Grant's Commanders Don't Ignore Him...

[Beck Reilly]

Yeah, it's another Civil War thread, but please try to hang in there 'til the end.

On June 3, 1864, Confederate and Union forces clashed at the Battle of Cold Harbor. Grant, having received heavy reinforcement, brought 105,000 men (the bulk of the Army of the Potomac) onto the field. Lee had also managed to replace many of his 20,000 casualties to that point in the campaign, and his army numbered 59,000. But the disparity in numbers was no longer what it had been--Grant's reinforcements were often raw recruits, while most of Lee's had been veterans moved from inactive fronts, and they were strongly entrenched in fortifications.

Grant, unaware of the strength of the Confederate earthworks that confronted his army, ordered his II and XVIII Corps, totaling 31,000 men, to attack the Confederate right flank on the morning of June 3. The defenders, consisting mostly of men from the Confederate First and Third Corps, who fought from behind earthworks, slaughtered them as soon as they moved forward. Grant, not realizing what was happening, threw in the VI Corps, arguably his best fighting unit at that point in the campaign. They were slaughtered as well. The Confederate musket and artillery fire along the XVIII Corps front was so severe that its men were actually pinned to the ground for protection, unable even to retire to their own lines. Grant lost 7,000 men in about 30 minutes, and the only reason he didn't lose more was that his corps commanders ignored his orders to advance again.

Estimated Casualties: 15,500 total (US 13,000; CS 2,500)

So, the question is, what if those corps commanders had not ignored Grant, and had thrown their men into the meat grinder? With casualties building so rapidly, it is not inconceivable that twice as many men could have been lost.

Now, obviously the Confederacy is not going to win the war because of this, but with a quarter of his army gone, will Grant be just another in a series of generals to be removed from command? Could the political fallout of such a loss (in OTL, the battle's statistics were not presented until AFTER Lincoln had been reelected but in TTL it would be almost impossible to keep a lid on it) be great enough to oust Lincoln from the White House? How much longer will the war last (I'd say a month or two as the Confederates will have time to reposition themselves while Grant nurses his wounds)?

 

[Ace Venom]

The South's main strategy by this time was hoping the North would lose the will to continue the fight. But a crushing victory by Lee at this point would not have won the war for the Confederates. We get a few different possibilities:

A) Grant survives the battle, but is removed from his role as commander of the Union armies. Meade, who was still in charge of the Army of the Potomac, would regain full control without having to answer to Grant. Of course, my knowledge of the Union command structure could use a bit of correcting.

B) Grant is killed at Cold Harbor. Don't know how you can manage this, but if he is killed, it's a major blow to Union morale. It doesn't kill Northern momentum, because Jefferson Davis's bad decisions on generals would still give Atlanta to the Union.

Other than morale, I don't see this as a big loss in the long term.

 

[robertp6165]

So, the question is, what if those corps commanders had not ignored Grant, and had thrown their men into the meat grinder? With casualties building so rapidly, it is not inconceivable that twice as many men could have been lost.

Actually the decision not to advance was made from below, by the men themselves. They actually did receive orders to attack, but refused to advance, or advanced a short distance, then stopped and "went to ground" and refused to advance further. It is questionable that the casualty figures would have gotten much larger given the refusal of the men to offer themselves up for useless slaughter, regardless of what Grant's Corps commanders might have done.

 

[DMA]

One thing to consider is that Grant & high casualities is nothing new. In one of his early battles, Shiloh in 1862, not only was Grant defeated on the first day (only to reverse the battle on the second), but the Union casualities were a sobering 13 000 plus men. Such a figure was unheard of at the time. As a result, Grant was called all sorts of things. Nonetheless, Lincoln declared that he couldn't spare Grant as he fights. So I think, considering the long number of victories Grant had won, albeit with a high casuality rate, few would have called for Grant's sacking at a worse Cold Harbor. Anyway, by 1865, few were ever surprised when casualities were high in any given battle. As it was there is a long list of such battles which resulted in high casualities by the time Cold Harbor was fought. As a result, as bad as Cold Harbor was, I don't think there were all that many people back in Washington yelling for Grant's head afterwards, except maybe for a number of the troops. So even if the Union casuality reached 30 000, I'd doubt there'd be much said apart from the cursings of the troops themselves.