By P. A. Stonemann, CSS Dixieland, CSN
...the remnants of the United States Army still holding their ground in some
areas, although their effort was clearly doomed. Once the Treaty of Peace had
been in a preliminary form agreed between the two powers, and the hostilities
had nearly come to an end, the goals of President Davis policy could then be
pursued without further delay. One of the first was diplomatic recognition by
foreign governments, and in fulfilment of this aim a body of polyglot and
learned gentlemen was mustered in Richmond, where the Secretary of State
issued them with instructions on their mission abroad. It was not long before
the interchange of ambassadors began, the first ones being those of France
and of Great Britain, shortly followed by other nations...
From "A Century in the History of the Confederate States of America,
1861-1961", chapter on "A Hundred Years of International Relations: Foreign
Policy of the Confederacy and its Position Regarding World Conflicts".
Official Reports of the C. S. A. Government, Department of State, Richmond
1961.
...many years later, in another time line...
The above lines never were published in the world that we know. They have
been invented by P. A. Stonemann as an appropriate introduction to the
present essay. They are an example of the wording of official reports or the
tenet of scholar books that we could be reading today, had the mysterious
paths of Destiny not driven our Glorious Confederate Cause into the dark
shadows of defeat, doomed to unavoidable sinking into the cold depths of
oblivion, with which our epic struggle is today regarded by most of those
individuals who were born four or five generations after our heroic War for
Confederate Independence. Or perhaps those introductory lines were really
published by a P. A. Stonemann, commissioned officer of the Confederate Navy,
in a parallel universe in which the Confederacy had been victorious.
Who knows...
Serious historians have contemplated the enigmatic turns of "what might have
been" since Tito Livy, who in his "History of Rome", Book IX, sections 17-19,
speculates on the possibility of Alexander the Great having attacked not
Persia, but Rome, in the IV century before Jesus Christ. These two diverging
lines of History have been conventionally labelled as, on one hand, "Our Time
Line" (Alexander attacking Persia, which he victoriously did), and on the
other hand, "Alternative Time Line" (Alexander attacking Rome, which he never
did in the World History that we know).
Hence, the name for this most interesting genre of historical fiction is
commonly that of "alternate History", though modern historians prefer the
expressions "counter-factual History" or "virtual History", emphasising that
it is an historical exercise written by a knowledgeable author, but that it
is contrary to the facts as we know them in our "real world" (if we could at
all define what we understand by "reality", without entangling ourselves into
the wraps of metaphysical Solipsism). There is considerable debate within the
community of historians about the validity and purpose of this kind of
speculation.
Seen as a variant of Scientific Fiction, we may also define alternate or
counter-factual History as a chain of events that happened in a "parallel
universe" that is not in direct contact with "our universe". The Viking
colonisation of the Americas from Vinland (New Foundland) all the way to the
Amazonian jungle and to the South American pampas... a victorious
Confederacy... a Boer White South Africa that controls half of the
continent... a German Victory in the First World War or else in the Second
(not in both, if Germany had won the First World War, there would not have
been a second one as we know it)...
The points of possible divergence between "Our Time Line" and the
"Alternative Time Line" are uncountable, because even apparently small causes
may potentially provoke disastrous effects. If we further reason that inside
each chosen point of divergence a whole chain of possible variables enter the
equation, then we must conclude that as far as our minds can reach we may as
well consider the whole range of parallel universes as extending ad
infinitum. This is known as the "multiverse" hypothesis, like in an
interactive story where the reader can choose amid a number of possible
continuations: after only a few of those choices have been made, the tree
branching becomes surprisingly big. This will also be readily understood by
chess players who have sometime tried to analyse the many different ways in
which a game may begin: 20 possibilities for the first white move, amounting
to 20 X 20 = 400 possible games for the first black move, 400 X ~30 (because
more moves are possible now that other chessmen enjoy greater mobility with
open paths on the board) = 12000, 12000 X ~30 = 360000... and so we reach
astounding huge numbers in very few moves. Nobody can really say what could
have been in History if it had happened otherwise, of course, but the game of
alternative History speculation is a fascinating one nonetheless, in spite of
that limitation.
Sir John Squire
The earliest attempt at remaking our History
In 1932, British historian Sir John Squire collected a series of fourteen
essays written by some of the leading historians of the period. Many of those
essays could be considered fictional stories, published under the common
title of "If It Had Happened Otherwise". In this work, Oxford and Cambridge
scholars turned their attention to such questions as "If the Moors in Spain
Had Won" or "If Louis XVI of France Had Had an Atom of Firmness." Four of the
fourteen pieces examined the two most popular themes in alternate History
prior to the Second World War: Napoleon's total Victory in Europe and
Confederate Victory in North America. One of the entries in Squire's volume
was Winston Churchill's "If Lee Had Not Won the Battle of Gettysburg",
written from the point of view of an historian living in a world where the
Confederacy had won the War, considering what would have happened if the
Union had been victorious. This kind of speculative work that posts from the
point of view of an alternate History is variously known as "recursive
alternate History", "double-blind what-if", or "alternative-alternative
History". Other authors appearing in Squire's book included Hilaire Belloc
and André Maurois.
The key change between our History and the alternative History is known as
the "Point of Divergence". In Philip K. Dick's "The Man in the High Castle",
that point is the attempted assassination of Franklin Delano Roosevelt in
Miami, in 1933. In our reality, that attempt was a failure. In Dick's novel,
and in other Germany-wins-the-war scenarios, Roosevelt's death results in the
United States wracked by the Great Depression of 1929 and holding tight to
their neutrality, thus causing Britain to lose the War. In real History, F. D.
Roosevelt was the President of the United States for most of the Second World
War. In 1941 he took the decision of involving his nation in the conflict.
Some variants of the hypothesis of the multiverse posit that Points of
Divergence occur at every instant, springing off parallel universes for each
instance.
Even main stream Scientific Fiction stories are known to have Points of
Divergence. The Star Trek series, for example, diverts from our reality in
that several key space disasters never occurred, therefore resulting in a
much faster and smoother development of rocketry and Astronautics than it has
happened in Our Time Line. The original television series 'Star Trek', with 79
episodes of 50 minutes each, produced by Gene Roddenberry in the years 1966
to 1969 (starring Leonard Nimoy and William Shatner), has one episode about a
planet visited by the Starship Enterprise, of the Federation of Planets, where
the Confederacy had won the War and the Union was reduced to a group of
stubborn underground resistance. A kind of "League of the North" organisation,
which in the early XXI century may even have had a publication entitled "The
Northern Patriot" and a Web site located at http://www.leagueofthenorth.net/
or at http://www.yankeenet.org/
(Please excuse that little bit of good humour, do not follow those fictional
hyper links or You may be put in communication with another universe).
In 1995 the Sidewise Award for alternate History was established to recognise
best long form (novels and series) and best short form (stories) within the
genre. The award is named for Murray Leinster's story "Sidewise in Time".
Either winners of that prestigious award or not, some of the works dealing
with a world in which the Confederacy had been victorious are listed hence
forward. The list is not at all complete, because the number of literary
pieces on the subject may be much greater than what is known, and an amount
of them may remain inedit (never published), but it is a good selection that
will invite interested readers to perform a research by themselves.
Ward Moore
The classic approach at recounting a Confederate Victory
"Bring the Jubilee", by Ward Moore, published in 1953.
First reader review: It absorbs the reader, in spite of some historical
errors, partiality, and rather nasty episodes.
By P. A. Stonemann, CSS Dixieland
One of the most researched periods in alternate History is that of the
Confederate War, and one of the most famous books on the subject is Ward
Moore's "Bring the Jubilee", in which the Confederacy was not defeated in the
War, because it had won the Battle of Gettysburg. Though Ward Moore knew well
the military side of the conflict, there are some errors in the story that
reveal that he did not know the political side so well. For instance, the
time in office of a Confederate president is given as of four years. This is
a mistake, in the Confederate Constitution of 1861 (in Our Time Line, our
real World), the legal time is of six years. Because Jefferson Davis was
nominated President of the Provisional Government on 18th February 1861 and
formal President of the Confederate States on 22nd February 1862, the
election for the next Confederate presidential term of office would have
happened six years later, in late 1867 for presidential inauguration in early
1868. Ward Moore mistakenly places the next election only four years later.
Probably an influence of the United States Constitution (a presidential term
is of four years in that country), that Moore may have known better than he
knew our own Constitution. Ward Moore's story reads well in spite of errors
like that, although he is clearly more pro-Union than pro-Confederacy. He
presents the Confederate States in the XX century as a well-to-do aristocratic
nation that keeps hold of venerable Traditions and conforms to strict racial
separation (although blacks are fairly treated), and the United States in the
XX century as a third world country that never had recovered from its defeat
at the hands of the Confederacy: full of economical troubles, social tensions,
and strikes organised by the labour unions that mobilise many thousands of
rioting workers (but there is no racial strife).
Both, Confederacy and Union (particularly the Union), remain backward in
scientific research and in technical development, the Confederacy because it
has no need of it, and the Union because it cannot pursue researching
endeavours. The First World War happened, with the name of "War of the
Emperors". It ended with a German Victory and, obviously, there was no Second
World War. The relations between the Confederate States and the German Reich
are peaceful, the first power commands influence in the American continents
and the second in Europe. Both powers compete for World influence, but no
violent clash occurs between them. Spain still has Cuba, Puerto Rico, the
Philippines, the Marianas, and other overseas possessions (the war of 1898
between the United States and Spain never happened in that Alternative Time
Line). The book is written from the personal perspective of an historian from
that alternate World, who builds a time travelling machine and goes back to
the Battle of Gettysburg. The Point Of Divergence is George Pickett's Charge:
in that World the heroic Confederate General charged against Union lines and
was victorious, he did not perform a suicidal charge against unbreakable
Union positions. In fact, his victory permitted Generals Lee, Longstreet and
Stuart to chase a destroyed Union Army and force its surrender at the town of
Reading, to occupy Washington City, and thus to force the Union Government to
recognise the Confederacy as a separate nation (including Delaware, Maryland
-with Washington City-, all of Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, the Territories
of the West and Upper South California) and to foster international recognition
as well. In sum, in spite of its shortcomings, the book is not only entertaining
but also highly informative.
The following is a collection of reader reviews, copied almost verbatim.
Orthography, vocabulary and grammar have all been changed line by line over
more than a thousand lines, for conforming to the British Standard used by
the League of the South. Certain wrong expressions such as "Civil War" have
been carefully avoided, except when appearing as titles of literary works
(because a war between two nations is never a "civil war", and the Confederate
States are a nation even today, although under foreign military occupation).
Those reviews are not authored by P. A. Stonemann, but shown in this essay
for illustrating how readers react to the whole business of alternate or
counter-factual History depicting a Confederate Victory. Being at present
located in Brazil, P. A. Stonemann has understandable difficulties in
keeping pace with current information about publications released in North
America or in other continents, but the best efforts have been made to keep
the readers of the League of the South abreast of what it may keenly interest
them, verbi gratia, everything related to the Confederate States, and most in
particular our Victory.
Confederate scientists and warriors
Confederate Militia Soldier
Edmund Ruffin in April 1861
|
Confederate Navy Commander
Matthew Fontaine Maury
|
Confederate Marine Lieutenant
Frances Cameron in 1864
|
When various States seceded from the United States and shortly later joined the
Confederate States in 1861, there were some Federal garrisons in Confederate
territory that had to be removed, as by International Law those troops were now
in foreign land and without authorisation to stay. Most Federal garrisons in
Confederate territory were peacefully occupied by Confederate troops or by troops
from its States: Fort Moultrie, Fort Johnson, Castle Pinckney (Charleston, South
Carolina), Fort Pulaski (Savannah, Georgia), Fort Morgan (Alabama), and others.
Confederate Representatives in Washington made efforts to negotiate compensations
for the removal of Federal garrisons from Fort Sumter (Charleston, South Carolina),
Fort Pickens (Santa Rosa Island, Pensacola, Florida), Fort Taylor (Key West, Florida),
and Fort Jefferson (Dry Tortugas, Florida). Unfortunately, United States President
James Buchanan was hesitant, and just wanted to end his mandate "without troubles".
The new President, Lincoln, was clearly dishonest and tried to win time by giving
vague hopes to the Confederate Representatives.
However, after MONTHS of negotiations, the Confederates saw that the Federals did
not really want to remove their garrisons. The foul play of the Federals was fully
confirmed when a Federal fleet was put to sea with the purpose of carrying plenty
of reenforcement, weapons, ammunition and many other supplies to Fort Sumter.
Shortly before the arrival of the fleet the Confederate Commander in Charleston,
General Beauregard, intimated the Federal Commander of the Fort, Major Anderson,
to immediate surrender. Not as prisoners of war, which had not begun yet, but for
being repatriated to the United States by land or by water. Major Anderson replied
that Military Honour did not allow him to surrender except in the last extreme or
by order from his superiors, but that given his situation, he would accept to
surrender some days later "if not having received supplies by then". He obviously
knew that the relief fleet was on its way. It was impossible to wait any longer,
the Fort had to be taken by force. President Jefferson Davis gave authorisation by
telegraph, and General Beauregard sent message to Major Anderson that the attack
would begin in one hour. Punctually, the General ordered to open fire.
Soldier Edmund Ruffin
Militia Soldier Edmund Ruffin was a veteran member of the South Carolina State
Guard. With strong self-discipline, he kept himself almost PERMANENTLY ready for
action, and when General Beauregard gave the order, Soldier Ruffin was the first
to shoot at Fort Sumter. For this, he is remembered as 'the man who started the
War'. More correctly must be said that the unwillingness of the United States to
take their garrisons out, and their dishonesty to say so sincerely, REALLY started
the War. The Federal relief fleet arrived on that day, but was unable to approach
the Fort. After only three dead (two of them by accidental explosion of a Federal
cannon), Fort Sumter surrendered. The Federal garrison was received with full
Military Honours, and repatriated to their country.
Commander Matthew Fontaine Maury
Navy Commander Matthew Fontaine Maury was a scientist of international renown,
the Father of Oceanography and creator of the United States Naval Observatory.
In 1861 he resigned his high rank in the United States and offered his valuable
services to the Confederate States. He was the inventor of the contact torpedo,
one of the new Confederate weapons that wreaked havoc among United States ships.
He worked in Confederate and British laboratories and industrial facilities,
perfecting his inventions and causing serious trouble to Federal shipping.
Lieutenant Frances Cameron
Marine Lieutenant Frances Cameron was a condecorated hero, who fought bravely
in several combats. The Confederate Marine Corps saw its first naval action
aboard the CSS Virginia ironclad off Hampton Roads, Virginia, on 8 th and 9 th
March 1862, in battle against the USS Monitor ironclad. Marine detachments
served on major war ships and for special operations, such as the captures of
the USS Underwriter and USS Water Witch, and an attack to free Confederate
prisoners of war being held at Point Lookout, Maryland. Marine sea-based
amphibious operations included the CSS Savannah shore party at Fort Beauregard
in Phillips Island, South Carolina, to evacuate the garrison under attack.
Marines under command of Commodore Josiah Tattnall manned the shore batteries
that turned back Union war ships at Richmond, Virginia, and at Savannah, Georgia.
Marines in the Naval Brigade, a part of General Richard Ewell's Corps, fought
with distinction at the Battle of Sayler's Creek, Virginia, in April 1865.
Seal of the Confederate Navy
|
Flag of the Confederate Marine Corps
|
The Seal of the Navy and the Flag of the Marine Corps represent two creations
of Secretary of the Navy Stephen Mallory. His intelligence, experience, and
untiring devotion to our Cause, created in only four years a Naval Force to be
reckoned with, having started in 1861 from just a few boats that were under his
direction rebuilt and armed. Mister Mallory coordinated the construction, in the
Confederate States and abroad, of surface war ships, ironclads (precursors ot the
battle ship), semi-submersibles, submersibles, torpedos, and other naval weapons.
Harry Turtledove
Time travellers from the early XXI century save our Cause
Harry Turtledove has also used Science-fictional devices to examine alternate
histories: in his "The Guns of the South" (1992), it is the meddling of time
travellers that brings on the victory of the Confederacy in the War. Harry
Turtledove has since then examined this same concept (executed quite
differently, of course) in "How Few Remain", set twenty years after a
Confederate Victory established the Confederate States of America. This novel
is followed by "Days Of Infamy", by the Great War trilogy, set in the 1910's,
the American Empire trilogy, taking the time line up through the 1920's and
1930's, and the Settling Accounts trilogy, detailing an alternate Second
World War. In the late 1990's and early 2000's, Harry Turtledove has been
among the most prolific practitioners of alternate History. His books include
a series in which the Confederacy had won the War and another in which aliens
invade Earth during the Second World War. Other stories by this author
include one with the premise that the Americas had not been colonised from
Asia during the last ice age. As a result, the American continents still have
living mammoths and pre-human species.
"The Guns of the South", by Harry Turtledove, Published in 1992 by Ballantine
Books (ISBN: 0345376757).
First reader review: An Interesting Story.
I found this to be a fun book to read. In alternate History speak, General
Lee has a major Alien Space Bat Attack (a highly improbable or also illogical
occurrence). While minding his business commanding the Army of Northern
Virginia, a strange and shady fellow from a strange and shady organisation
comes to him with an offer that the General cannot refuse. The stranger has
crates and crates of automatic weapons (our modern day AK-47) that will
practically give just one of the Confederate regiments enough fire power to
hold its ground against an entire Union army. Lee takes up this offer and the
results are predictable: the Confederacy wins. Then things get curiouser. The
stranger and his cohorts wind up being members of a White organisation from a
XXI Century South Africa, trying to change the course of History and not let
kaffirs get control of the richest and most advanced African nation. These
Whites are not happy with the plans that the Confederacy has after victory:
emancipation of slaves. Critics dislike this story because of this reason.
They think that there is no basis for this. I think that Turtledove rushes
the issue. I do not think that slavery would have been ended in a victorious
Confederacy within ten years or so of independence. Still, I think that the
gradual emancipation that the author shows in the book is a reasonable
possibility, although a bit premature as he presents it.
Normally, I do not like alternate history books that are so implausible. It
seems like cheating to me. Also, most such stories are not particularly well
written. This one seems to be an exception. Harry Turtledove has an excellent
grasp of military forces during the War era, and it shines through the book.
He also has a pretty decent idea of the political forces competing with each
other in this time frame. These facts managed to get me through a story that
normally I would not even have picked off a book shelf ! This is a decent
story. One word of caution for military aficionados. The second half of this
novel focuses on political and social issues, and it can be boring if you do
not like that stuff. If you want action from start to finish you may be
somewhat disappointed.
Second reader review: Still one of the best Confederate War counter-factuals
round.
Harry Turtledove likes to relate the unlikely event that inspired "Guns Of
The South": a letter from fantasy writer Judith Tarr. She complained to
Turtledove that the proposed cover art for her latest book looked "as
anachronistic as Robert E. Lee holding an Uzi gun". The rest is History, or
at least an alternate version of it. Turtledove has built a burgeoning career
as an alternative History maven, but so far he rightly remains best known for
his 1992 best seller "Guns Of The South", a work which has achieved a
singular status in the growing genre of alternate History. Even so noted an
historian as James M. McPherson has lauded it as "without question the most
fascinating War novel that I have ever read". This scholar also wrote a
fictional story that speculates about Robert E. Lee's famous "lost order",
that actually brought on the Battle of Sharpsburg. If Lee's courier had been
less careless, could then Lee have induced and won a Battle of Gettysburg in
1863 ? McPherson's speculative scenario typifies these riveting excursions
into the unknowable. As for Turtledove, "Guns Of The South" is regularly
cited as the best work of its kind in counter-factual History, or certainly
the best of recent vintage, and not without justification.
Instead of an Uzi, Robert E. Lee finds Confederate Victory by another famous
modern gun: the AK-47 so strikingly depicted on the cover of all editions of
the book. One must admit that the very idea is a tremendously scintillating
one: what adolescent (or adult, for that matter) War buff has not wondered in
some idle fancy what Robert Lee could have done with some modern military
wizardry? (presuming, of course, that his opponents had no such wizardry
too). In Turtledove's fantasy, the adolescents turn out to be a group of
South African Whites of the AWB, who manage to pilfer a time machine in 2013,
and proceed to use it to ship a massive arsenal (and themselves) back to
Rivington, North Carolina, in late 1863, in hopes of changing the outcome of
the War. Before long, a mysterious man attired in a strange outfit of mottled
green and brown, an unplaceable accent, and a truly marvellous rifle shows up
to make a sales pitch at the winter headquarters of the Army of Northern
Virginia. One can only imagine how a Confederate Army equipped with a supply
of AK-47, might have wreak havoc on Grant's planned Overland Campaign of
1864, but Turtledove ensures that one has no need to imagine it by himself.
In vivid and well researched strokes, Turtledove unfolds Lee's bloody
repulses of Grant, and his eventual capture of Washington City, almost solely
through the eyes of two protagonists: Lee himself, and (for a grunt's eye
view) one First Sergeant Nate Caudell of the 47 th Regiment of North Carolina.
A captive Lincoln is forced to sue for peace: Union armies are withdrawn from
Dixie in exchange for the return of the Union's capital city.
All of which makes for a fascinating tale, yet it only provides the first
half of the book. It is in the second half that Turtledove takes what would
otherwise have been just another fantasy and turns it into a vehicle for
examining the issues which brought on the War: principally, the place of
blacks in North American society, Dixie or Yankee. The AWB has its own plan
for a free Confederacy, and it proves increasingly unpalatable even for many
Confederate leaders. The mounting conflict comes to a head when a reluctant
Lee agrees to run to succeed Jefferson Davis as Confederate President. In the
balance lies not only the AWB's role in the Confederacy, but that of slavery
as well. The strengths of "Guns Of The South" are manifold: the research is
impeccable. War aficionados and historians will recognise many clever asides.
Turtledove even goes so far as to append detailed results of the 1864 Union
presidential election in alternate History (after Union's defeat), as well as
of the fictional Confederate presidential election of 1867. Inauguration of
President is done in the first months of the following year. The presidential
term of office is of four years in the Union and six years in the Confederacy,
Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated as President of the United States of America in
Washington City on 4 th March 1861, Jefferson Davis was inaugurated as President
of the Permanent Government of the Confederate States of America in Richmond on
22 nd February 1862. Turtledove offers a fair reasonable explanation of how he
arrived at the fictional electoral results of 1864 in the Union and 1867 in the
Confederacy, for the presidential inaugurations of 1865 in the Union and 1868
in the Confederacy. All of which is impressive enough, so that one is able to
forgive the frequently laboured prose and stilted dialogue which is usually a
trademark of Turtledove's alternate History work (and, in fairness, that of
most alternative History fiction), or the sluggish pacing of most of the second,
postwar part of the book. Such weaknesses are forgiveable when one ponder how
powerful a work Turtledove has managed to spin out of what it is at first glance
such a fantastical premise.
Turtledove has rolled out several unrelated works assuming a Confederate
Victory: "How Few Remain", "The Great War" and the "American Empire" series,
but none of them provides as crisp a tale as "Guns Of The South" even if
their turning points be more pedestrian (and credible) than Andries Rhoodie
and his time travelling South African Whites. If you enjoy alternate History,
or if you love War History, make it a point to add "Guns Of The South" to
your reading list. You will not regret it.
Third reader review: Reflection on "Guns of the South". A High School Review.
By Christian Gomez
Harry Turtledove's "The Guns Of The South" is a whimsical adventure into an
alternate History, and it is a true XX century masterpiece in alternate
History literature. "The Guns Of The South" is not part of the Harry
Turtledove's series that spans from "How Few Remain" to his latest great
masterpiece "Settling Accounts: Return Engagement". Unlike in Harry
Turtledove's "How Few Remain", the Confederate States of America do not win
in 1862 by natural causes, instead a time traveller from the year 2013 by the
name of Andries Rhoodie comes to the past during the Confederate War, and he
offers Robert E. Lee something that the Confederate General cannot refuse:
weapons and their ammunition, in this case the AK-47 automatic rifle. Also a
photo book of the War in which the Confederacy was defeated, and coffee. With
a number of AK-47 rifles, or "repeaters" as the Confederate soldiers call
them, at the hands of Robert E. Lee's Northern Virginian Army and the rest of
the Confederate armies, the Confederacy easily unleashes a blood bath onto
the Union. Wave after wave of Union troops are instantly killed. It is no
longer a war, but "murder" as one of Lee's men said during an engagement with
the enemy. The Union Springfield muskets are no match for the power of the
AK-47. History is quickly changed as The New York Times publishes various
headlines depicting Confederate victories and Union slaughtered defeats, such
as: "Disaster! Grant's Army overthrown in the Wilderness", "Forced to retreat
above the Rappahannock, and there defeated once more". The journalistic
article continues: "Unhappily, like with many of our engagements, the late
fighting (though serving to illustrate the splendid valour of our troops) has
failed to accomplish the object sought. The result thus far leaves us with a
loss of upwards of 40 000 men in the two battles engaged there, and
absolutely nothing gained. Not only did the rebels hold their lines, but they
are advancing behind the impetus of their new breech-lading repeaters,
against which the vaunted Springfield is of scarcely greater effect than the
red man's bows and arrows". As a result, General Lee meets with U.S.
President Lincoln to discuss the terms of Union surrender.
The novel is filled with great description of true historical characters,
such as Confederate General Robert E. Lee, his wife and children, Confederate
General Nathan Bedford Forrest, Union President Abraham Lincoln, Confederate
President Jefferson Davis, and Lee's soldiers. You really feel that you are
some sort of temporal observer of events in the story. This is a great novel
for alternate History and Science Fiction readers. If you love Harry
Turtledove's other novels, or if you have never heard of Harry Turtledove,
you will still love this great novel. I consider myself an "historian" when
it comes to the War, due to the fact that I am constantly researching on it.
I have read several biographies of Robert E. Lee and seen a couple of films,
such as "Glory", and my favourite "Gods and Generals". This novel is well
written with accurate historical background information. A "must read" for
any one who just like reading.
Bevin Alexander
The strategic genius of General Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson
"Lost Victories: The Military Genius of Stonewall Jackson" by Bevin
Alexander, Historian, published in 1995.
First reader review
By William H. Mullins
This book is devoted to the proposition that alone among the Confederate
leadership, General Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson had the strategic and
tactical savvy to win the war for the Confederacy. Bevin Alexander, newspaper
writer and former combat historian, presents tantalising evidence for this
assertion, but in the end he fails to persuade fully.
The author examines First and Second Manassas, Jackson's Valley campaign, the
Seven Days' battles, and the battles of Sharpsburg, Fredericksburg and
Chancellorsville, to argue that "Jackson, not Lee, possessed the strategic
vision necessary to win key battles and, possibly, entire campaigns. Instead,
Robert E. Lee blocked the more daring and opportunistic Jackson, while
pursuing a destructive strategy that permitted the Union to wear down the
Confederacy. In the early days of the war Lee and an equally cautious
Jefferson Davis ignored Jackson's eager calls to follow Confederate victories
at Manassas and in the Shenandoah Valley with forays north to capture
Philadelphia or Baltimore. Later, Jackson failed to push Lee into daring and
rapid manoeuvres that might have completely destroyed Pope's army at Second
Manassas or Burnside's battalions at Fredericksburg". Alexander offers
Jackson's bold flanking march at Chancellorsville as proof of the wisdom of
Stonewall's advice, arguing that only darkness and Jackson's mortal wound
spared Hooker's forces.
No one can question Jackson's tactical ability. The author demonstrates that
Jackson grasped early the coming changes in warfare, as the rifle replaced
the smoothbore musket. Cavalry charges became ineffectual, secure defensive
positions were more likely to yield victory than an attack, and offensives
had to develop quickly, employ surprise, and be designed to turn a flank.
Yet, Alexander's criticism of Lee's strategic caution misses a crucial point.
Lee, like George Washington during the War of Independence from Great
Britain, had the power to lose the war in a day. Although historians continue
the debate of how aggressive Lee was, clearly he could not afford to act as
boldly as Jackson and the author might have desired.
This is the central problem with the book: it is "what-if History," reaching
the height of counter-factual hypothesis in the final chapter. There
Alexander speculates on what might have happened had Jackson lived: "One
cannot look at the weakness of the Confederacy and conclude that victory was
impossible, instead one must look at the strength of Stonewall Jackson and
wonder what other bewildering surprises lay within his mind". Although in the
final pages such a notion is toned down, this quotation conveys the spirit of
assertions throughout the book. Further, Alexander assumes a flawless
operation each time that he imagines Jackson taking the field or invading the
North. Academic historians will find problematic the absence of references to
essential books and essays that have in the last thirty years addressed
issues of risk and aggressiveness in Confederate war strategy.
"Lost Victories" makes interesting reading, however. Alexander's overviews of
numerous battles are handy, though derivative, and his thesis is provocative.
Yet, without the assessments of other historians to provide a context, this
exercise in counter-factual History lacks the foundation that it needs for
sufficient development.
Confederate submersible ships
Confederate semi-submersible, David Class
Painting by Conrad Wise Chapman
|
Confederate semi-submersible, David Class
Engineer drawing
|
The semi-submersible David Class was a precursor of the submarine, continued by
various Confederate prototypes (the CSS Pioneer, CSS Bayou Saint John, and CSS
American Diver), and finally by the fully submersible Hunley Class. David Class
semi-submersibles had a crew of four men, propulsion by steam engine to a single
propeller at the stern, and one torpedo with sixty Kilogrammes of explosive. The
chimney is the air intake, the torpedo is attached to the spar at the bow.
Confederate submersible, Hunley Class
Painting by Conrad Wise Chapman
|
|
Confederate submersible, Hunley Class
Engineer drawings
|
|
The more advanced, fully submersible Hunley Class, had a crew of eight men, manual
propulsion to a single propeller at the stern, and one torpedo with sixty Kilogrammes
of explosive. Electric propulsion was considered for submerged navigation, but the
electrolytic accumulators available at the time were enormous in size and in weight.
Exothermic propulsion could not be used, a steam engine needs a good supply of air.
Endothermic propulsion was in the 1860's only a futuristic idea (the Otto - Beau de
Rochas engine and the Diesel engine were invented years later). The best solution
was a manual crank operated by seven crew men, while the Commander coordinated their
action, navigated the submersible, approached the target, and operated the torpedo.
On 17 th February 1864 the Confederate submarine CSS Hunley attacked and sank in five
minutes the much bigger war ship USS Housatonic. This was the first successful attack
by a submarine IN HISTORY, but the submarine also sank. She was recovered more than
136 years later, in August 2000. The eight men of the crew were then buried with full
Confederate military honours, and the submarine, still ongoing restoration, is now
exhibited at a museum near Charleston, South Carolina. In guided tours, visitors can
enter a full size replica of the submarine, see her original instruments, and watch
a documentary with historical and technical information.
R. W. Richards
The defeat of Union General Ulysses Sympson Grant in June 1864
"Alternative History Trilogy. Divergence: 1864 CE", by R.W. Richards,
published by RoKarn in 1995 (0962550221).
What if Lee's Army of Northern Virginia had defeated Grant's Army of the
Potomac at Ox Ford in spring 1864 and later captured Washington City ? The
work of R.W. Richards addresses this hypothesis. It is divided in three
volumes:
"A Southern Yarn": Story of Lee, Grant and a fictional sergeant during May
and June 1864.
"Brothers in Gray": Conclusion includes recapitulation of the Battle of the
North Anna, previously related in "A Southern Yarn", and the adjustment of
its main characters in their return to civilian life in a victorious
Confederacy.
"Gray Visions": Includes Confederate involvement in a war between Spain and
some North American states, and a great European war similar to the First
World War.
What if the Army of Northern Virginia had been more successful ? What if
General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson had not been shot accidentally by friendly
fire ? What if General Lee had had Jackson with him at Gettysburg ? What if
it were Jackson instead of Longstreet who had been asked to take Little Round
Top with his men and turn the left flank of the Union Army in that important
battle ? What if Union General George Meade had been forced to withdraw from
Gettysburg, back toward Washington City, with the Confederate Army attacking
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania ? What if the outcome of this battle had forced the
United States government to consider the possibility of the Confederacy
remaining separate from the Union ? What if Lincoln had been defeated by a
presidential candidate proposing "peace", in the election of 1864 ?
This example of "what ifs" is just one possible scenario out of many, known
as counter-factual History. The game of "what might have been" is endless,
but on occasion counter-factual History can be used to help us learn more
about what really happened. Getting beyond just facts, the historian must
come to terms with the meaning of events. If we play this out, then the
United States would have been permanently torn asunder, being the first step
toward the Balkanisation of North America, with other miniature states
appearing from the remnants of the initial ones. Thus, no XX century super
power, no major intervention in European world wars, no space race, and the
list could go on. There remains, in Dixie, a sentimental attachment to the
"Lost Cause" of the Confederacy. Confederate Battle Flags are ubiquitous,
monuments to Confederate dead appear throughout Dixieland, re-enactments
glorify the anonymous Confederate soldier, while books and films remind us of
the virtues of ante-bellum society. The primary problem of most of us is that
we fail to consider "what if", and in so doing, we miss the implications of
events about "who we are" and "where we are" today. The real importance of
historical studies is in drawing conclusions about the world in which we find
ourselves now. It is the "Gone with the Wind" mentality of seeing ante-bellum
culture as one of genteel belles and gallant gentlemen, defending their homes
and fortunes against the rapacious Yankee.
Howard Means
Detective story in an improbable Confederacy of the XXI century
"CSA, Confederate States of America", by Howard B. Means, published by
William Morrow in 1998 (ISBN: 0688161871).
Senior editor at the Washingtonian and author of Colin Powell, Howard Means
here proposes that the Confederate States of America had won the War, and all
that remains of the Union as we knew it, is a disaster area called the
Industrial Zone. For President Spencer Jefferson Lee (great-great-grandson of
both Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee) it is politics as usual. He is about
to cut the ribbon on the greatest public-works project in History, but of
course there is a political price to pay. Two bodies are found in the grim
ruins of Washington City, each with a bullet in the head and all their
fingers removed, so that they could not be identified...
First reader review: Do not Judge a Book by its Cover !
When I first saw the title "CSA" and read the summary of the plot, I felt
that I had to have this book. Alternative History is a fascinating subject,
and I have always enjoyed this kind of speculative fiction. However, the
premise for the creation of the Confederate States and the destruction of the
Union is so flimsy and historically unsound that the entire novel fell apart
round it. Howard Means starts the book with the unlikely assumption that the
Confederacy had won the war in 1865. Any serious historian can explain that a
Confederate Victory coming so late would have been highly improbable, not to
say impossible. By 1864 the Cause of the Confederacy was lost, and no final,
great heroic display by Jefferson Davis in Richmond, could have saved it.
Lee's Army had crumbled to less than a quarter of Grant's Army by 1865. There
is no conceivable way in which the Army of Northern Virginia could have
resurrected itself and conquered the Union. If the setting for a Confederate
Victory had taken place after a Lee's Victory at Gettysburg, then the premise
could have been kept up, but assuming the destruction of the United States
in 1865 is not credible. Suspension of disbelief is one thing. Being asked to
swallow this tripe is absurd. I would recommend never picking up this book,
based solely on that, but the story itself is just as awful or worse.
Dissident people are sent to the "badlands" of the industrial waste land that
was the former Union. The Vice-President's son (a mixed-up kid cliche), is
kidnapped by a SLA-like Yankee group and taken to the former United States,
where he is brain washed into believing the absurd of racial equality. He
becomes a Patty Hearst type, falling in with his kidnappers. The book offers
no real insight into the workings of the Confederate States, except for a few
token paragraphs about how the President is always white, the Vice-President
always black, and how the two chambers of Congress are one white and the
other black. Also, the University of Virginia built an identical campus just
for blacks, and it can be assumed that these Jim Crow-esque rules apply across
the whole Confederate Nation. It is all rather sad, as the opportunity to
explore how a real victorious Confederacy would have been, is lost in the
mists of a ridiculous plot. Why would the former Union, with all its immense
industrial power, be turned into a wasteland by a victorious Confederacy ?
Would have not been better to exploit those resources ?
Second reader review: Waiting for a Pay-off.
I was intrigued by the concept of this book: a present-day world assuming
that the Confederacy had prevailed in the War. The problem is that the book
never pays off on the set-up. I had to force myself to keep reading with the
hope that an interesting story or compelling characters would be just round
the corner. But it never happened, the book remained dull and outright boring
to the end.
Third reader review: I judged this one by its cover, and I lost !
By Mark Ter Bush
Ater reading the dust cover of this book, I snapped it. The first chapter was
acceptable, with a little information on how the Confederacy had won the War
of Northron Aggression. Then it was all down hill after that. Too much detail
put into areas that had nothing to do about anything. A hateful liberal
mis-mash about the joys of race mixing, homosexuality and such, with nothing
whatsoever to do with alternative History. Very hard to get through.
Fourth reader review: Lack of dramatic content.
By Robert S. Gartner
Howard Means knows how to write because he keeps you fairly interested in the
story. However, there is a certain lack of dramatic content throughout the
book, which does not appear until the end. We find out little about what the
Senate, House, newspapers or the Dixie public in general, think about the
current state of events. And for a book on alternate History, his descriptions
of the current world beyond his characters is sketchy. Such as: Is Nathan
Winston the first black Vice-President of the Confederate States ? How is the
rest of the Confederacy beyond Richmond ? How the former United States ? How
the rest of the World ? The book is populated by too few main characters, and
some of them disappear for 75 pages or more, before returning again. Means is
too focused on Spencer Lee and Nathan Winston, and not enough on the world of
the Confederacy. By adding a little political intrigue, more in depth (and
alternate) descriptions of the world, and a stronger police investigation,
this could have been a blockbuster. Instead, it is just a curiosity piece to
go along with the other ho-hum "What If" books.
Fifth reader review: Poor History, Poor Premise, Worse Execution.
By M. Evan Brooks
A descendant of the SS-GB genre, this book is flawed by the lack of historical
verosimilitude, coupled with its pedestrian writing. To have the Confederacy
winning the war in 1865 because it was "renewed" by the heroic sacrifice of
Jefferson Davis, is already too much of a stretch. Then to add a black House
and a white Senate only stretches credibility beyond comprehension. In effect,
Howard Means's approval of the racial case of 1896 known as Plessy versus
Ferguson, "separate but equal", is taken to ridiculous heights. In the book
written by Means, European History still has a National Socialist Germany,
which is strange, since the success of the NSDAP in the 1920's and 1930's of
Our Time Line, was to a great extent a consequence of German rage against the
abusive Treaty of Versailles in 1919, that "ended" the Great War. In that
Alternative Time Line, Great Britain is a virtual sinecure of the Confederate
States. History between 1865 and 2000 is slap-dash and more than unlikely.
The "detective" novel has a plot which is somewhat reminiscent of "Guns of
the South" in terms of race relations, and of "Gorky Park" in terms of plot
line, but it is handled so poorly that no one really cares. To top it off,
the protagonist is a police detective by the name of Clark Haddon (in our
real world there is a Haddon Clark well known as a local serial killer in
Washington City). This novel is bad in many different aspects: poor historical
development, poor plot line, poor writing... and these are its strengths.
I have probably read worse books, but it is difficult to say when.
MacKinlay Kantor
After a Confederate Victory at the wrongly named "Civil" War,
an "Alternative" Time Line that converges into Our Time Line
"If The South Had Won The Civil War", by MacKinlay Kantor, collaborations of
Dan Nance and Harry Turtledove, published in 2001 (ISBN: 0312869495).
First Reader Review: One of the first alternative History stories that I ever
read.
Seeing that Mister Kantor's book-length essay (originally published in, I
believe, Look magazine) was one of the first alternate History tales that I
ever read, I have a considerable sentimental spot for it. I should have liked
to have rated it higher, but for the fact that Kantor seems to suffer a
failure of imagination after about his alternate 1880's. Before that point,
his scenario is imaginative and well constructed, as other reviewers have
detailed. After that point, however, his "alternate History" basically
becomes Our Time Line, only with three North American republics instead of
one, located South of Canada and North of Mexico: United States, Confederate
States and Texas. It is quite possible that an independent Confederacy would
have gone to war against Spain over Cuba, which was a frequent target of
Dixie "filibusters" (freebooters) before the War, but Kantor blithely assumes
that World History would have gone exactly in the same manner as it has done
in Our Time Line. To cite just one example, it is really quite unlikely that
all those three North American nations (USA, CSA, Texas) would have entered
the First World War at the same time that the United States historically did
in Our Time Line, or even that they would have entered at all. See the novel
"The Wild Blue and the Gray" for another, and more realistic, scenario of
Union-Confederacy tension over the Great War.
Second Reader Review: Excellent story of "What If ?"
This book looks at what would have happened if just a few things had happened
differently during the War. In that Alternative Time Line, Union General
Ulysses Sympson Grant is killed in a freak equestrian accident near Vicksburg,
Mississippi, on 12th May 1863. The event seems to take the wind out of the
Army of Tennessee, whose expedition had started earlier that year with such
promise, but whose fortunes had been getting worse and worse. As consequence
of the Yankee tragedy, the remaining Union forces surrender to the Confederate
Army at Vicksburg. Farther north, the Battle of Gettysburg turns into a defeat
for the Union forces (perhaps slaughter is a better word), who finally are
forced to surrender to Confederate General Robert E. Lee. Word reaches Union
President Abraham Lincoln that the end is near. On 4th July 1863 he and his
family flee the White House at night, in the back of a horse-drawn ice lorry.
His first destination is Richmond, Virginia, where he is the "guest" of
President Jefferson Davis. There is little or no looting of Washington City
by the advancing Confederate forces, although a number of White House items
somehow make their way into Confederate homes. The looting is done by the
citizens of Washington City, whose name is changed from District of Columbia
to District of Dixie. The United States Government is given the chance for
moving the offices and documents out of Washington DD, and they eventually
end up in the new Federal capital of Columbus, Ohio, which is then renamed
Columbia. Seward's Folly (the purchase of Alaska from Russia), never happens.
Throughout all of this, Texas remains independent. In 1898 a Confederate
battleship is blown up in the harbour of La Habana, Cuba (in Our Time Line,
exactly that disaster and in that year happened to the USS Maine, a Federal
battleship. Quelle coincidence !!!). The Confederate States declare war on
Spain, and send an expeditionary force against Spanish forces in Cuba. After
a campaign successful for the Confederacy, Cuba is rebuilt and becomes the
newest member of the Confederate States of America. Throughout all of the XX
century, relations between the three nations (United States, Confederate
States and Texas) are actually pretty good. This is a fascinating book.
History buffs need to read it. Some knowledge of real History, more than the
usual amount, would be a help. Highly recommended.
Third Reader Review: No butterflies here.
Alternative History also has its history, its ancients. And this is it: at
least as far as the Confederate War be concerned, this small booklet is one
of the earliest efforts in "what if?", published by parts in magazine form in
the early 1960's. The fact that it was originally published in a magazine is
quite obvious, since it rather tells about events and effects like a cursory
book review. But even more obvious is the time when it was written, 1960. The
author lets his readers suppose that the Confederacy had won at Gettysburg
and at Vicksburg, that thus the United States and the Confederate States
separated, but then that they joined efforts in fighting together the two
World Wars (the TWO, not only the first one), and that on the centennial of
separation, in 1965, they would consolidate again as a single nation ! ! !
In Our Time Line, Kantor had really been a United States soldier who fought
in the Second World War, and the feelings of bond to their comrades in arms,
either Dixies or Yankees, remained so strong in him that did not allow him to
see what the true relations would have been between a defeated Union and a
victorious Confederacy. Let alone to see how European History would have been
different. To wish that History would have continued as before, and that the
Union and the Confederacy would have been on the same side (at least in the
First World War) is a very optimistic assumption, disregarding the "butterfly
effect" (which says that a minimal change may provoke disastrous, totally
unexpected consequences). It is interesting to note that at nearly the same
time that this story was written, Ward Moore in his "Bring The Jubilee" comes
to completely other conclusions.
Harry Turtledove writes in 2001 an introduction in which he praises this
book, and credits it with inspiring him with his "Great War" series. I wonder
why he decided not to let Texas secede from the Confederacy in his series. Or
is that still to come? Anyway, this booklet is more a curiosity than a
serious work of alternative History worth reading. No butterflies worth
catching and looking at here.
Confederate military uniforms
Marine Captain
Collar and lower sleeve
|
|
Collar:
|
Colonel
|
Lieutenant
Colonel
|
Major
|
Captain
|
First
Lieutenant
|
Second
Lieutenant
|
|
Upper sleeve:
|
First
Sergeant
|
Ordnance
Sergeant
|
Sergeant
Major
|
Quartermaster
Sergeant
|
Second
Sergeant
|
Corporal
|
|
The Confederate States of America created a lasting lore that is a continuous
source of inspiration for uncountable works of literature, music, painting or
cinema. The imaginative richness of Confederate uniforms and Confederate flags
is admired and studied by military historians all over the World.
Brian Thomsen and Martin Greenberg
The Battle of Gettysburg, July 1863: High Tide of the Confederacy
"Alternate Gettysburgs", by Brian Thomsen and Martin H. Greenberg, published
in 2002 by Berkley (ISBN: 0425183777).
This book of short stories explores Gettysburg from a fictional standpoint.
For example, one story asks "what would have happened if Longstreet had
called off Picket's charge and then, sensing an opportunity, Union General
Sedgewick had mounted an attack ?". The stories range from total flights of
fancy to more subtle alternate outcomes. What if the battle had turned out
differently ? In this collection, today's most popular writers of alternate
History look at that question:
Brendan Du Bois
William H. Keith, Jr.
William Forstchen
Harold Coyle
Doug Allyn
James Reasoner
Jake Foster
Robert J. Randisi
Jim De Felice
Simon Hawke
Denise Little
Kristine Kathryn Rusch
Steve Winter
William Terdoslavich
Paul Thomsen
First Reader Review: What might have happened at Cemetery Hill ?
Counterfactual History, poohed by some academicians, is a popular topic for
story tellers, and the Confederate War is one of the popular historic topics
for writers of all specialisations. And what is more popular than speculating
on what might have happened, if alternate decisions during the Gettysburg
Campaign had produced a different outcome ? How might a different outcome
have affected History, or even the fate of the World, if the Confederacy had
been victorious in these crucial three days in summer 1863 ? Or what else
could have happened in the rolling hills of Pennsylvania ?
The editors have charged a dozen-odd writers of different backgrounds to
think and write with these questions in mind. Some of the stories stay in the
realm of counter-factual History and point to the fact that only a few
different decisions or developments may well have altered the whole course of
events. For anybody interested in military History, chapters like "Sedgewick
Charge" by the well known military writer Harold Coyles, or "Custer's First
Stand" by Doug Allyns, will attract attention, as well as the concluding
essays, which investigate the potential for alternate developments during the
Gettysburg Campaign and beyond this narrow window over the whole War.
Of the more fictional and literary stories, one explores the impact of a
completely different Gettysburg Address (speech pronounced by Union President
Abraham Lincoln), another story muses about the murder of Abraham Lincoln,
and another even touches the realm of Scientific Fiction in a piece about how
powerful contemporary events may interact and even change century old historic
facts. This one is certainly one of the best pieces of the volume, although
the overall quality of the collection is varying strongly, from excellent
reading stuff, over intriguing essays on alternate History, to some outright
dull and uninspired texts.
All together, "Alternate Gettysburgs" is a recommendable addition to any war
gamers library, a good companion for a visit to the Battlefield Park that the
place is today, or just for an occasional dip into what is arguably the most
covered and researched conflict in human History.
Second Reader Review: What if the Confederacy had won the Battle of Gettysburg ?
It is not surprising that alternative History stories about North America be
intrigued by the possibilities offered by the War, or that the Battle of
Gettysburg be the focal point of such speculations, or that Pickett's charge
be most often considered as the pivotal moment. I remember watching war gamers
playing out the Battle of Gettysburg on an immense map, and, of course, those
playing the Confederates immediately took the high group on Culps Hill,
Cemetery Ridge, and the Round Tops, and they tried to slaughter the Army of
the Potomac as it arrived upon the scene. "Alternate Gettysburgs" is an
uneven collection of short stories and essays focusing on various visions of
what might have been, with a key change here or there.
Actually, few of the stories deal with Picketts charge, but it is clearly the
pivotal event of the battle. Harold Coyle does a reversal by having the charge
abandoned and having the Federals trying "Sedgewick Charge" instead. Doug
Allyns in "Custer's First Stand" has the flamboyant Union cavalry officer
making a foolish mistake in trying to stop the charismatic Confederate cavalry
General J.E.B. Stuart from attacking the Union rear during the charge.
Probably the oddest story in the collection, with its combination of History
and Scientific Fiction, may be "In the Bubble", by William H. Keith, which
takes war gaming to its ultimate level. "The High-Water Mark", by Brendan Du
Bois, tweaks History a bit to turn the War into a World War. He is also the
author of "Resurrection Day", published separately. Most of the stories
include afterwords from the authors explaining their points of departure from
History as we know it in Our Time Line.
Two of the stories deal with the Gettysburg Address pronounced by Union
President Abraham Lincoln. "The Blood of the Fallen", by James M. Reasoner,
has Lincoln giving a different speech at the dedication of the National
Cemetery, because in this alternative world his son Tad dies from his fever.
I especially liked "Well-Chosen Words", by Kristine Kathryn Ruschs, because
as a rhetorician I appreciate her point that the Gettyburg Address might be
Lincoln's most famous speech, but that he gave another one of equal importance
(both of which, I should note, are etched in marble on opposite ends of the
Lincoln Memorial).
Other stories are set in the alternative future of a world in which the
Confederacy had won the War. "A Gun for Johnny Reb", by Simon Hawkes, is one
of the few to try and ground the alterations in something beyond wishful
hoping, offering a more realistic version of the novel "The Guns of the
South", by Harry Turtledove. Certainly there are hits and misses throughout
the book, but surely there are enough intriguing tales to make reading this
book worthwhile.
Ironically, the best part of the book for me was the closing essay by William
R. Fortschen, "Lee's Victory at Gettysburg... And Then What ?", which throws
cold water on the idea that a Confederate Victory then and there would have
changed the outcome of the War. Fortschen argues that a Confederate Victory
on the second day would have been more probable (suggesting that a 15 minute
break to fill empty canteens with water would have given the Confederates
enough strength to take Little Round Top and turn the Union left), but then
he makes a totally convincing case that the Army of Northern Virginia would
never have been able to take Washington City. I am in total agreement with
Fortschens argument. Other essays in the appendix section of "Alternate
Gettysburgs" provide an overview of the battle, a look at the politics of
war, and the social convictions of both sides surrounding the battle.
Alternative histories, as a general rule, seem to suffer from what I want to
call historical echoes. I mean this to signify that even as an author goes
off in a decidedly different direction, "real" events manage to make their
way back into the tales. Thus, for example, in the fiction a general will die
at Gettysburg in the same way that he died a year later in our real world, or
a fictional presidential assassination will be eerily similar to an historical
one. Ironically, then, the best alternative histories are those that are able
to break truly free of what really has happened in Our Time Line, and to
indulge themselves in fanciful flights of "what if..."
Third Reader Review: A collection of good and bad stories. More bad.
I enjoy alternate History and the what-ifs of crucial events in real History.
Gettysburg seemed a very good event to write about, and I thought that this
collection of short stories would be fairly good. I was somewhat erroneous.
The majority of short stories in this book are average, but there are even a
couple of really bad ones.
One of these stories is the first one in the book: "Sedgewicks Charge", by
Harold Coyle. The story is about Confederate General Longstreet's decision to
stop Pickett's charge. Union General Sedgewick then thinks that he may find
his chance to destroy the retreating Confederate Army. But it was not the
concept of the story that was disappointing, it was the execution and writing
style of Coyle. He uses too many company names, and numbers, instead of
focusing on the action that the story is trying to portray.
The rest were good premises, but a number of them had writing styles that
were a bit lacking. There are, however, a few above-average stories in this
book that really make it better. Overall, it is an acceptable book that has
some commendable short stories in it. It also has in the back of the book a
brief overview of the battle of Gettysburg, politics at the time, et cetera.
I suggest reading this book, but possibly skipping over the tedious parts
that I have mentioned, because they really detract from the book value as
something to have on your shelf.
Newt Gingrich and William Forstchen
First, giving the wrong name of "Civil" War to an international war,
then, a heroic Union resistance in spite of their defeat at Gettysburg
"Gettysburg: A Novel of the Civil War", by Newt Gingrich and William
Forstchen, published in 2003 (ISBN: 031230935X).
Review of the reviews written by Mark Kleiman and Stuart Buck:
Mark Kleiman pans Newt Gingrich's novel "Gettysburg", claiming: "Against the
background of Lost Cause mythologising... it is a little hard to swallow the
idea that Gingrich was not doing, or encouraging his readers to do, a little
bit of wishing along with his imagining". Stuart Buck defends Gingrich on
various grounds. As far as I can tell, however, neither Kleiman nor Buck have
actually read the book. I have, and indeed, I have reviewed it. In my review,
I have noted that this is the first book in a planned trilogy. The obvious
comparison is with Harry Turtledove's series (not with "Guns of the South",
which is entirely separate, but rather with the series that started with "How
Few Remain"). It has been pretty easy to spot whither Turtledove is going: he
is just re-writing the First and Second World Wars on North American soil. In
contrast, it is hard to tell whither Gingrich and Forstchen are going.
In real History, the Union had such an overwhelming superiority in manpower,
industrial output, weapons, and railway lines, that the Confederacy had no
real chance. All that the Union President had to do was to find a general who
could "understand the Mathematics involved", giving time for the Union to
press defeat onto the Confederacy not by any inherent military qualities of
the Union Army, which there were none, but just by sheer weight of numbers,
by wearing out the Confederate War effort. Gingrich and Forstchen clearly
know this: several characters make reference to these advantages at several
points in the novel. But why did they write three books of alternative
History, only to arrive at the same point as real History arrived (a Union
Victory) by a different route ? Anyway, it should be an interesting journey
into the unknown. One could now continue by reading "Grant Comes East", which
I have not done yet. As the title of the second volume clearly suggests,
Union President Abraham Lincoln is about to find his general. Given the title
of that second book and the emphasis put in the first book on the Union's
tremendous advantages, however, I very much doubt that the trilogy might end
with a Confederate Victory.
It is an interesting experiment of thought in what might have happened, if
Confederate General Robert Lee had exercised sound strategic judgment at
Gettysburg. At the end, the Union has lost a battle, to be sure, but Gingrich
and Forstchen make it clear that the War is far from being over. Contrary to
the reviews in "Publishers Weekly" magazine, Kleiman also quotes that many of
the Union leaders are treated with the same respect and sympathy that Gingrich
and Forstchen treat Robert Lee. Indeed, if one had to identify a single "hero"
of the first novel, one could make a strong case for Union General Henry Hunt.
Union Colonel Joshua Chamberlain, as another example, is accurately portrayed
as the authentic hero that he was in Our Time Line.
As further evidence that Kleiman has jumped to a hasty conclusion, beyond the
points that Buck makes, consider that Gingrich's co-author William Fortschen
is the author of "The Lost Regiment" series, which is an excellent alternative
History and Scientific Fiction series about a Union regiment. I have read a
lot of Fortschen's novels, and he is the last man of whom I could suspect of
collaborating in a wish fulfillment venture for a Confederate Lost Cause.
I recommend that you read Gettysburg, and maybe you withhold judgment until
the trilogy be complete, before you decide if Kleiman be right by declaring
that "it says something ugly about Gingrich's section, and his party, and the
tame press". I suspect that you may find that Kleiman owes to Gingrich and
his readers an apology.
First Reader Review: A very realistic book about a different Gettysburg.
Newt Gingrich and William R. Forstchen get together to write a very realistic
War novel about what would have happened if Robert E. Lee had decided to carry
out a sweeping, massive movement, to out-flank the Union Army. Unlike most
books about the War, this book tosses out luck and almost magical changes in
the thoughts of the main characters, basing the action and combat on the
reality of the men and the leaders within both armies. The battle scenes are
painfully real, causing me to feel horror at some of the details. Both authors
refuse to hide anything, showing the heroism and the gore that was the War
battlefield. A must for a What-If library !
Second Reader Review: One of the best alternative histories.
In this novel we get an accurate History of the first day in the Battle of
Gettysburg. The fighting in that day was fierce, and the Union forces early
seemed to be getting the better part of the action. However, Union General
Reynolds was killed, and shortly thence after, the tide turned. By the end of
the day the Union forces were pushed back to Cemetery Hill. Although they
took a beating, the positions into which they were pushed back were still
defensible. From this point on, the novel departs from what happened in real
History and explores what might have happened. Confederate General Longstreet
suggests to his superior, General Lee, that the Confederate troops commence a
flanking action, and Lee accedes to this. So, rather than the head butting
assaults in the Devil's Den and Little Round Top (and several other such
skirmishes), Lee leaves a small force in front of the Union forces to bluff
them, while the bulk of his troops march off to positions between Gettysburg
and Washington City. Thus, the fierce fighting of the second day and the
unsuccessful head-on assault known as Pickett's Charge on the third day, are
both averted.
Union General Daniel Stickles sees what is happening and warns his superior,
General Meade. In a fit of anger, Meade admonishes Stickles, and does not
react in a timely manner. There is much confusion with the supply trains and
General Haupt, who co-ordinated the railways for the Union forces, fails to
get proper cooperation from the locals. The trains are captured by the
Confederate forces and as the flanking action continues, confusion reigns.
The balance of the novel plausibly explores what would have occurred in this
situation. The authors assume just one major departure from real events: Lee
sees the error of attacking the Union forces head-on, knowing that they have
a defensible position on high ground. As in Chancellorsville, he divides his
forces, leaving enough at Gettysburg as a decoy, while the others commence
the flanking action. The outcome of this novel hinges on Meade's reaction to
these events, and the success of the Union forces in responding. This great
saga continues with a sequel entitled "Grant Comes East". I must recommend
this gripping alternate History.
"Grant Comes East", by Newt Gingrich and William Forstchen, published in 2004
by Thomas Dunne (ISBN: 0312309376).
"Grant Comes East", the second book in the best-selling series by Newt
Gingrich and William R. Forstchen, continues the story of a Confederate
Victory at Gettysburg. The first book examined the great "what if" of North
American History: could Lee have won the Battle of Gettysburg ? A Confederate
Victory, however, would not necessarily mean that the Confederate Cause had
gained its final triumph and a lasting peace. It is from this departure point
that the story continues in "Grant Comes East", as General Robert E. Lee
marches on Washington City and launches an assault against one of the most
powerful fortifications in the world. Across 140 years, nearly all historians
have agreed that after the defeat of the Army of the Potomac at Gettysburg,
the taking of Washington City would have ended the war. But was it possible ?
Lee knows that a frontal assault against such fortifications could devastate
his Army of Northern Virginia, but it is a price that he fears must be paid
for final Victory. Beyond a military victory in the field, Lee must also
overcome the defiant stand of Union President, Abraham Lincoln, who vows that
regardless of the defeat at Gettysburg, his solemn pledge to preserve the
Union will be honoured.
Lincoln mobilises the garrison of Washington City to hold on, no matter at
what costs. At the same time, Lincoln has appointed General Ulysses Sympson
Grant as Commander of all Union forces. Grant, fresh from his triumph at
Vicksburg, Mississippi, races east bringing with him his hardened veterans,
to confront Lee. What ensues across the next six weeks is a titanic struggle,
as the surviving Union forces inside the fortifications of Washington City
fight to hang on, while Grant prepares his counterblow. The defeated Union
Army of the Potomac, staggered by the debacle dealt at Gettysburg, is not yet
completely out of the fight either, and it is slowly reorganising. Its rogue
commander, General Dan Sickles, is thirsting for revenge against Lee, the
restoration of the honour of his Army, and also the fulfillment of his own
ambitions, which reach all the way to the White House. All these factors will
come together in a climatic struggle, spanning the ground from Washington
City, through Baltimore, to the banks of the Susquehanna River.
Once again, Newt Gingrich and William R. Forstchen create a brilliant story
of how the War could have unfolded. In "Grant Comes East", they use their
years of research and expertise to take readers on an incredible journey.
First Reader Review: Brilliant "Counter History".
As a History professor, who has taught War History on several occasions
(although I am no expert, by any means), I can say that this series is
amazing. I usually do not read jacket covers or blurbs, I jump right into the
book. So, when I started "Gettysburg", I thought that it would be like
"Killer Angels", but with slightly different characters. Then, surprise. By
the second day of the battle it is clear that something is happening here (to
quote Buffalo Springfield). After "Gettysburg", I could not wait for "Grant
Comes East". The character development is astounding, and while historians
may quibble with whether General Dan Sickles or Herman Haupt be correctly
depicted or not, it still makes for a fascinating read. As a military
historian, one of the things that is most impressive about both of these
books is the authors' ability to get into the detail of war, both in combat
and in camp life. The mere understanding of the logistics supplied by Haupt
is no small feat, and the combat scenes leave you tugging for one side or the
other, depending on your political proclivities. After this great book, I
have the intention of reading the third part of the trilogy: "Never Call
Retreat: Lee and Grant, the Final Victory".
Second Reader Review: The dialogues capture the reader.
Again General Meade is that ghost that haunts the reader. In "The Personal
Memoirs" of Union General Ulysses Sympson Grant, the Commander of the Army of
the Susquehanna writes that four horse generals (General Sheridan, General
Ord, General Humphreys and General Meade) pressed the Confederate Army at
Appomattox. But again the dialogue in the historical novel catches the
reader. I enjoyed the prattle among characters in both camps before and after
the Battle of Gunpowder Falls, in Maryland, on 19th August 1863.
Third Reader Review: Great book, title a little misleading.
You would not have thought that two Ph.D. types could write such good stuff.
Perhaps it be because of their Ph.D.'s, that make these books so well
researched as to be quite believable. In the first book, one very simple
decision: "We are going to move, so that they have to attack us rather than
us attacking them", is indeed likely to have changed History. Choosing to
fight at Gettysburg was, in my opinion, the only big error of General Lee. He
did not think so at the time, but it was the turning point. Union President,
Lincoln, had a hard time finding a good general that could be the equivalent
of Lee. But after Vicksburg he had Grant, and he knew what he had. This story,
the second in the trilogy, turns farther from real History. After all, when
you change the course of the War at Gettysburg, Lee is still in Pennsylvania
with an almost intact Confederate Army of Northern Virginia, while the Union
Army of the Potomac is basically shattered to pieces, and it would not play
out the same. I also liked the treatment of Union General Dan Sickles. From
what I have read, he appears to have been just as nutty as he is treated here.
"Never Call Retreat: Lee and Grant, The Final Victory", by Newt Gingrich and
William Forstchen, planned for publication in late 2005 or early 2006.
Photographs of Confederate and some foreign personalities
Confederate President
Jefferson Davis
|
Confederate Vice President
Alexander Hamilton Stephens
|
Confederate Secretary of the Navy
Stephen R. Mallory
|
Confederate Secretary of War
James A. Seddon
|
There are about seven thousand known photographs of the War for Confederate
Independence of 1861. It is the fifth military conflict of which photographs
exist, the previous four being the War between Mexico and the United States
(1846-1848), the Crimean War that confronted Britain, France, Sardinia and
the Ottoman Empire against Russia (1854-1856), the Revolt of the Sepoys in
British India (1857), and the Garibaldian Campaign for Unification of Italy
(1859). Those wars put together count fewer photographs than the Confederate
War. This is not a surprise, because Photography in those heroic years
required an established studio, or means of transport for bulky and heavy
equipment, including a portable laboratory or fast conveyance of
photographic plates between the field and the laboratory.
British Ambassador in Wash-
ington Lord Richard Lyons
|
Confederate Representative
in London John M. Mason
|
|
Mexican Ambassador in Washington
Don Matías Romero
|
Confederate General
Robert E. Lee
|
No other war was more photographed in the XIX century and first years of the XX,
than the Confederate War. The various European or colonial wars, the Russian wars
in central Asia or against Japan, wars in China, Africa, Central or South America,
or in other areas, had not so much photographic coverage. There was some extensive
coverage of the Second Boer War in South Africa (1899-1902), but only since the
Great War (1914-1918) the number of photographs is higher for major military
conflicts, having inaugurated the risky profession of war reporter, in whose
activity courageous photographers or commentators are sometimes injured or even
killed. Until the Great War the photographer and the journalist usually worked
separately. Since then both professionals tend to form teams, providing images
and information to newspapers, wireless or television stations, Internet, or books.
Of those, only newspapers and books existed before 1914, but graphic printing was
primitive (Xilography, Lithography, early Photoprinting). Wireless communications
existed since the early XX century, but radio broadcast began in the 1920's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photojournalism
Confederate General
Thomas J. Stonewall Jackson
|
Confederate Cavalry General
J. E. B. Stuart
|
Confederate General
Pierre G. T. Beauregard
|
Confederate General
Joseph E. Johnston
|
The work of the first war photographers had been made possible by Photography
pioneers such as Nicephore Niepce, Louis Daguerre, Hyppolite Bayard, Hercules
Florence, John Herschel, William Talbot, Frederick Scott Archer, Niepce Saint
Victor, and others who first discovered, or improved, photographic processes
or equipment. The extant photographs, either monoscopic or stereoscopic, were
made by various processes such as daguerreotype, calotype, ambrotype, tintype,
melanotype, wet collodion, albumen print, salt print... or variants of them.
The dry plate of gelatine iodide, chloride, bromide, or fluoride of silver,
was introduced in the 1880's. Infrared light was discovered by Herschel, but
infrared Photography only became practicable in the 1930's, after the original
achromatic emulsions had given place to orthochromatic and panchromatic.
Confederate General
John B. Gordon
|
Confederate General
William Mahone
|
Confederate General
John Bell Hood
|
Confederate General
James Longstreet
|
Photographs exist portraying actions of combat or its immediate consequences,
civil or military individuals and groups or their activities, and many other
aspects of life documented for posterity. In the Confederate War hundreds of
itinerant or studio photographers immortalised the historical event, such as
Confederate Lieutenant Robert Smith (who built a clandestine camera in the
military prison), Andrew Lytle, Julian Vannerson, Charles Rees, Jay Edwards
Moody, Frederick Durbec, James Osborn, George Cook, George Brown, Edward
Whitney, Andrew Paradise, David Woodbury, Frederick Gutekunst, George Stacy,
David Knox, George Barnard, Alexander Gardner, Mathew Brady, and others.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photographers_of_the_American_Civil_War
Confederate General
John C. Breckinridge
|
Confederate General
Ambrose Hill
|
Confederate Colonel
John Mosby
|
Confederate Irish Colonel
Joseph Kelly
|
Photographic collections exist all over the World, in some countries more than
in others. Many images are now available in Internet, but some may be difficult
to find, because they are not openly exhibited in a document of the World Wide
Web, they are inside a hidden directory, an electronic book, some rare protocol
or some other form of storage, in what has been labelled as the 'Deep Internet'.
If existing, they can be found, but not only through a search engine. A little
more of Computing sophistication is necessary for doing serious research work.
Peter Tsouras
Insisting with the wrong name of "Civil" War,
but a more mathematical view of Butterfly Effect
"Dixie Victorious: An Alternate History of the Civil War", by Peter G.
Tsouras, published in 2004 (ISBN: 1853675954).
First Reader Review: Thought-provoking alternative History.
The contributors to "Dixie Victorious" concentrate mainly on the military
impacts of some relatively small change in the historical record. For example,
the immediate presence of the personal physician of Confederate General Albert
Sidney Johnston at the Battle of Shiloh in April 1862, saves the General from
bleeding to death in this alternate History, as in real History he in fact
died because no one was nearby to put a tourniquet on his leg wound. James R.
Arnold conjectures that Albert Johnston's survival at Shiloh enabled him to
lead the (fictional) campaign that saved Vicksburg for the Confederacy a year
later. David M. Keithly and Michael R. Hathaway both offer counter-factual
outcomes of Lee's 1862 campaign of Maryland (that in real History ended with
a nominal Union Victory at Sharpsburg), which lead to Confederate Victory in
the War.
Among the most interesting scenarios are Dudley's depiction of the triumph of
Confederate ironclads over the Union blockade in the spring of 1862, and Cyril
M. Lagvanec's fictional account of the 1864 Red River campaign in Louisiana.
The latter was in fact a Union fiasco in real History, but Lagvanec argues
that a few little twists could have made this often ignored event the turning
point of the War, and a key to Confederate Victory. The contributors also are
allowed to have some fun. Each historian presents an authentic bibliography,
but the end-notes for most chapters are a mixture of real sources and some
provocatively fanciful ones: "From Manassas to Manila Bay: The Campaigns of
James Ewell Brown Stuart" (in real History, Confederate Cavalry General J.E.B.
Stuart probably died in combat, although his body was never found. He never
performed any military campaign in the Philippines).
The real purpose of such conjectures, as Tsouras points out, is to emphasise
just how close the Confederacy came to win the War: how a relatively minor
incident, such as Lee's actual injury just prior to the Maryland campaign in
1862, might have had major consequences. MacKinlay Kantor posited just two
alterations of fact to change the course of History in "If the South Had Won
the Civil War", which presents a more thorough projection of the aftermath of
Confederate Victory. For those who are already familiar with the actual
military and political courses of the War, "Dixie Victorious" is not just an
amusement. The book illuminates the issues of these War campaigns and
encourages new ways of viewing them. It is well worth your time.
Second Reader Review: Ten provocative alternative histories where the
Confederacy wins.
"Dixie Victorious: An Alternative History of the Civil War" is a collection
of ten essays imagining how the Confederacy could have won the War. It is
edited by Peter G. Tsouras, author of several alternative histories including
"Gettysburg: An Alternative History". The title, of course, spoils the outcome
of all of the essays, but then the appeal here is more argumentative than it
is narrative, and the question is whether each author can make a compelling
case to tip in the other way the delicate balance between military success
and failure.
Andrew Uffindell, "Hell on Earth: Anglo-French Intervention in the War", has
the "Trent" incident resulting in Great Britain declaring war against the
Union, and France following suit. Uffindell comes up with additional reasons
for the two European nations fighting the war that neither wanted in 1861,
and thus forcing the Union into fighting a war on all fronts, needing to
defend their boundary with British Canada.
Wade G. Dudley, "Ships of Iron and Wills of Steel: The Confederate Navy
Triumphant", has Confederate Secretary of the Navy, Stephen R. Mallory,
creating a fleet of ironclads. Consequently, when the USS Monitor shows up at
Hampton Roads, she faces not only one Confederate ironclad (the CSS Virginia),
but three of them, and the historical stalemate of Our Time Line becomes a
decisive Confederate Victory in the Alternative Time Line.
David M. Keithly, "What Will the Country Say ?: Maryland Destiny", turns
Special Order Number 191, which fell into Union General McClellan's hands
before the Battle of Sharpsburg, into a "ruse de guerre", as Confederate
General Robert Lee baits a trap to destroy the Union Army of the Potomac.
This one is an interesting twist on History, and yet another opportunity to
show Lee as being clever and McClellan being incompetent, which is almost
always fun.
Michael R. Hathaway, "When the Bottom Fell Out: The Crisis of 1862", revisits
Lee's first North-bound campaign, and has the Confederate general avoiding
hurting himself when he was thrown by his horse the day after the second
battle of Manassas. Overall I tend to like the essays where the key change is
rather simple, which is what Hathaway does by having Lee free from pain and
clear headed during his first attack toward the North.
James R. Arnold, "We Will Water our Horses in the Mississippi: A.S. Johnston
vs. U.S. Grant", has Confederate General Albert Sidney Johnston's life being
saved by a tourniquet at the Battle of Shiloh. The Confederacy still loses on
the second day, but Jefferson Davis is able to put Albert Johnston back in
command of Confederate forces in the West, during the siege of Vicksburg.
Clearly, the idea here is to insert Johnston back into the War in the westron
theatre at the point where Davis most felt his loss, which explains why Shiloh
still remains a Confederate defeat even in this alternate History.
Edward G. Longacre, "Absolutely Essential to Victory: Stuart's Cavalry in the
Gettysburg-Pipe Creek Campaigns", has the Confederate Cavalry keeping in
contact with Lee during the second invasion of the North. The Battle of Pipe
Creek replaces that of the historical Battle of Gettysburg. Those who have
read the alternative History "Gettysburg", by Newt Gingrich and William R.
Fortschen, will find this essay of more than passing interest, since it
shares the belief that there was a Confederate Victory to be had in Lee's
second invasion of the North, but not at Gettysburg itself.
John D. Burtt, "Moves to Great Advantage: Longstreet vs. Grant in the West",
finds Confederate General Braxton Bragg being wounded, therefore James
Longstreet taking command of the Army of Tennessee and fighting Grant.
Longstreet had agreed to go west, so that he could have an independent
command, and Burtts essay argues out a best case scenario for what he could
have accomplished, although his aggressiveness in the story might strike many
as being beyond his real nature.
Peter G. Tsouras, "Confederate Black and Gray: A Revolution in the Minds of
Men", has Jefferson Davis seizing the opportunity afforded by Major General
Pat Cleburne's Manifiesto, to give the Confederacy's slaves an opportunity to
earn their freedom by enlisting in the Confederate Army and Navy in 1864 (in
real History this happened in March 1865, too late for changing the outcome
of the War). This one has the advantage of taking actions that the Confederacy
was eventually compelled to take, and moving them forward to a time when it
might have actually helped the Confederate Cause.
Cyril M. Lagvanec, "Decision in the West: Turning Point in the
Trans-Mississippi Confederacy", has Confederate General Kirby Smith taking
back Arkansas and Missouri in 1864, as David Dixon Porter's Mississippi
Squadron falls victim to its commanders greed for captured cotton. I had the
most problems with this scenario, because I am not inclined to think that the
Union would have reduced its overwhelming number advantages in Virginia and
in Tennessee-Georgia, just to make up for setbacks in Louisiana, thereby
setting up a domino of effects.
Kevin F. Kiley, "Terrible as an Army with Banners: Jubal Early in the
Shenandoah Valley", basically has Union General Phil Sheridan's ride failing
to reverse the Union's fortunes after Confederate General Jubal Early's
attack in the Valley. Kiley also finds an opportunity to remove a major
obstacle to a Confederate Victory with a single bullet, which I have to admit
was a card that I thought would be played more often in these essays.
In most of these essays the Confederacy does not win the war militarily, but
rather gains a pivotal military victory (or combination of victories) that
tips the delicate balance and gives the Confederate States a political
victory, such as when General McClellan defeats Lincoln in the 1864 Union
election. All of these essays are presented as the work of military
historians in an alternative reality. Each has foot notes documenting
sources, with those from fictional sources noted with an asterisk (Lagvanec
is the farthest over the rainbow, with all of his notes for his
Trans-Mississippi essay having asterisks).
Readers will know exactly what they are getting with "Dixie Victorious", so,
those who are offended by "What If" stories in general, and in particular
those disliking scenarios in which the Confederacy wins the War, can stay far
away. The idea here is to be provocative and to come up with diverse scenarios
for this to happen, and in that regard this collection is successful. Students
of the War will find a lot to argue about in these pages.
Roger Ransom
A serious title and a well-thought treatment of possibilities
"The Confederate States of America: What Might Have Been", by Roger L.
Ransom, published by Norton in 2005 (ISBN: 0-393-05967-7).
An intriguing exercise in counter-factual History, operating under the
assumption that the Confederate States of America did not, in fact, win the
last election. Imagine, Ransom asks, that Robert E. Lee had not thrown George
Pickett's division into the line of battle at Gettysburg, but had instead
left the field. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia would not have been broken,
as it happened in real History.
Review by Joseph Crespino, History teacher:
Perhaps more than any other Confederate national, President Jefferson Davis
reaffirmed the Dixie sense that we had been involved in a noble struggle.
Davis helped spawn a generation of men who sat outside the county courthouse,
a stone's throw from the Confederate monument, and argued over how different
things might have been, if only Major General James Longstreet had broken
through on Little Round Top at Gettysburg, or if at that battle General Lee
had never ordered Major General George Pickett to launch his hopeless charge
against Union lines.
No historian has thought through such "what if" questions as seriously as
Roger L. Ransom in "The Confederate States of America: What Might Have Been".
The book begins with Ransom's "Recipe for Counter-factual History Pudding",
mixing two parts historical plausibility with one part common sense and
another part imagination. The culinary metaphor is apt, because many readers
have displayed an almost insatiable appetite for this sort of speculative
fare.
While Ransom, an historian and a teacher of History and Economics at the
University of California, Riverside, stops well short of Williams' conclusion,
most historians have a word for counter-factual History: "Fiction". But there
is a method to Ransom's speculation. He argues that the best way to understand
how profoundly the War altered World History, is to try to imagine what would
have happened if the War had gone the other way. We know that the Union's
Victory unleashed the forces that ultimately transformed the United States
into the economic and political behemoth of the world in the XX century. But
what if the Confederacy had somehow fought its way to a stalemate ?
Ransom takes the reader through the individual battles that swung the way of
the Confederacy and led to an imaginary, counter-factual truce, in November
1864. As he dips back and forth between his counter-factual narrative and
historical analysis, Ransom sheds light on a number of surprising places.
Ransom also recounts the conventional wisdom that the performance of Lee's
Army early in the war was nothing short of miraculous. The shift between
Ransom's analysis and his fictional War can be jarring, as though, in the
short space of a few lines, he hopped from the subdued aura of a university
seminar room, to the front lines of a War re-enactment.
Pride of the Confederate Navy
Captain James Waddell, Commander of the
Confederate War Ship CSS Shenandoah
|
Lieutenant John Grimball, First Officer of the
Confederate War Ship CSS Shenandoah
|
Between 19 th October 1864 and 6 th November 1865 the Confederate War Ship
CSS Shenandoah captured an impressive THIRTY-EIGHT United States ships
all over the World, in a heroic circumnavigation shown on the map below.
The Confederate War Ship CSS Shenandoah
at port in Victoria, Australia, in 1865
The Confederate Flag is flying on her mast
|
World travels of the Confederate War Ship
CSS Shenandoah in 1864 and 1865
|
Conclusion of the review
The growing interest in our Glorious Cause
By P. A. Stonemann, CSS Dixieland
All the books shown here have been disposed in chronological order after the
year of their publication. The reader should observe that the first essay of
alternate History about the Confederate War was written in the 1930's, the
first book of full length in the 1950's, another book appeared in magazine
form in the 1960's, and then we jump directly into the 1990's. Although there
may have been some works not listed here, we may assume that the literary
pieces that have been listed represent some of the finest efforts in the
direction of what could have been (or what still can be) in a victorious
Confederacy. As it could be expected, they range from the fantastic to the
probable, from the purely narrative fiction to the detailed descriptive and
the persuadingly dissertative erudite letters.
From the collection of reviews shown above, we can get some important facts.
One of them is this: the interest in the War for Confederate Independence is
a growing thing, not only with regard to alternate History, but also to real
History. In parallel, the involvement of many people in some kind of
activities related to the War, is also in the increase: battle re-enactments,
living History events, conferences, seminars, slide shows, motion pictures
and documentaries, wireless and television programmes, or music festivals,
are all pointing more to the Confederate War, than they did some years ago.
Of course, this fact by itself does not necessarily mean that we may be
witnessing the prelude of an awakening of Spirit for Independence in our,
until now, sleeping majority of Dixie Compatriots. By now, at least, most of
those events are more on the cultural side than on the political one, when
not simply on the ludicrous. Recognising that reality, however, we ought to
feel optimistic never the less, when we compare how things are going today,
to the way they were going in the distant and the not-so-distant past.
There has always been in some Patriots a surviving sentiment for recovering
our Confederate Independence, all the way since 1865 to the present, but this
sentiment did not materialise into a political struggle until very recently.
The claim for total Confederate Independence was not openly present in the
platform of the "Dixiecrats" of Strom Thurmond, back in the 1940's, when he
was a candidate in the elections to the Presidency of the United States (he
did not win, but for many years he was a Senator for South Carolina). Neither
such a claim was the main driving force of the followers of George Wallace,
in the 1960's. Perhaps we may begin to find a known historical claim for
recovering our lost Independence in Byron de la Beckwitt, from his Klan
related activities in the 1960's, to his sad death in prison at the turn of
the present century. Other well known Klan leaders, or former Klan leaders,
such as Bill Wilkinson, James Farrands, Don Black, or David Duke, may have
had their sympathies for the Confederate Cause, and most of them clearly have
shown that sympathy at some event, but they have never publicly declared to
be fighting for our National Independence.
In the mid 1990's P. A. Stonemann had the fortune of attending, attired in
full Confederate uniform, an event that made History in our movement for
Independence. For the very simple reason that it was the official start of
this movement, one of the very first meetings where Confederate Independence
was publicly proposed. The reunion took place in Southron Kentucky, in the
birth place of President Jefferson Davis. At the inspiration of the biggest
Confederate Flag in the World, painted on the ground at that historical place,
some distinguished gentlemen concentrated the attention of the more than a
thousand like-minded Compatriots who were eagerly protesting, because of the
coward murder some days earlier, at the hands of a group of blacks, of a young
red-neck who wore a Confederate Flag. There he was Colonel Bill Rolen, CSA,
commanding a contingent of our soldiers. Also Mister Jared Taylor, author of
the book "Paved with Good Intentions" and editor of the magazine "American
Renaissance", full of factual information about the racial problems that the
North American States (Dixie as well as Yankee) are increasingly facing since
we lost the War. And above all, considering the implications of the lucid
speech with which he aroused the feelings of his audience, was the charismatic
President of the Southern League: Doctor Michael Hill.
"... We have our right to secede from the United States and form a separate
sovereign nation, or nations ..." were some of Doctor Hill's premonitory
words, asking our Confederate Compatriots to make a stand for Independence
once more, and this time probably with greater success than we had in our
effort of 1861, when we lacked the industrial power and resources that we
have today (the example of the recently dissolved Soviet Union, Yugoslavia
and Czechoslovakia, was in the minds of everyone in the assembly). In a
reference to the liberal, race egalitarian propaganda orchestrated by the
Union Government of these days, Mister Taylor reminded the public concentrated
there that "Our Confederate ancestors never faced that", and that such a
brain-washing propaganda was directly responsible for the murderous behaviour
of certain elements in the current generation of blacks, who certainly must
not have known that black soldiers enlisted and fought bravely for the
Confederate Cause, beside the very important help that, with their work,
black civilians gave to the War effort of the Confederacy. The Grand Dragon
of Ohio, Mister Van Loman, privately commented to a group of comrades that
"what is being said here today has had no precedent in the last hundred
years". Against the defeatism of many pragmatics of these days, we found
reason to believe in a re-awaking of courage for our Glorious Cause.
A somewhat heterogeneus collection of listeners heartily applauded these
enlightened orators. There were at that place and time all kinds of elements
of different persuasions, from Sons of Confederate Veterans and United
Daughters of the Confederacy to Confederate Society of America, from
Confederate Heritage Preservation Association to Southern League, from Ku
Klux Klan to National Alliance, from Asatrú Heathens to Christian Identity.
Much above our possible differences of opinion, we all were united in a
strong bond of repulse against the totally unjustified murder of that
young victim of mis-information, of the lies with which liberal-dominated
public media constantly bombard the little minds of ignorant people, of the
falseties and the fairy tales that many of those ignorants have swallowed,
and to which a sizeable amount of them, particularly blacks, have fatally
succumbed. As a note, not even a single individual there present was black.
Even among photographers, journalists, television camera crews, sound
technicians or police agents. We were an all-White concurrence. Some may
interpret that fact by saying that the event was strongly inclined in
disfavour of blacks, considering the tragic crime that had been perpetrated
by a group of them, who had been caught and were waiting for trial. Another
possible, and not at all mis-guided interpretation, is that most blacks have
voluntarily "chosen" to separate themselves from Confederate celebrations of
any kind, even the most innocent ones, because they have fallen victim to the
fabricated historical myth that presents slavery as the main reason, for both
sides, that fostered Confederate Independence and subsequent War in 1861.
All of this is a rather sad "Alternative History", more or less believed by
many of the descendants of those blacks who fought for the Confederacy, or
who supported it through their efforts in the fields, the mills, or the
factories, of our 1860's Dixieland. Why would they have fought or supported
the Confederate Cause with that fervour, if they had been treated so cruelly
as it is usually portrayed in many magazines, newspapers, books, motion
pictures or broadcast programmes of today ? Why had they helped their tyrant
masters to keep the "peculiar institution" alive, when they were so badly
exploited and abused as liberal-minded History teachers "explain" to their
credulous pupils ? The answer to that enigma is only one: because, as a
general rule, there was no such cruelty, exploitation or abuse in the
minimal. Some injustices may have happened, against individuals of the
"slave" race as well as against those of the "free" race. We do not claim
that things were perfect in ante-bellum Dixie or during the War. We do not
hold the naïve assumption that things have ever been perfect anywhere in all
human History. They may have been better or worse, which is also a matter of
the personal beliefs of the observer, but utopies have never existed. That is
why they are called "u-topy", meaning "no-place" in Greek. From the fantasies
of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" to the "opinion formers" of today, liberal media want
to make blacks believe that they are heading towards an utopical "freedom",
when in reality the opposite is true: they have become all the more slave,
because not just their bodies, but their minds and souls as well, have been
enslaved by the liberal Big Brother more than they could have ever been
enslaved by any Rhett Butler stereotype of a master.
The winner of a war re-writes History, following his own ideas and beliefs,
or simply his whimsical fancies and desires. He has the resources to do so,
and he can keep control to some extent, more overtly or less, of the few
persons who do not share the same views. There is no such a thing as total
"freedom of expression", there never was in any country or in any century.
The very idea is another liberal absurd. The control of expression may be
tighter or may be looser, the punishment against transgressors may be harder
or may be softer, but it is always present. The victorious Union re-wrote
History because it had the power to do it, knowing that few individuals would
dare to oppose, and that those few could be speedily silenced, one way or
another, either by making them lose their jobs and keeping them in anonymous
ostracism, or by exposing them to a public ridicule orchestrated by the
collaborationist press. There is never lack of eager collaborationists for
the regime that holds power. The winners presented an idealised version of the
reasons for which they, the Union, had fought the War, and even offered their
own interpretation of the reasons for which WE, the Confederacy, had fought
the War. Individuals who personally knew the ante-bellum period and the War,
of course did not swallow those myths, but as those persons who lived the War
left this World one after another, the generations who replaced them gradually
lost the notion of what had really happened. Those peoples who forget their
own History are condemned to repeat it, or a variation of it.
Fortunately, we have the cure against that illness of historical amnesia.
Since the times of Herodotus and Tucidides, History has been recorded in
books. A lady or a gentleman wishing to be vaccinated for immunity against
historical false myths, has only the task of finding the appropriate books,
and of perusing them thoroughly. With regard to Confederate History, there
are some good sources from which to start. For ante-bellum Dixie, the writings
and discourses of John C. Calhoun are an excellent inspiration. For the War,
read:
"Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government" and "Short History of the
Confederate States", by President Jefferson Davis.
"Constitutional View of the War Between the States", by Vice-President
Alexander Hamilton Stephens.
"Memoirs of Service Afloat", by Admiral Raphael Semmes.
"Autobiographical Sketch, and Narrative of the War Between the States", by
Lieutenant General Jubal Early.
"Southern Military History", by General Clement Evans.
"Aide de Camp of Lee", by Colonel Charles Marshall.
"Military Memoirs of a Confederate", by Lieutenant E.P. Alexander.
"The Story of the Confederacy", by Robert Selph Henry.
"A Southern View of the Invasion of the Southern States, and War of
1861-1865", by Captain Samuel Ashe, last surviving commissioned officer of
the Confederate Army. Captain Ashe was in his twenties during the War, and 95
years old when he wrote this book in 1935, detailing the true reasons that
justified our secession from the United States in 1861, and the tragic
aftermath of our historical decision.
For the consequences of the War and post-bellum Dixie, consult:
"Southern History of the War" and "The Lost Cause", by E.A. Pollard.
"Southern by the Grace of God", by Michael Grissom.
"The South was Right", by Captain James Kennedy and Corporal Walter Kennedy.
There are also other valuable works that could be recommended, and that
should be known by a serious Confederate Patriot. In spite of being the
losers of 1865, we have no lack of informative sources. It is only facing the
task of finding them. Probably a much easier task in Dixie or Yankee North
America, than it is in Brazil (millions of Brazilians cannot read even in
Portuguese, let alone in English). Once You find books of Your liking, read
them and arm Yourself with the powerful weapon of Knowledge ! ! !
War games are useful not only for learning History and for analysing past or
present military chances, but also for developing strategic and tactic
reasoning, like in chess. Interesting as they are, however, they are of
course only games. If You want to change REALLY the course of History, then
take courage and help the League of the South or other serious Confederate
Patriots in our Glorious Quest for Independence ! ! !
If You could write letters of support, journalistic articles, historical
essays or epic poetry, then You would convince many, as yet undecided people,
of the righteousness of our Cause. If You could draw or paint illustrations,
from humouristic cartoons to fine art canvas, or if You could photograph for
journalistic covering of patriotic events or for artistic exhibitions, then
Your pictorial skills would inform and attract another number of people. If
You could compose or interpret music or dance, then a good amount of them
would feel emotionally moved to our side. Whatever Your talents, You can do a
lot for helping the Cause. Do not sub-estimate the power of tenacious will,
and of faith in the final Victory.
The winner of a past war may be the loser of a future war, even against the
same enemy. There is an all too human tendency for the winner to "sleep in
the laurels of victory", or even for falling into corruption, inefficiency or
degeneration, like it happened in the Roman Empire or in the Soviet Union.
The Yankee empire will fall too, like the British or the French or the
Spanish empires had fallen earlier, in different manners and at different
times, but all of them following an unavoidable rule of History. If we shall
be ready or not for taking our chance when that time finally arrive, that
depends on us.
If we let the opportunity pass, it may never return, and our distinct
Confederate nationality, our unique Dixie culture, will be gradually
dissolved in the mists of Time... until finally, in the future, it will be
only known to a few specialised historians or antiquarians, same as the old
Egyptians or Sumerians are known today. We are already being studied by
archaeologists: the discovery of the CSS Hunley (the first successful war
submarine in Naval History) near Charleston, South Carolina, bears witness to
the fact that we have joined the Egyptians and Sumerians in capturing the
attention of learned scholars. Important and interesting as those studies
are, we have to shudder at the prospect of being remembered only as curious
relics in some museum.
There is no "small help", all contributions are welcome. Even a three year
old child who holds a tiny Confederate Flag in his white little hands, is
giving an important support to our Noble Struggle. He is doing what he can,
and that is what is all about: each one of us helps according to his
individual possibilities. There are many ways to help. I have suggested just
a few of them, surely You may think of many others: from computer programming
or scientific researching, to running the Olympic Marathon wearing a
Confederate shirt or planting a Confederate Flag on top of Mount Everest.
From the intellectual to the bizarre.
Shake off Your consumer-society comformism and move ! ! ! Start now ! ! !
Contact an officer of the League and ask him how You can help ! ! !
Confederate President
Jefferson Davis
|
Confederate General
Robert E. Lee
|
Confederate General
Thomas J. Stonewall Jackson
|
Hyper links
