What if...Grant Won the Race to Spotsylvania?

[J_Man0507]

Yes, Grant and Sherman both understood that they had the numbers to defeat the enemy in their respective theatres of operation, but I don't think they saw it as "I have the luxury of more men, so I am just going to smash against them until they have nothing left." Grant himself wanted to get Lee out onto open ground and fight, not fight from trenches. Yes, he knew that that would eventually defeat Lee, but he wanted it done sooner, and not with as many casulties as fighting for another year would entail. He didn't want to fight Cold Harbor, and regretted it after the failed assault. I do agree though, that he knew that he could win by superior numbers, and that once he dug in for the seige at Petersburg, he knew that ultimately he could win by surrounding Lee and overextending his lines.

By the second half of the ACW, the battles are no longer being fought primarily in the open; the soldiers are digging in at every stop they make, whether it be to camp for the night, or make coffee. They understood that fighting from entrenched positions was better than standing in the open. And unfortunately, the only way to take those positions was to either flank them, or find the weak spot and take it from there by assault. Lee also did not want to fight from trenches, because he knew that he didn't have enough men, and that he would eventually be enveloped by the Union forces to his front. I'm sure he didn't mind having men thrown at him, but he also knew that once he dug in and went into seige warfare, it was over for him if he didn't get out or defeat Grant. Trench warfare was brutal and costly. WWI is the prime definition of that, though the ACW showed it just as well: Assaulting a dug in enemy in a frontal assault is costly, whether it be successful or a failure.

[cw1865]

Without doubt, they start the war fighting Waterloo, they 'end' it (Siege of Petersburg) fighting Verdun.

With respect to the Overland Campaign, I think Lee does very well. He does exactly what he needs to do, he exacts a heavy toll on Grant and he holds on WELL past the election of 1864.

At that point, really what else could the man do?

[whitworth]

Lee had lost his offensive capability, as weak as it was, after Gettysburg.
He was a master of defense.

Actually for the reunion after the war, I think it was important that Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina fell to Union troops, prior to Lee's surrender.

Alabama didn't see much invasion, until around Lee's last battle to escape out of Richmond.

I think Grant was satisfied, once he got Lee in a siege position. Much was to be gained by Sherman chewing up Georgia, South and North Carolina, and James H. Wilson running through Alabama and defeating Bedford Forrest at Selma. I believe these Confederate areas needed to see war, before it was over.
By the time Grant pushed a weakened defensive line in Virginia, the war was over in any other important place in the Confederacy.

[whitworth]

Grant's tremendously large army needed constant resupply. Either by railroad or by water. That meant Grant had to stay in those areas.

Because Washington was too close to Richmond and Lee's army, it forced Union commanders into a narrow corridor.
Lee never had to worry about a large Union army attacking Richmond from the west. Logistics prevented it, plus the psychological need to protect Washington.

[J_Man0507]

Not necessarily. There could be an attack from the west, but it could not be the only attack. It would have to be a joint attack, with one force coming down from the north of Richmond and another coming from the Shenendoah. So I agree that there could not be just one mass attack from the Shenendoah or other points west. But I do think Lee would have to worry about it, especially with Sheridan destroying Early's army in the Valley. A joint attack I could see working.