An Analysis of Two Civil War Generals and the Surrounding Revisionist History
Robert E. Lee on the other hand was a man of discipline and determination. He was a military genius who finished second in his class West Point. He is probably the South’s most dignified personality. He could have commanded the Union Army during the Civil War, but even though he opposed secession, he would not invade his native South. That is probably why the respect for Lee is unchallenged by any other southern figure.
These two characterizations completely ignore the most important aspect of each man’s life. Each man had to make a decision that impacted the United States in its greatest time of turmoil. One decision was crucial to the Union’s prevail, the other decision was detrimental. But the reputations of these two men don’t reflect their actions. Grant should be the dignified man because he was on the side of the righteous and the victorious and Lee should be the vilified man for fighting against the uniform of the United States, but this is not the way history is told.
From a modern day perspective, it’s nearly impossible to justify the actions of the South during the Civil War. The Confederate flag has become a symbol on a similar plane as the Swastika. It’s probably unfair to say that the Confederacy was built strictly on racial hatred. If that were the case there would be no statues of Robert E. Lee and President Gerald Ford would never have reinstated his citizenship posthumously. The secession had more to do with the North vs. South power struggle than it did slavery. Northern history has turned southern pride into bigotry, maybe justifiably so, maybe not. It’s a very black and white approach to the whole subject. North = Good, South = Bad. That’s the way it’s taught in northern public schools. I don’t know how it’s taught in the south but I find it hard to believe that they’re being taught that all their ancestors were evil traitors.
I think it’s much more complicated than all of that and Grant and Lee are the epitome. Grant was a flawed personality who was on the side of human rights. Lee was an exceptional personality who made the flawed choice of going against human rights. No matter what your loyalties or beliefs are with the times, if you go against human rights, history will not and should not treat you kindly.
Many historians would argue that Grant was misunderstood and that his modern reputation doesn’t do him justice. His modern reputation usually praises his work in the Civil War, but not without bringing up his shortcomings as a sloppy leader and a drunk. They say because he fought with greater numbers and better equipment that he was inferior to General Lee. A lot of criticism comes from neo-southern Confederates, but his actual opponents in the Civil War had nothing but glowing things to say about him.
Grant was born on April 27, 1822 in Point Pleasant, Ohio. His father was an abolitionist who despised slavery. Although Grant never considered himself an abolitionist, this is probably where most of his morals came from. His mother was a distant woman who probably contributed the most to Grant’s shyness and lack of close relationships.
Grant’s military career began at West Point. He didn’t want to go but his father pressured him into it. This is where most of the character criticism of Grant stems from. He did not like being a cadet at West Point. To Grant it was a time in his life that he thought would never end. Once on vacation from the Academy with his family he described those ten weeks as shorter than any one week at West Point. He painted a lot while there. It’s as if the lifestyle wasn’t giving him enough of an outlet for his personality. The results of his education reflected his disdain for the constant drilling and regimented lifestyle. He graduated West Point on July 1, 1843 ranked 21 out of 39. It’s a common criticism that his attitude at West Point was reflective of his entire life as a soldier and is easy evidence to point to if one were to say that Grant lacked the interest and the drive to be a great soldier, or at least the superior of General Lee.
After West Point he was assigned to the Fourth Infantry in St. Louis as a brevet second Lieutenant. It is there that he meets his future wife, Julia Boggs Dent. He spent the next four years courting her through long distance correspondence as he fought in the Mexican War. He described Mexico in great detail in his letters. He really seemed to enjoy observing everything about the land and people. He was a quartermaster in Mexico and took an active role in many battles. He was already beginning to earn a reputation as a less than stellar officer, but the drum major of the Fourth Infantry, J.D. Elderkin disputed that reputation when he described Grant in the Mexican War. “He has this reputation somehow of being slow, or dim, not altogether intelligent. Where this comes from I have no concept, because he was exactly the opposite of this in all respects. I knew him well and I knew that his brain was very active. He was very quick to comprehend, and fast to understand anything,” said Elderkin.
When Grant returned from Mexico in 1848, he married Julia Boggs Dent. It was in his marriage that Grant really showed who he was. It was not uncommon in those days for husbands who are away for long periods of time to stray, but Grant remained faithful to Julia his whole life. As he put it himself, “since I have loved Julia, I have loved no one else.” Historians agree that the pair had a true romance from beginning to end. The couple had four children and while most parents would beat their kids, Grant spoiled them to a fault. Despite there being a General in the house, Julia was the disciplinarian of the household.
The next few years were difficult for Grant. He was separated from his family a lot and the army was boring him. He turned to alcohol as an outlet for his boredom and depression. He was promoted to Captain in 1853, but didn’t seem to care. He missed his wife and her letters to him only made him feel worse. He resigned from the army in 1854 to go back to his family.
Historians dispute why Grant resigned from the army. They either say it was because of his family or that it was because he had a problem with alcohol. His drinking is probably the biggest criticism against him. The people that knew him acknowledged that he did drink, but say that he really never hurt anybody. It was not uncommon in those days for officers to drink from time to time but it seems like Grant’s depression made his drinking more conspicuous.
After doing various jobs for the next seven years, he returned to the army for the Civil War. He rapid ascension through the ranks should be enough to say what kind of dedicated soldier Grant was. Receiving the surrender of General Lee at Appomattox is where Grant earns his place in history, but even with this great victory, Grant couldn’t shake the criticism. On the battlefield, there are some that refer to Grant as a butcher. They say he was irresponsible with his troops and had unnecessarily high casualty rates. When Grant and Lee first faced off, Grant won the battle but lost twice as many men as Lee.
It seems like there’s still a war going on. It’s war of reputation between the north and the south. I’ve grown up in the north so I’ve been taught very simply that Grant was right and Lee was wrong. The more I research, the more criticism I hear, and the more it seems exaggerated. I’ve heard it said before that the south eventually won the war. At the time of his death, Grant was an American hero on the same level as Washington and Lincoln, but his reputation has since gone in the toilet. If what I said earlier about history being written by the winners is true than I expect to read nothing but glowing things about General Robert E. Lee.
Robert E. Lee was born on January 19, 1807 in Stratford, Virginia. His father, Henry Lee was a Major General who was well renowned. He was on hand to witness Cornwallis’s surrender to George Washington. He served three terms as Governor of Virginia. Henry Lee was also a man of questionable character. He was twice in debtor’s prison and after resigning from the United States Army, he considered fighting for the French in their revolution. He married into money after his first wife died. Charles Carter was the second wealthiest man in Virginia behind George Washington. Carter didn’t approve of his daughter, Ann Hill, marrying Henry, who was 17 years older. But once Henry abandoned his plans to fight in France, Carter agreed and Ann and Henry were married and had their son Robert.
Robert’s childhood influence came more from the Carter side of the family rather than that of his own father. His mother was close to her family so Robert spent a lot of time with his cousins, who were about his age. Robert adopted the high social attitude of the Carter family. He was even more exposed to it when his father died when he was eleven.
Robert wasn’t sure what he wanted to do with his life. He had been an exceptional student, but his family didn’t have the money or land for him to become a southern gentleman like most in the Carter family. He decided to go to West Point to become a soldier. He used all the family influence he could muster to get appointed to the academy.
He excelled at the academy; being designated a “distinguished cadet” for cracking the top five in his class. After finishing his first year, he was appointed staff sergeant, which was the highest rank a first year cadet could hold. Lee finished his four years at West Point ranking second in his class. He did not receive a single demerit his entire time there. Since he finished as a distinguished cadet he could choose which branch of the military he wanted to be assigned to. He chose to enter the engineer corps.
Lieutenant Lee bounced around from one engineering project to the next. During this time he started courting Mary Custus. Mary’s father was apprehensive about their relationship because Mr. Custus wasn’t sure that Lee could support his daughter on his Lieutenant’s salary. It didn’t help that the Lee family had notorious financial problems that, although Lee was independent of, hurt the family reputation. Despite Mr. Custus’s objections, the couple was married in 1831. They had seven kids in fourteen years despite Robert’s engineering duties and Mary’s inability to travel. Their relationship was a bizarre coupling. Lee was a tidy, workhorse, perfectionist and Mary was lazy and often left the house a mess.
Life as an engineer was very slow. Projects were often delayed by weather and disease. Since there were so many delays, completion of these projects were always behind schedule, which reflected poorly on everyone, including Lee. This made promotions scarce, but Lee got enough experience to be put in charge of many assignments. He was eventually promoted to captain.
This routine ended when the Mexican War broke out. The first few months of the war were a question mark for the engineers. They were all sitting around wondering if they were going to get the call to go to war. Lee was eager to go because he knew that those who did go would be given preference over him. For Lee it was a make or break situation. He could either stay where he was and remain undistinguished and get passed over, or he could make a name for himself in a war and rise up the ranks. On August 19, 1846 he got the message he was hoping for. He was ordered to report to San Antonio for service in Mexico.
Lee’s job once he arrived in Mexico was to find the best topographical routes for the troops to go. Although Lee was nearly 40 and almost 20 years removed from West Point, this was the first time he rode with actual troops. His first campaign was very uneventful. The troops marched around Mexico finding nothing and chasing after false alarms. Despite the lack of action, General Scott was impressed with Captain Lee and brought him onto his staff. Scott later called Lee, “”the very best soldier that I ever saw in the field.”
Captain Lee’s first experience in battle was in Vera Cruz. Lee and the engineers got much of the credit for the ease of the victory. For his actions in the Battle of Cerro Gordo, Lee was promoted to major. By the end of the war, Lee had built up a great reputation and the best experience as a soldier he would ever need. His reconnaissance ability was second to none. He didn’t receive national recognition right away, but as the praise from his superiors continued for the next decade, he would get that recognition.
After the war he was promoted to colonel and spent the next three year in Baltimore constructing a fort. During that time Colonel Lee was given an offer by Cuba to run a campaign to get Spain off the island. The offer was intriguing to him because it would give him a chance to run the whole show by himself. Lee eventually refused the offer because he had gotten an American military education and served in the United States army and considered it unethical to accept an offer from a foreign power.
Lee bounced around a lot in the years preceding the Civil War. He became the superintendent at West Point, served in the U.S. Cavalry, fought Indians, and sat on various court-martials. It was a difficult time on the home front for Lee. His father in law died from pneumonia and left him with his plantation and the responsibility that went along with it. His wife had also become an invalid.
Lee moved on to Texas where he dealt with Indians and bandits. Texas was his first experience serving in the south in thirty years so he had been out of touch with the slavery question. After the election of Abraham Lincoln, states began to discuss secession. Lee did not agree with this plan and said, “”It is, however, my only hope for the preservation of the Union, and I will cling to it to the last.”
As more states seceded, Lee changed his tune. He spoke of the north, “a Union that can only be maintained by swords and bayonets, and in which strife and civil war are to take the place of brotherly love and kindness, has no charm for me. If the Union is dissolved, and the Government disrupted, I shall return to my native State and share the miseries of my people, and save in defense will draw my sword on none.” Lee’s intentions were to fight in defense of Virginia because he didn’t believe in the causes of either the north or the south. He was against secession, but he was also against preserving the union by force. As Texas seceded, Lee was ordered back to Washington.
Once he got to Washington, Lee saw firsthand how important the leaders on both sides considered him. He was offered a position of brigadier general by the Confederacy, which he never responded to. He was then offered 75,000 troops and the position of major general by the Union, which he turned down. Lee was insistent on waiting to see what Virginia planned to do. When they decided to secede, it broke Lee’s heart. He resigned from the U.S. Army the next day. He resigned with resentment of both the north and south for what they were doing to his Union.
His whole purpose behind resigning was so he could defend his native Virginia and he took up that cause almost immediately. After the war was over Lee never regretted his decision. He said, “I did only what my duty demanded. I could have taken no other course without dishonor. And if it all were to be done over again, I should act in precisely the same manner.”
I find it very troubling that someone as smart as Robert E. Lee could do something so naÃ?¯ve and misguided. Of course he had loyalty to his state, but how deep does the loyalty have to run when the very people he wants to protect do something he’s so opposed to. Blind loyalty is dangerous and the blood is on Lee’s hands. Somehow despite this, he is forgiven. I agree that before his decision to resign from the United States Army Lee was a dignified figure that deserved no criticism, but the decision he made was big enough to ruin him despite his character assets.
I looked for some modern context to define what a traitor is. A good example of a modern traitor is American Taliban John Walker-Lindh. He was an American who fought against the uniform of his own country of the side of the Taliban. Southern Republicans point to him as their justification for attacking the patriotism of dissenters. But I agree that he is a traitor and by the same definition, so is Robert E. Lee. He was an American fighting against the uniform of the United States. So in theory, while I do my research, I should expect to find the same vilification for Lee that I do for Walker-Lindh.
But the vilification is backward. Ulysses S. Grant takes the brunt of the criticism for his character. Revisionist history has turned one of the men who preserved the union into a drunken butcher. If it came down to character alone than Lee wins hands down, but why should it come down to character? Reputations should be made from people’s actions under the direst of circumstances. Does it really matter where a man ranked at West Point if one man steps up to defend his country while the other turns his back on it? It’s interesting to speculate what would have happened if Lee stayed with the Union or even sat out completely. He was such an asset to the south that it’s hard to believe the war would have gone on as long, or had as many casualties as it did without Lee. All those added casualties belong on the doorstep of Robert E. Lee. In a world where history is written correctly, Grant should be considered a hero and at best Lee should be considered a noble loser and at worst, a butcher.
It really comes down to a choice. Both men had the opportunity to sit out the war completely. Neither had a huge interest in either cause. Grant had resigned and didn’t have to come back and fight. Lee had resigned because he couldn’t invade his native Virginia, but he could have just stayed home rather than putting the entire war on his shoulders. The real difference of these two men is that Grant rose above his flaws and Lee succumbed to his.
