you have backup for the whole "murdering civilians" things coming from Grant as an Army command?

The true driver was 1) his willingness to take casualties larger than inflicted on the confederates, and his willingness to attack economic assets and bringing back the concept of scorched earth to modern warfare.
 
The South never had a chance at winning the war. The best they could do was to force the Yankees into a truce that would allow them to leave the relatively young United States. Lee's failure at Gettysburg and Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South. Historians tend to drool over Lincoln's legacy and claim that he "preserved the Union" but the Union actually fell apart under his watch and he foolishly thought he could defeat the South in a couple of months.


"Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South."


how evil!

isn't it interesting that when WE do it to others we defend it by saying "it had to be done" or "things happen in war" or "we were just following orders"....

but when the bad guys do it to US we are OUTRAGED!

"THIS PROVES HOW EVIL OUR ENEMIES ARE!"

Yes war is not perfect. Grant once threatened to use Confederate POW's as human shields. Now granted that was because Lee had already been using American POW's as human shields at his defensive positions and it was Grant's threat to get him to stop that inhuman evil.

You can also read Lee and Grant's letters of how POW's were kept in squalor, dying from lack of resources to keep them healthy because Lee had said that black US pow's... or "Confederate Property" as he called them wouldn't be allowed in a POW exchange. Grant responded by calling off the exchange unless all US soldiers were returned.

Likewise, the Confederacy passed a law stating all negroes or mulattoes, slave or free, taken in arms should be tried for inciting servile insurrection and be subject to the death penalty. The response to their statement that captured black soldiers “be put to death” rather than be held as prisoners of war, Lincoln declared that “the law of nations … permit no distinction as to color in the treatment of prisoners of war.” And if the Confederacy executed a Union soldier, he said, the Union would retaliate in kind;

War is brutal. It sucks that the desire to perpetuate and expand the institution of race based slavery was so strong among those leaders.
 
Last edited:
The South never had a chance at winning the war. The best they could do was to force the Yankees into a truce that would allow them to leave the relatively young United States. Lee's failure at Gettysburg and Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South. Historians tend to drool over Lincoln's legacy and claim that he "preserved the Union" but the Union actually fell apart under his watch and he foolishly thought he could defeat the South in a couple of months.

It was an unwinnable battle with how a couple things went in my opinion.

Confederacy was unable to get a single foreign power to recognize them. So while they had some under the table support and individuals offering support, they were basically on their own.

2nd, was like you said, the best way was to force a truce. To take on George Washingtons strategy of fighting a war of attrition. But Washington could let Philadelphia or NY fall, and pick and choose which battles favored his armies, then come back later. He could retreat out of bad situations and regroup. In the Confederacy, states were asking for a full defense of their lands and that every city was fought for even if it meant a major engagement they may not win and would be very costly to an army which struggled to replenish itself (people and supplies/weapons).

As for murdering civilians, that happened on both sides. It was War. Remember the first civilian casualties of the war was when Confederate supporting civilians took the war into their own hands attacking a Massachusetts brigade. It was a total war. Civilians in the Confederacy like the story of John Burns who grabbed his shotgun from the kitchen and joined the war effort. Likewise the story of Jennie Wade, killed baking bread in her kitchen by a Confederate sharpshooter.

Word spread about Sherman. Not willing to let the rich land owning aristocrats to send young people off to their war to perpetuate and expand race based slavery while living apart from it. He burned and razed.. And treated those who surrendered with the best care according to Confederates. Those stories were blown up and rather than full engagements, allowed his army to avoid that and instead gain surrenders, saving thousands of lives.

As for the lie that the union fell apart under Lincoln, the truth was secession was occurring even before he took office. It was his predecessor, James Buchanan who said the rebellion was illegal.

I do believe you are right about Lincolns beliefs it would be over quickly. He underestimated the desire of those southern leaders to hold together to support their "peculiar institution". He thought they would believe him on his claims he wouldn't try and end slavery if he had the chance. They didn't, and makes sense from their perspective not to believe those promises, since when given the chance, he fought to end slavery.

It's speculative fiction, but Harry Turtledove has a whole series of books on a Southern Victory and the repercussions of this through the 1940's.

Southern Victory - Wikipedia

Before the Battle of Antietam, Federal troops accidentally recovered a copy of Special Order 191, which detailed Lee's plan for the invasion of Maryland. Using this intelligence, Federal forces under George B. McClellan moved north and forced the Battle of Antietam, ending the invasion.

In Turtledove's alternate history, C.S. troops recover Lee's orders before the papers fall into Union hands. The resulting C.S. advance catches McClellan and the Union Army by surprise. General Lee forces McClellan into a battle on the banks of the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania and destroys the Army of the Potomac in the Battle of Camp Hill on October 1, 1862.

After this decisive C.S. victory, Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia move eastward to occupy Philadelphia. The Confederate States earns diplomatic recognition from the United Kingdom and France. The two European nations force mediation on the United States; the C.S. achieves independence. This "War of Secession" ends in less than two years.

That sounds interesting, I think I will grab them when I am done with my current book. And there could have been a few other options besides the two I had mentioned.

Battle of Ft Stevens turning out differently or Grant not sending reinforcements at time might have been one of those. It was an attack on Washington DC (Lincoln watched part of it, and I believe he had a friend or doctor standing beside him who was shot), and while it's real goal was to force Grant to divert troops to DC (thus reducing his troops marching on Richmond), the ultimate upside of that battle would have been able to take DC or capture Lincoln. Not sure if that would have been enough to push a truce, but it's a possibility.
 
The South never had a chance at winning the war. The best they could do was to force the Yankees into a truce that would allow them to leave the relatively young United States. Lee's failure at Gettysburg and Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South. Historians tend to drool over Lincoln's legacy and claim that he "preserved the Union" but the Union actually fell apart under his watch and he foolishly thought he could defeat the South in a couple of months.

It was an unwinnable battle with how a couple things went in my opinion.

Confederacy was unable to get a single foreign power to recognize them. So while they had some under the table support and individuals offering support, they were basically on their own.

2nd, was like you said, the best way was to force a truce. To take on George Washingtons strategy of fighting a war of attrition. But Washington could let Philadelphia or NY fall, and pick and choose which battles favored his armies, then come back later. He could retreat out of bad situations and regroup. In the Confederacy, states were asking for a full defense of their lands and that every city was fought for even if it meant a major engagement they may not win and would be very costly to an army which struggled to replenish itself (people and supplies/weapons).

As for murdering civilians, that happened on both sides. It was War. Remember the first civilian casualties of the war was when Confederate supporting civilians took the war into their own hands attacking a Massachusetts brigade. It was a total war. Civilians in the Confederacy like the story of John Burns who grabbed his shotgun from the kitchen and joined the war effort. Likewise the story of Jennie Wade, killed baking bread in her kitchen by a Confederate sharpshooter.

Word spread about Sherman. Not willing to let the rich land owning aristocrats to send young people off to their war to perpetuate and expand race based slavery while living apart from it. He burned and razed.. And treated those who surrendered with the best care according to Confederates. Those stories were blown up and rather than full engagements, allowed his army to avoid that and instead gain surrenders, saving thousands of lives.

As for the lie that the union fell apart under Lincoln, the truth was secession was occurring even before he took office. It was his predecessor, James Buchanan who said the rebellion was illegal.

I do believe you are right about Lincolns beliefs it would be over quickly. He underestimated the desire of those southern leaders to hold together to support their "peculiar institution". He thought they would believe him on his claims he wouldn't try and end slavery if he had the chance. They didn't, and makes sense from their perspective not to believe those promises, since when given the chance, he fought to end slavery.

It's speculative fiction, but Harry Turtledove has a whole series of books on a Southern Victory and the repercussions of this through the 1940's.

Southern Victory - Wikipedia

Before the Battle of Antietam, Federal troops accidentally recovered a copy of Special Order 191, which detailed Lee's plan for the invasion of Maryland. Using this intelligence, Federal forces under George B. McClellan moved north and forced the Battle of Antietam, ending the invasion.

In Turtledove's alternate history, C.S. troops recover Lee's orders before the papers fall into Union hands. The resulting C.S. advance catches McClellan and the Union Army by surprise. General Lee forces McClellan into a battle on the banks of the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania and destroys the Army of the Potomac in the Battle of Camp Hill on October 1, 1862.

After this decisive C.S. victory, Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia move eastward to occupy Philadelphia. The Confederate States earns diplomatic recognition from the United Kingdom and France. The two European nations force mediation on the United States; the C.S. achieves independence. This "War of Secession" ends in less than two years.

That sounds interesting, I think I will grab them when I am done with my current book. And there could have been a few other options besides the two I had mentioned.

Battle of Ft Stevens turning out differently or Grant not sending reinforcements at time might have been one of those. It was an attack on Washington DC (Lincoln watched part of it, and I believe he had a friend or doctor standing beside him who was shot), and while it's real goal was to force Grant to divert troops to DC (thus reducing his troops marching on Richmond), the ultimate upside of that battle would have been able to take DC or capture Lincoln. Not sure if that would have been enough to push a truce, but it's a possibility.

The one thing is the series doesn't really cover the civil war, but the wars afterwards. A 2nd war between the States, WWI, and WWII are covered.
 
The South never had a chance at winning the war. The best they could do was to force the Yankees into a truce that would allow them to leave the relatively young United States. Lee's failure at Gettysburg and Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South. Historians tend to drool over Lincoln's legacy and claim that he "preserved the Union" but the Union actually fell apart under his watch and he foolishly thought he could defeat the South in a couple of months.

It was an unwinnable battle with how a couple things went in my opinion.

Confederacy was unable to get a single foreign power to recognize them. So while they had some under the table support and individuals offering support, they were basically on their own.

2nd, was like you said, the best way was to force a truce. To take on George Washingtons strategy of fighting a war of attrition. But Washington could let Philadelphia or NY fall, and pick and choose which battles favored his armies, then come back later. He could retreat out of bad situations and regroup. In the Confederacy, states were asking for a full defense of their lands and that every city was fought for even if it meant a major engagement they may not win and would be very costly to an army which struggled to replenish itself (people and supplies/weapons).

As for murdering civilians, that happened on both sides. It was War. Remember the first civilian casualties of the war was when Confederate supporting civilians took the war into their own hands attacking a Massachusetts brigade. It was a total war. Civilians in the Confederacy like the story of John Burns who grabbed his shotgun from the kitchen and joined the war effort. Likewise the story of Jennie Wade, killed baking bread in her kitchen by a Confederate sharpshooter.

Word spread about Sherman. Not willing to let the rich land owning aristocrats to send young people off to their war to perpetuate and expand race based slavery while living apart from it. He burned and razed.. And treated those who surrendered with the best care according to Confederates. Those stories were blown up and rather than full engagements, allowed his army to avoid that and instead gain surrenders, saving thousands of lives.

As for the lie that the union fell apart under Lincoln, the truth was secession was occurring even before he took office. It was his predecessor, James Buchanan who said the rebellion was illegal.

I do believe you are right about Lincolns beliefs it would be over quickly. He underestimated the desire of those southern leaders to hold together to support their "peculiar institution". He thought they would believe him on his claims he wouldn't try and end slavery if he had the chance. They didn't, and makes sense from their perspective not to believe those promises, since when given the chance, he fought to end slavery.

It's speculative fiction, but Harry Turtledove has a whole series of books on a Southern Victory and the repercussions of this through the 1940's.

Southern Victory - Wikipedia

Before the Battle of Antietam, Federal troops accidentally recovered a copy of Special Order 191, which detailed Lee's plan for the invasion of Maryland. Using this intelligence, Federal forces under George B. McClellan moved north and forced the Battle of Antietam, ending the invasion.

In Turtledove's alternate history, C.S. troops recover Lee's orders before the papers fall into Union hands. The resulting C.S. advance catches McClellan and the Union Army by surprise. General Lee forces McClellan into a battle on the banks of the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania and destroys the Army of the Potomac in the Battle of Camp Hill on October 1, 1862.

After this decisive C.S. victory, Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia move eastward to occupy Philadelphia. The Confederate States earns diplomatic recognition from the United Kingdom and France. The two European nations force mediation on the United States; the C.S. achieves independence. This "War of Secession" ends in less than two years.

That sounds interesting, I think I will grab them when I am done with my current book. And there could have been a few other options besides the two I had mentioned.

Battle of Ft Stevens turning out differently or Grant not sending reinforcements at time might have been one of those. It was an attack on Washington DC (Lincoln watched part of it, and I believe he had a friend or doctor standing beside him who was shot), and while it's real goal was to force Grant to divert troops to DC (thus reducing his troops marching on Richmond), the ultimate upside of that battle would have been able to take DC or capture Lincoln. Not sure if that would have been enough to push a truce, but it's a possibility.

The one thing is the series doesn't really cover the civil war, but the wars afterwards. A 2nd war between the States, WWI, and WWII are covered.
That sounds fun. And I'd still be good with that. Kind of like that show, Man in the High Castle. Doesn't focus much on the war, but the alternate reality after WWII if the US had lost.
 
The South never had a chance at winning the war. The best they could do was to force the Yankees into a truce that would allow them to leave the relatively young United States. Lee's failure at Gettysburg and Grant's willingness to murder Southern civilians to achieve a victory doomed the South. Historians tend to drool over Lincoln's legacy and claim that he "preserved the Union" but the Union actually fell apart under his watch and he foolishly thought he could defeat the South in a couple of months.

It was an unwinnable battle with how a couple things went in my opinion.

Confederacy was unable to get a single foreign power to recognize them. So while they had some under the table support and individuals offering support, they were basically on their own.

2nd, was like you said, the best way was to force a truce. To take on George Washingtons strategy of fighting a war of attrition. But Washington could let Philadelphia or NY fall, and pick and choose which battles favored his armies, then come back later. He could retreat out of bad situations and regroup. In the Confederacy, states were asking for a full defense of their lands and that every city was fought for even if it meant a major engagement they may not win and would be very costly to an army which struggled to replenish itself (people and supplies/weapons).

As for murdering civilians, that happened on both sides. It was War. Remember the first civilian casualties of the war was when Confederate supporting civilians took the war into their own hands attacking a Massachusetts brigade. It was a total war. Civilians in the Confederacy like the story of John Burns who grabbed his shotgun from the kitchen and joined the war effort. Likewise the story of Jennie Wade, killed baking bread in her kitchen by a Confederate sharpshooter.

Word spread about Sherman. Not willing to let the rich land owning aristocrats to send young people off to their war to perpetuate and expand race based slavery while living apart from it. He burned and razed.. And treated those who surrendered with the best care according to Confederates. Those stories were blown up and rather than full engagements, allowed his army to avoid that and instead gain surrenders, saving thousands of lives.

As for the lie that the union fell apart under Lincoln, the truth was secession was occurring even before he took office. It was his predecessor, James Buchanan who said the rebellion was illegal.

I do believe you are right about Lincolns beliefs it would be over quickly. He underestimated the desire of those southern leaders to hold together to support their "peculiar institution". He thought they would believe him on his claims he wouldn't try and end slavery if he had the chance. They didn't, and makes sense from their perspective not to believe those promises, since when given the chance, he fought to end slavery.

It's speculative fiction, but Harry Turtledove has a whole series of books on a Southern Victory and the repercussions of this through the 1940's.

Southern Victory - Wikipedia

Before the Battle of Antietam, Federal troops accidentally recovered a copy of Special Order 191, which detailed Lee's plan for the invasion of Maryland. Using this intelligence, Federal forces under George B. McClellan moved north and forced the Battle of Antietam, ending the invasion.

In Turtledove's alternate history, C.S. troops recover Lee's orders before the papers fall into Union hands. The resulting C.S. advance catches McClellan and the Union Army by surprise. General Lee forces McClellan into a battle on the banks of the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania and destroys the Army of the Potomac in the Battle of Camp Hill on October 1, 1862.

After this decisive C.S. victory, Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia move eastward to occupy Philadelphia. The Confederate States earns diplomatic recognition from the United Kingdom and France. The two European nations force mediation on the United States; the C.S. achieves independence. This "War of Secession" ends in less than two years.

That sounds interesting, I think I will grab them when I am done with my current book. And there could have been a few other options besides the two I had mentioned.

Battle of Ft Stevens turning out differently or Grant not sending reinforcements at time might have been one of those. It was an attack on Washington DC (Lincoln watched part of it, and I believe he had a friend or doctor standing beside him who was shot), and while it's real goal was to force Grant to divert troops to DC (thus reducing his troops marching on Richmond), the ultimate upside of that battle would have been able to take DC or capture Lincoln. Not sure if that would have been enough to push a truce, but it's a possibility.

The one thing is the series doesn't really cover the civil war, but the wars afterwards. A 2nd war between the States, WWI, and WWII are covered.
That sounds fun. And I'd still be good with that. Kind of like that show, Man in the High Castle. Doesn't focus much on the war, but the alternate reality after WWII if the US had lost.
Thank God the Russians were there
 
Wait? Something called the Confederacy existed? I thought we weren't supposed to know that today. They were racist, sexist, homophobic, you know, Deplorables.
 
Wait? Something called the Confederacy existed? I thought we weren't supposed to know that today. They were racist, sexist, homophobic, you know, Deplorables.
They were worse than Deplorable
 
But, I thought the Confederacy never existed? I am no longer allowed to see any evidence of it.
 
But, I thought the Confederacy never existed? I am no longer allowed to see any evidence of it.

Absolutely you can.

And you can learn about the atrocities of those leaders against the USA.

Just like you can learn about Hitler without building monuments to him.

Plus, you can still learn how those monuments were erected heavily in the civil rights era by southern leaders wanting to make sure blacks knew there place.

We don't need to put up a monument celebrating the lives and deaths and misguided efforts of the 9/11 terrorists in Times square to remember what happened.
 
The Civil War was only partially about slavery. The main causes were:

The Economic rape of the South by the NORTH.
State's Rights

The Hitler analogy is really bogus.
 
The Civil War was only partially about slavery. The main causes were:

The Economic rape of the South by the NORTH.
State's Rights

The Hitler analogy is really bogus.

Hmmm which is a states right?

States have the right to decide on their own about slavery?

States must allow slavery throughout the entire Confederacy?


Or

States can decide if slave travel is allowed in their state.

Or a federal mandate that all States must allow slavery travel....
 
The Civil War was only partially about slavery. The main causes were:

The Economic rape of the South by the NORTH.
State's Rights

The Hitler analogy is really bogus.

And if slavery wasn't the main cause, why did the founding fathers of the Confederacy say it literally was the main cause?
 
Mississippi opened up their declaration of Independence from the US (their article of secession), they began it with...

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery"

But it really wasn't about slavery?
 

Forum List

Back
Top