The Iron Brigade made up of soldiers from Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin was probably the toughest unit in either army.
OT: History Channel Miniseries "Grant"
- Thread starter ao5884
- Start date
Grant understood that Lee's army was the target, it had to be destroyed to win and that meant engaging it. In the movie Gettysburg (I know its a movie), Lee says something like "He loves the army, but to be victorious you have to be willing to sacrifice what you love".
Grant was the first Union general in the east who was willing to do just that. McClellan was an excellent general, good at tactics and building an army, his problem was he was more afraid of losing than he wanted to win, and he could not risk sacrificing the army.
I don't think Grant was loved by his armies, he was respected because the soldiers knew, that finally, a general was in charge that was going to see it through, at least then the casualties severed a purpose.
General Sherman's army that "marched to the sea" was a very effective group made up primarily of farm boys from Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. They lived off the land and were able to go through very difficult wooded terrain.
Gettysburg was not a "decisive defeat" of the south. If anything, it was a draw. the casualties on both sides were almost exactly the same.
honestly? the "brilliance" of that move didn't resonate with me. If the admiral didn't notice that the battery was shooting off the tops of the ships but wasn't hitting the ship itself. So he moved them closer to the battery because they couldn't shoot down. If that wasn't the case, vicksburg campaign would have been over before it started.
I am not saying it wasn't great war crafting. I am saying he was a good to great general but he had such an advantage over Lee and the South it makes me hesitate to put him in the same class as Lee. After watching the first two episodes, I fail to see a decisive "victory". He either won because he had a superior force or won because he just refused to be beaten. Attrition and time were his friends. The South couldn't afford attrition nor could they afford time. Grant, overall, was the only northern general to get that.
honestly? the "brilliance" of that move didn't resonate with me. If the admiral didn't notice that the battery was shooting off the tops of the ships but wasn't hitting the ship itself. So he moved them closer to the battery because they couldn't shoot down. If that wasn't the case, vicksburg campaign would have been over before it started.
I am not saying it wasn't great war crafting. I am saying he was a good to great general but he had such an advantage over Lee and the South it makes me hesitate to put him in the same class as Lee. After watching the first two episodes, I fail to see a decisive "victory". He either won because he had a superior force or won because he just refused to be beaten. Attrition and time were his friends. The South couldn't afford attrition nor could they afford time. Grant, overall, was the only northern general to get that.
You really think and believe they had a choice butted up against DC? Literally surrounding the capital? I don't know what your agenda is here, but the thought process is ridiculous. What did Baltimore want to do regarding the Union? No way in hell Lincoln was allowing a border state to succeed without consequences.
The north could not have ended slavery without a war. No one wanted a war. They could have allowed the South to secede but there probably would have been a war eventually over the territories.
Last edited:
The Wilderness, as brutal as it was, proved Grant's mettle. Attacking in horrible conditions in the enemy's prepared and preferred territory, it's understandable why Chancellorsville the year before was such a disaster for the Union. The only difference the following year was that Grant was in command. Instead of retreating like he was expected to do, he pushed through. That effectively ended the war, because it forced Lee to defend Richmond.
A lot goes into taking a defensive position with the ground you occupy being the most important. Many of the battles won by Lee early in the war were a result of him holding the high ground or positions easily defended. The North then had to launch frontal assaults on heavily defended positions. The tables turned at Gettysburg, and Lee lost. Lee also usually had great intelligence as a result of Jeb Stewart’s Calvary, which also failed him at Gettysburg.
20th Main under Chamberlain were Bad ass at Gettysburg.
Gettysburg’s was a clear Union victory. Grant at Vicksburg was shear brilliance. Most any military historian will agree with zero controversy.
Maryland never left the Union - period. Virginia was a border state too and it did leave the Union...Lincoln’s wishes not withstanding.
Not all of Virginia was crazy about secession, which led to West Virginia being formed and joining the Union in June of 1863.
Maryland never had a chance. Lincoln threw the leaders of the succession movement in jail before they could get a vote taken.
Little known fact, New Jersey actually took a vote of succession, obviously it failed.
I don't give a hoot what "you believe", you're flat wrong. Lee was in abject retreat after Gettysburg - his casualty wagon-train supposedly stretched over 10 miles as he desperately fled south. There are countless articles that talk to Meade's overly cautious pursuit in cutting off his retreat. Lincoln was furious with Meade for his overly conservative disposition of his troops - in fact, it was one of primary contributors to Lincoln naming Grant the Commander of all Union Forces (and promoting him to Lt General - the first person to hold that rank since George Washington) 8 months later. In FACT, Lee retreated deep into VA after Gettysburg (ultimately in Orange County VA southwest of Frederick almost to Charlottesville) and his Army of Northern Virginia didn't fight another major engagement until the Battle of the Wilderness, which was precipitated by Grant's determination to draw him out of hiding (Grant began planning and initiating the "Overland Campaign" immediately after being named Commander of all Union forces - his intent was clear, force Lee to engage his Army by marching on Richmond in the straightest, fastest line possible. Once the engagement started at The Wilderness, Grant dogged Lee's Army relentlessly until Lee surrendered after he was defeated at the Siege of Petersburg - Lee knew Richmond, the Confederate Capital, was totally undefended and at Grant's mercy, so he did the only thing he could, surrendered. Lee's Army had been decimated and numbered only 28,000 at Appomattox.).
Also, grant was free to move his men and generals. Why Davis didn’t have lee as overall commander earlier is ridiculous. Also that lee had to sit at Petersburg and protect Richmond was a major blunder and just what grant wanted.
Grant took 60k in a month. Yes he was labeled a butcher in the north. But he had to do what he had to do to finish off the south.
His goal was not Harrisburg. It was to draw the north out on open ground and concentrate and crush him. Lee made so many blunders on that campaign it is ridiculous. First was the reorganization of the army after losing Jackson. Second was letting Stuart ride free and not guard and shield the army as well as giving information to lee on the northern army. Lee said after Chancellorsville that hookers biggest mistake was marching blind and sending his Calvary away. Lee didn’t Longstreet do what he wanted which was move to the right. He let Jackson twice at Chancellorsville and Fredericksburg make his decision. He also gave him 31k instead of 13, twice.
I could go on and on about Gettysburg.
Losing Jackson really shook him and lee managed the army in the same way instead of changing his leadership style.
I think a great what if would be lee with Jackson and Longstreet two corps and Stuart with their army vs grant with Sherman Sheridan and Thomas. That would be some kind of battle.
The town of Antietam is on the Potomac River (one side of River is MD other side is WVa, which was still VA at the time). So in reality the Army's bumped into each other at this spot along the Potomac River rather than being some major invasion of the North by Lee - Lee did not have the huge supply lines necessary to sustain a massive offensive into enemy territory as he did at Gettysburg. Antietam, while bloody, was a one day skirmish. Lee's Army immediately retreated back across the Potomac and encamped just south of Sheperdstown, VA. The Confederacy fought one offensive north of the Mason-Dixon Line (the border of PA and MD) - the Mason-Dixon Line was the accepted dividing line of the North and South. Maryland did not secede from the Union for one simple reason - the State was militarily occupied by Union Forces. Approximately 25,000 Marylanders fought for the Confederacy under the title of "The Maryland Line" - complete and utter nonsense to claim that Maryland was part of the Union. Maryland was militarily occupied at the very start of the war, but Maryland's Volunteer Army fought for the Confederacy, not the Union.
Yes he wanted to draw The Army of the Potomac out of Virginia. But he also wanted to destroy the Rockville railroad bridge over which went most of the supplies for the Union Army in the west, take Harrisburg and threaten Philadelphia if the opportunity arose.
Harrisburg was a significant training center for the Union Army, with tens of thousands of troops passing through Camp Curtin. It was also a major rail center and a vital link between the Atlantic coast and the Midwest, with several railroads running through the city and over the Susquehanna River. As a result of this importance, it was a target of Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia during its two invasions. The first time during the 1862 Maryland Campaign, when Lee planned to capture the city after taking Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, but was prevented from doing so by the Battle of Antietam and his subsequent retreat back into Virginia.
The second attempt was made during the Gettysburg Campaign and was more substantial. Two full divisions of Richard S. Ewell's Second Corps approached Harrisburg in June 1863 from the southwest through Cumberland County, while a third division under Jubal Early planned to cross the Susquehanna River at Wrightsville, Pennsylvania, and attack Harrisburg from the rear. In response, Union Maj. Gen. Darius N. Couch, commanding the Department of the Susquehanna, dispatched troops to the present day borough of Camp Hill, located in the Cumberland Valley approximately two miles west of Harrisburg. Laborers hired by Couch quickly erected earthworks and fortifications along the western portion of Bridgeport, adjacent to Camp Hill. The two largest of these became known as "Fort Couch" and "Fort Washington."
On June 29, two Confederate cavalry companies attacked Union militia positions around Oyster Point, but were driven back with two wounded. This allowed officers from Ewell's staff to get a view of Harrisburg's fortifications from what is today the Drexel Hills development of New Cumberland. Based on their information, Ewell prepared for an attack but that same day Lee ordered Ewell to pull back. Lee had recently discovered that the Union Army of the Potomac was closer than he thought and desired to concentrate his forces near the South Mountain range to parry oncoming Union forces, a move that culminated in the Battle of Gettysburg.
Ewell left two cavalry units behind at a place known as Sporting Hill, on the west side of Camp Hill. Brigadier General William F. Smith, commanding the 1st Division of the Department of the Susquehanna, sent two militia infantry regiments and a cavalry company to locate the Confederates. The two forces collided the next day, fighting a short skirmish at Sporting Hill before the Confederates withdrew. This is considered by many to be the northern-most battle of the Civil War.
Last edited:
WRONG!
Battle or raid? [ edit ] The Confederate raid by Confederate Brig. Gen. John Hunt Morgan into Ohio and Indiana in July 1863, and culminating in the Battle of Salineville is considered by many historians to be the northernmost land battle of the Civil War .
And it was NOT a raid.
Maryland was a border state between the Union and the Confederacy. Nearly 85,000 men signed up to join the military. Though it was a slave state, only a fourth of them joined Confederate units. The majority joined Union forces.
My only complaint about the Grant mini series is that it was about two nights too short. They spent all of about 37 minutes trying to cover Grant's eight years in the White House. This was one of the most complex and challenging Presidencies in US history. Grant had his successes and his failures as President. Some of each were mentioned, but hours could've been spent diving into the overwhelming challenges and complexities of the Reconstruction era.
As they say, "if it bleeds, it leads" so they spent the bulk of the three nights on the war. Important stuff, no doubt. But the 'peace' that Grant was tasked with winning was much more difficult and, to me, interesting than the war. Lincoln knew that he had every advantage in the North for winning the war from the start. The problem was finding someone who wasn't concerned about the newspaper editorials, who just wanted to fight and win.
The day when Grant came east the war was essentially over. He had every advantage other than having to constantly fight on the offensive.
As they say, "if it bleeds, it leads" so they spent the bulk of the three nights on the war. Important stuff, no doubt. But the 'peace' that Grant was tasked with winning was much more difficult and, to me, interesting than the war. Lincoln knew that he had every advantage in the North for winning the war from the start. The problem was finding someone who wasn't concerned about the newspaper editorials, who just wanted to fight and win.
The day when Grant came east the war was essentially over. He had every advantage other than having to constantly fight on the offensive.
Many South-simpathetic historians have sugar-coated how utterly defeated Lee's Army was at the end - the last battle prior to Lee's surrender, Sailor's Creek, Lee lost 25% of his Army - 8,800 men - to death, casualties or surrender (mostly surrender) in a single day!! (Sailor's Creek only lasted one day). Lee told his staff, "My gosh, our Army is evaporating before our eyes.". Lee's Army was thoroughly and completely defeated just as it would have been much earlier had Grant been in the Eastern Theater after Gettysburg.
Well, maybe, but don't neglect the importance of the 1864 election. If Abraham Lincoln were not re-elected, the outcome might have been quite different. The opposing candidate, George McClellan ran on a Peace first platform; if he had won, he might have settled with the Confederacy as a separate state just to end the hostilities.
The success of Grant and Sherman on the battlefield was important for Lincoln's win.
Don't think there was anything automatic about the outcome of the War.
I like this. What happened when the traitor confederates came to Harrisburg?
"At least 16 Confederates from the 16th and 36th Virginia Cavalry were killed during the fighting and an additional 20 to 30 were wounded. Union losses were listed at 11 men wounded."
Rebel scum. Stay the F out of Pennsylvania.
"At least 16 Confederates from the 16th and 36th Virginia Cavalry were killed during the fighting and an additional 20 to 30 were wounded. Union losses were listed at 11 men wounded."
Rebel scum. Stay the F out of Pennsylvania.
i really loved the first two episodes but the third smelled like an agenda. They emphasized everything done right and blew right passed what went wrong. Then, at the end, blamed Lees greater popularity over grant on southern writers with an agenda. Well, I’ve been on this earth several decades and know that the media is driven from the two coasts, not the south, Midwest or mountain states
that is the media’s game though; you are either painted as a super human super hero or a completely corrupt buffoon. I’d have loved to get more balance to understand how bad decisions are made, as well as the good.
having said that, B+ work. I learned a lot. Looking forward to the upcoming series. Kudos to the history channel
You make a great point. I have studied this closely for years and this was the first time I heard that the press and history writers favored Lee over Grant. Seemed totally out of left field and not accurate at all. It always seemed to me that Grant the General was portrayed >> Grant the President and Grant the General = or slightly > than Lee. Both seems about right based upon the evidence.
Similar threads
