May 1, 2013… so begins the Sesqui of the Battle of Chancellorsville.
As such, I’ve been thinking…
Everett B.D. Julio’s “Last Meeting of R.E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, at Chancellorsville”.
What if Stonewall Jackson lived to command beyond Chancellorsville?
Frankly, any forward speculation of his possible performances in battles after Chancellorsville is subject to so many factors that it’s not even funny. As such, forward speculation is a waste of time. Could he have performed better than those who came after… maybe (repeating his “best of” performances… and maybe something even better)… maybe not (I’m thinking of his early performance in the Seven Days, or worse).
What’s more important to consider is the impact he had when he was alive. Known, documented results. It’s that time, during his life, in which I like to consider a range of questions.
I had ancestors with Jackson… more than a fair number. I also had Southern Unionists ancestors in the Valley. Let’s be clear, however, even those who were with Jackson represented a range of sentiments.
Let’s consider those who went into the ranks after the first Confederate conscription act. I can think of a fair number who enlisted before Jackson launched his campaign in the Shenandoah… war on the home-front indeed. Was it at that point (when “they” really were, finally, “down here”) that some men felt more compelled to join than in 1861? Was it a matter of being compelled to enlist to prevent the shame of conscription? I think these and other factors played a role.
Charles Hoffbauer’s “Spring Mural”. Jackson watches as his men pass. I’ve always been drawn to the spring in the step of the enlisted man, leading the way, clad in the most simple clothing. Did it represent not only “hope” of those who committed to the “cause” in 1861, but a revised hope in others who weren’t so enthusiastic for the larger objectives of the Confederacy?
Even so, if one was to sit uncertain on how to commit, up to that point, perhaps… as Jackson took the Army of the Valley to a successful conclusion… concerns of participating in war against the old flag became less than concern.
He brought them victories… not only the men of his army, but also, civilians of the Valley.
Perhaps fence-sitters became more confident of the direction in which they should go. Then again, for some, maybe not. I say this also knowing that (having looked at different examples in soldiers in the Army of the Valley) there were men in the ranks of his army, at the time of the Valley Campaign, who deserted and were not returned (and returned under force, mind you) until the winter of 62-63. For those from the central Shenandoah Valley, once immediate threat to their part of the Valley had been dealt with (to a degree), had they felt that they had done enough for the time being?
But, allow me to get to something that is more central to a regular theme in this blog.
Because Jackson gave his men victories… and many of his men hailing from the Shenandoah Valley… did these victories also have an impact on residents of the Shenandoah Valley who had exhibited, up to that point, more Unionist-leaning sentiments? I think back to the quote I took from David Hunter Strother, back in a post in January. Strother was thinking (mostly) about how the presence of the Union armies impacted Virginians who were, before that time, Southern Unionists. He didn’t, however, weigh-in on how many Confederate success in battles may have had a part in the swaying of Unionists.
As readers consider this… remember, we have the “advantage” of looking back and seeing the big picture, but, don’t think under those terms.
Think about the war from the perspective of the individual… from an individual right here in the Shenandoah Valley. Were there die-hard Unionists here? Absolutely. But, think… because Jackson performed, and the people here were beneficiaries (though I feel confident that some of the more die-hard Southern Unionists here, and even “leave-aloners”, would beg to differ) of his performances, did it… could it have impacted some where they felt more confident of ultimate Confederate success? Could they also have felt that, to remain in the land of generations of family members who had preceded them, it was time to chose a side? Did some Unionists… because of Jackson’s success… lean more Confederate (even if only for a short term during the war), just because it seemed the way to go to hold on to what mattered significantly to a largely agrarian people? The land is what they knew… it was the provider, and to be honest… may have mattered more than the “greater causes” (Union, the preservation or destruction of slavery, etc., etc.) of one side or the other.
Because he gave them victories (at home, and away on Virginia fields to the East), what impact did Jackson have on swaying the sentiments of Southern Unionists in the Shenandoah Valley?
While I don’t think answers from those who lived it are so easily available, I think such a question has more merit than those that focus on how Jackson may have impacted the outcome of the battle of Gettysburg.
Cenantua's Blog 
Cotton Boll Conspiracy
May 2, 2013
A very interesting question, and one I had not considered, either in the context of Jackson or in the larger sense of whether Southern success in 1862 led more people who were on the fence to tilt toward the Confederacy. People instinctively like to back a winner, and certainly Jackson and his peculiar charisma won some people who may have been undecided. But I would think just as important was how Northern troops were perceived; if they were maurading, stealing livestock and wreaking havoc from the get-go, that’s going to push people toward the other side just as quickly, if not more so, than anything else. Just my two cents.
Mike Simons
May 10, 2013
It is a great question to spend and evening with friends, I have several times and we generally feel if he survives the South would have won or at least forced the North to the Peace Table.
Jerry
May 12, 2013
A very interesting topic. Not one that I have seen explored very often. However, I don’t believe one man could have changed the outcome of the war. Even Jackson at his best couldn’t have overcome what the Federal army was becoming, i.e. tactical superior in the cavalry department, modernized weaponry, superior logistics and communications, a fact was becoming more evident to the southern citizens has the war stretched on.
I find it difficult speculating Jackson winning the1864 Valley Campaign or even yet preventing it from occuring. I have ancestors that were with Ashby and Jackson during the war and I have conjectured and debated with others for decades “what if” scenarios and like those poor southerners I have been brought to the reality that the war was lost for the south before Grant came east. When your enemy can take three years of being led by bumbling generals and you are still playing defense your losing. Not to mention when the southern cause needed to seek foreign and domestic diplomatic intervention to aid in a victorious outcome it had become to late for a victory. Just the difference in the two styles of governments and their officials was enough to slightly tilt the scale in the favor of the Federals. Peace with honor wasn’t going to happen with Lincoln, not a big Lincoln fan but he did have a backbone. Just a few of my thoughts.