Grant versus Lee: The Wilderness to Petersburg

[@briansheehan3430]

Hate to break it to the Lost Causers, but it was really more Meade vs Lee. Meade remained in command of the Army of the Potomac and handled the tactics. Grant was commanding General in the entire US Army, and handled the strategies of all major campaigns in all land theaters. After Cold Harbor, Grant outflanked Lee on the James River while Lee had no idea where the Army of the Potomac was, and pinned him down in Petersburg after just 8 weeks. The Wilderness was a draw, but a morale booster for the Army. Spotsylvania Courthouse was ultimately a victory for the US Army, because the rebels had retreated from the field after losing nearly 900 men at Harris Farm on what was supposed to be a simple recon. mission. Lee never went where Grant didn't want him to go, and ended up exactly where Grant wanted him, in the strategic city of Petersburg, just south of Richmond, and Richmond fell immediately after Petersburg did.

[@drummer78]

Grant was essentially in charge of the Army of the Potomac during the Overland Campaign. Meade might have been its commander but the Army of the Potomac’s daily movements were Grant’s decisions.

[@satidog]

For such a quick synopsis, this is pretty good. The music is unfortunate but the narration is succinct and paints the broad picture of the campaign.

[@swampfizz]

at 4:39 the caption says 24-26 may...shouldnt that be 23-26th?.I have a relative from the 6th Wisconsion that was killed on the 23rd at Jericho Mill

[@paulmorales3815]

At 3:30 you had Hancock's attack on may 11, it was on may 12

[@ninurtathricemajestic7179]

Gen. Edward Porter Alexander wrote they only had 40000 men serving under Gen. Lee by sharpsburg and the Union always thought the confederates had larger numbers.

[@dannyv2468va2]

There were many things working against Grant. He was hampered by the overall poor Corp leadership. This was a problem all during the campaign. If he would have had Sherman with him, the war in the East would have ended in 1864. Twice Petersburg should have been captured but poor Union battle field leadership allowed Lee to hold on. Grant lost over 50,000 men during these battles. Some here have said that makes him less of a general than Lee. Cold Harbor was him only major mistake. Lee fought on the defensive often behind breast works. It should be remembered that Lee lost well over 30,000 men. Those were losses he could never replace. Grant had more resources and used his advantage well.

[@Raison_d-etre]

Amazingly, Grant lost fewer soldiers than Lee. Why Lee would sacrifice so many people has not bee discussed enough. Grant actually preserved more of his army than any other Union general, while Lee sacrificed the most among the rebels, as a percentage.

[@shanewoody4232]

Because lee was more of a Napoleonic style of general while grant was more of a modern general

[@southernlogger2307]

Wrong and wrong

[@Raison_d-etre]

@@southernlogger2307 You've got nothing, racism apologist.

[@shanewoody4232]

@@southernlogger2307 well yeah grant was the first modern general and lee was the last Napoleonic general lee was better at tactics while grant was better at grand strategy which will fluence american generals like Eisenhower whom even claim his invasion of france was influenced by grants Vicksburg campaign which west point claims it's the best campaign ever planned in the north american continent remember grant never lost a campaign

[@jamest681]

Since the fighting was all in the south, Lee always had home court advantage, knowledge of the terrain, and the support of the population living there.

[@kurtsherrick2066]

It wasn't a draw. 19,000 Union Soldier's died in the Wilderness compared to less than 7,000 for the South. That is not a draw. That is a ass kicking.

[@petloh1882]

It was actually 17,000 to 11,000. Besides, Lee failed to stop Grant, and so it was a strategic union victory.

[@kurtsherrick2066]

@@petloh1882 Just looked at the Casualty numbers from Grant's and Lee's battle of the Wilderness. The Union Lost 17,500 and the South lost 7,000 it does depend on the Historian but the South losing 11,000 is just way off base. And it wasn't a Union Victory. They say it was a draw but the North suffered terribly in most of the battles between Lee Grant. Cold Harbor. Grant just had the most. When he lost those 17,500 men he replaced them with 31,000 men from Washington. Just think if Lee could of had all those men and equipment. The war would have been over in a year. Yes the South lost but they killed 3 to 1 of what they lost. Better Generals although the South also had some morons running part of the Army. The stupidity of Leadership in both Armies is apparent as History goes.

[@petloh1882]

Kurt Sherrick I get my 11,000 number off of Encyclopedia Britannica and Wikipedia. The Battle was a strategic union victory because Grant didn’t stop his overall offensive. Your kind of thinking like Lee thought, you aren’t understanding the full picture. Grant didn’t turn back, instead attacked Lee after suffering heavy losses. Grant continued to fight, and bloodied Lee at Spotsylvania and skillfully avoided his trap at North Anna. Cold Harbor was a disaster, but people forget Pickett’s Charge of Malvern Hill. If I were under grant I would have a much higher chance of surviving. Lee often lost up to a quarter of his men at times (Gettysburg, Spotsylvania)

[@shanewoody4232]

@@kurtsherrick2066 but in the end Robert E Lee fell to the USA like many others before and after him

[@jayharrington9689]

lee's army was destroyed. hard to balance that outcome with the idea that lee won the wilderness campagin when the end result was being pinned down in petersburg and the consequences of that

[@marioriospinot]

Nice.

[@Elitetreaty]

🪙