Death Date of Lee's Army...

[5fish]

On Sept. 30th, 1864, Gen. Lee organized an eight brigade strike force to recapture Ft. Harrison recently overtaken by the union. Lee's attack failed terribly and mark the of Gen. Anderson career with the AoNV..

Some historian point to this moment where Gen. Lee believe there was no hope in winning the war. Some historian mark this death of Lee's army. I never read the reasoning behind Historians opinion rising from Lee's failed effort to retake Ft. Harrison.

It was obvious that Lee's army had lost its offensive punch months before Ft. Harrison. Was Sept 30th, 1864 the death date of Lee's army??


Any thoughts out there......

[bschulte]

Originally Posted by 5fish

On Sept. 30th, 1864, Gen. Lee organized an eight brigade strike force to recapture Ft. Harrison recently overtaken by the union. Lee's attack failed terribly and mark the of Gen. Anderson career with the AoNV..

Some historian point to this moment where Gen. Lee believe there was no hope in winning the war. Some historian mark this death of Lee's army. I never read the reasoning behind Historians opinion rising from Lee's failed effort to retake Ft. Harrison.

It was obvious that Lee's army had lost its offensive punch months before Ft. Harrison. Was Sept 30th, 1864 the death date of Lee's army??


Any thoughts out there......

5fish,

interesting thread, especially since it deals with the Petersburg Campaign, a topic I've been looking at more closely over the past several years. My answer to your question is no. I honestly believe the death date of Lee's army was June 14, 1864, when Grant was able to reach the outskirts of Petersburg. Lee himself (and I'm very loosely paraphrasing here) said that once Grant reached Richmond and Petersburg and a siege was started, it was only a matter of time before the war ended. So my idea is that once a siege was started, Lee's army had no way out. It is important to note that Confederate soldiers in the trenches did not yet view their cause as lost. I think only after Lincoln won reelection in November 1864 did many Confederate soldiers finally begin to see the writing on the wall. When you look at the Siege of Petersburg, especially the actions prior to November 1864, without the benefit of hindsight, the actions fought during the
Siege become much more interesting. In the end though, I think Lee just didn't have enough manpower to break the siege.

[5fish]

I have not figure a date "one could call the Death Date of Lee's army". If you think about it the Wilderness was the only offensive action Lee took against Grant during the Overland campaign for the rest of the campaign Lee was fighting off his back foot.

There was North Anna but turned into standoff because Lee became ill. North Anna shows the leadership of the AoNV was fading away.

June 22, 1864, When Mahone flank the union line but stall out quickly. Another offensive push that failed.

Sept 30, 1864, FT. Harrison where Lee's fails to retake the fort..

March 25, 1865, Ft. Stedman event. I like to think of as Lee's folly...


From May of 1864 until April of 1865, Lee attempted four offensive operations against Grant's army. They all failed in their desired purpose. One could tell Lee's army had lost their magic after the Wilderness battle...

Which one can be consider the Death Date of Lee's fable AoNV. We all know historians like to point at a date saying this is when something occurred...

[ole]

Interesting posts. I don't know the date, but I'll vote for the day that Lee decided to endure a siege (which he knew was the beginning of the end) to hang onto Richmond for as long as possible. I figure that when Meade was stopped at the trenches, Lee ought to have advised Davis and the government to get out of Dodge. There was time to escape and set-up shop somewhere else. Staying bottled up could only end one way.

ole

[Blockaderunner]

Two possibles for me. The first would be the withdrawal from Maryland after Antietam. This probably ended any chance of a military victory. The second would be the re-election of Lincoln. This ended any chance of a negociated peace.

[Freddy]

I think Lee knew it was over on July 3, 1863. Granted Lee and the AoNV did not quit, but he had to know his army could not recover and soon he would learn of Vicksburg. Any offensive moves by Lee could only hope to slow the Virginia campaign of the AoP. Lee would learn this as Grant and Meade pushed southward.

[bschulte]

Originally Posted by Freddy

I think Lee knew it was over on July 3, 1863. Granted Lee and the AoNV did not quit, but he had to know his army could not recover and soon he would learn of Vicksburg. Any offensive moves by Lee could only hope to slow the Virginia campaign of the AoP. Lee would learn this as Grant and Meade pushed southward.

I don't know if I really agree with this. Obviously we can never know Lee's true thoughts on the matter, but if you take a look at the diaries of Southern soldiers in the ANV even through the early fall of 1864, you'll see that many of them did not view Gettysburg as any kind of "turning point" in the war. I think "Gettysburg as turning point" is more a product of (specifically Virginian) Lost Cause mythology than it is a correct view of the matter. Lee was pursuing Meade aggressively through central and northern Virginia in October 1863, just as he had done to Pope in August 1862. Hill's spectacularly bungled attack at Bristoe Station put a premature end to this offensive. This offensive action occurred AFTER Lee had sent Longstreet and his First Corps west to help Bragg at Chickamauga. I'll stick to my original date of June 14, 1864, when the Battle of Petersburg began. Technically, you could move this back to June 19, because that is the day the Siege of Petersburg truly started. Good discussion though. I think a case can be made for quite a few dates in the summer and fall of 1864. Lincoln's reelection, for instance, is one of them.

[ole]

A highly worthy post, Brett. As usual.

I think a case can be made for quite a few dates in the summer and fall of 1864. Lincoln's reelection, for instance, is one of them.

I don't consider Lincoln's reelection to be much more than a mental boost (or blow) for the armies in the field.

I base this consideration on the single idea that, had he lost, Lincoln would still have controlled the reins until early March. There were plugs he could have pulled, but I don't think he needed to. In March, the AoNV was bottled up and starving. Sherman was wading through North Carolina with only Joe Johnston standing in his way with valiant but suffering remnants of garrisons and the AoT.

What kind of fool would include in his inaugural address, "I've determined to negotiate with our rebellious friends to bring an end to the suffering of both sides"? With surrender and complete capitulation at hand?

So I discount the election. Just a thought.

ole

[Jamieva]

I would say the date that Grant decided to move on to Spotsylvania from the Wilderness battlefield, something that no other opponent of Lee's had every done. Early May 64?

Can't agree on July 3, 1863. Everyone placed much more importance on Gettysburg post war, during the war it was not viewed in that context.

[OpnDownfall]

Assuming that there is such a thing as Death Date..., I have long favored Ft. Stedman. It was the last planned offensive with a true strategic goal, so important that Lee used almost half his Army in it's execution under his best remaining offensive general. When it failed, There was no more viable strategic options for the ANV i.e. there was no overarching reason that justified the existence of the ANV
Ever since the Wilderness (at least), Lee's dispatches are clear calls for Davis and the confederate gov't to either resupply, re-equip and reinforce his army or accept the certainty of defeat. Davis was too stubborn or obtuse to understand what Lee was saying.