Why was General Grant so different than General Lee?
General Grant was a scholar, not some uneducated man sending his troops to the slaughter. General Lee had many opportunities to break further into the north and even torch the White House, and the General refuses to take up on these potential opportunities. Furthermore, General Grant had the much more challenging taks at hand.
How good of a general was General Lee?
Lee, second in his West Point class, an engineering officer, a career military officer, truly was a great general. As a tactician, he was head and shoulders above Grant. (Thomas, however, is another question.) Good defensively, Lee was even better on the offensive. He was bold and decisive, a calculating gambler.
Was grant a better strategic master than Lee?
He contended that Grant was the strategic master of his Confederate counterparts, had a lower casualty rate than Lee, and demonstrated his strategic skills by focusing on enemy armies rather than on mere geographic goals.
Was grant the greatest general of the Civil War?
Grant won the war and was the greatest general of the war. On the other hand, Lee was a one-theater general who adversely influenced Confederate prospects in his own and other theaters.
Who was the best general in the Civil War?
Ulysses S Grant was the supreme Union general during the civil war and then later 18th President of the United States. Grant was instrumental in the battlefield defeat of the Confederacy and then as President worked to implement Reconstruction.
Who was the better strategist Grant or Lee?
Both were decisive, bold men. Lee was clearly the better tactician. In the end, however, Grant must be seen as the better of the two. No man, other than Lincoln, did more to win the war than Grant. His strategic vision enabled him to maximize his advantages and Lee's disadvantages.
Was Lee the best general of Civil War?
After his death in 1870, Lee became a cultural icon in the South and is largely hailed as one of the Civil War's greatest generals. As commander of the Army of Northern Virginia, he fought most of his battles against armies of significantly larger size, and managed to win many of them.
What advantage did Grant have over Lee?
Grant took advantage of the fact that Lee had gravely weakened his outnumbered army in 1862 and 1863 and successfully conducted a campaign of adhesion against Lee's Army of Northern Virginia.
Who was the best WWII general?
7 Talented Generals Who Shaped World War IIField Marshal Bernard Montgomery. Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery, via Britannica. ... General George S. Patton. ... Field Marshal Erwin Rommel: The “Desert Fox” ... Marshal Georgy Zhukov. ... General Heinz Guderian. ... General Douglas MacArthur. ... Field Marshal Erich von Manstein.
Who was the greatest US general ever?
Who are the Five Greatest Generals in U.S. History?Here's What You Need to Remember: Each was great in his own way, in the circumstances of his time and in the qualities that America needed.George Washington:Winfield Scott:Ulysses Grant:George Marshall:Matthew Ridgway:
Could Lee have won at Gettysburg?
Early extolled Lee's genius. In fact, Early claimed, Lee's Army of Northern Virginia would have won the Battle of Gettysburg, the turning point in the Civil War, if his orders had been obeyed.
Who was the most respected Confederate general?
The Top 5 Greatest Confederate Generals: Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, James Longstreet, Nathan Bedford Forrest, and Patrick Cleburne.
What was General Lee's weakness?
That no doubt suited the Confederate fighting man, who didn't take kindly to being told what to do—but Lee's only weakness as a commander, his otherwise reverent nephew Fitzhugh Lee would write, was his “reluctance to oppose the wishes of others, or to order them to do anything that would be disagreeable and to which ...
Who lost more men Grant or Lee?
For the entire war, Grant incurred about 154,000 casualties (killed, wounded, missing, captured) while imposing about 191,000 casualties on his foes. Lee suffered about 209,000 casualties while imposing about 240,000 casualties on his opponents.
Did Grant attend Lee's funeral?
Some even suggest it was General Grant who personally and very silently weighed in to save Lee from his due. In classic Grant fashion, with utmost integrity and modesty, the Union General refused to back down in a dispute with President Johnson.
Did Grant and Lee respect each other?
For years, Lee got more respect than Grant both as a military leader and as a personality. In recent decades, historians have demoted Lee and promoted Grant on both counts. For Grant's reputation, it's a welcome corrective.
Who was the greatest strategist of all time?
Scipio Africanus (236/235–183 BC) was a Roman general and later consul who is often regarded as one of the best military commanders and strategists of all time. His greatest military achievement was the defeat of Hannibal at the Battle of Zama (near modern Zama, Tunisia) in 202 BC.
Who is the best military strategist in Game of Thrones?
The very best strategist on Game of Thrones — both in court and behind the scenes — is the late, great Tywin Lannister. Don't mistake his embarrassing death as a reflection of his political prowess.
Was Grant a good strategist?
Grant, therefore, was not only a good strategist but a very good judge of character. On a number of occasions during the Civil War Grant used his knowledge of commander's characters, having known many of them before the war, to his advantage.
What strategy would Grant use against Lee?
Grant's aggressiveness was consistent with the North's superior manpower and its need to proactively win the war, while Lee's was inconsistent with the South's inferior manpower and its need only for a deadlock. In short, Grant's war strategy, aggressiveness won the war while Lee's lost it.
Why did Lee argue that Longstreet’s corps was needed for an offensive in the East?
Longstreet had been seeking new opportunities in other theaters, but Lee argued that Longstreet’s corps was needed for an offensive in the East and that the semitropical Mississippi climate would defeat the Vicksburg campaign of Grant, who was sweeping through Mississippi at that very moment.
How many Confederates did Grant build?
While Grant built his forces up to perhaps 75,000, the Lee-inspired exodus of Longstreet’s troops simultaneously reduced Rebel strength in the area to a mere 36,000. Thus, when Grant’s troops successfully charged up Missionary Ridge, the spread-thin Confederates fled in disarray into northern Georgia.
How many casualties did Lee suffer?
Lee suffered about 209,000 casualties while imposing about 240,000 casualties on his opponents. Lee, who should have been fighting defensively and preserving his precious manpower, instead exceeded Grant’s understandable aggressiveness and incurred 55,000 more casualties than Grant. TOP STORIES.
How did Lee facilitate Atlanta's fall?
Lee had facilitated Atlanta’s fall by vouching for John Bell Hood’s fighting capabilities and also by not reinforcing the outnumbered opponents of Sherman. Such an inter-theater transfer was the worst nightmare of Grant and Sherman as they planned and executed their simultaneous 1864 campaigns.
What river did Grant send his army across?
After bloody conflicts at the Wilderness, Spotsylvania Court House, the North Anna River and Cold Harbor, Grant disengaged his entire army from Lee’s without Lee’s knowledge, sent it across the James River, and attacked Petersburg, the key to Richmond, before Lee could reinforce it.
Why was Grant brought to the East?
Finally, Grant was brought to the East to face Lee’s army, which he defeated within a year to effectively bring the war to a close.
What did Lee's constant demand for reinforcements and his 50,000 casualties, incurred during the Maryland campaign,?
Lee’s constant demand for reinforcements and his 50,000 casualties, incurred during the Maryland campaign, had drained other areas of the South of many of their soldiers. That drainage made Grant’s and other western generals’ jobs easier.
Why did Ulysses Grant resign?
But when the fighting stopped and Grant was assigned monotonous duties at remote posts far from his wife and family, he turned to the bottle. He resigned his commission in 1854 to avoid being drummed out of the service.
What was Grant's job during the Civil War?
When the Civil War began, Grant eagerly jumped back into military service, where his talents and experience were recognized. By September 1861, he was given command of the District of Southeast Missouri. Triumphs at Forts Henry and Donelson and the hard-won capture of Vicksburg made Grant the Union’s premier commander.
What did Lee do in the Civil War?
Despite his considerable efforts, on April 9, 1865, Lee was forced to surrender his weary and depleted army, effectively ending the Civil War.
What happened to Lee in 1865?
Despite his considerable efforts, on April 9, 1865, Lee was forced to surrender his weary and depleted army, effectively ending the Civil War. Lee returned home on parole and eventually became the president of Washington College (now known as Washington and Lee University) in Lexington, Va.
Why did Abraham Lincoln give Lee the command of the army?
Because of his exceptional reputation, Abraham Lincoln offered Lee the command of Federal forces in April 1861. But Lee declined and tendered his resignation from the army when Virginia seceded, arguing that he could not fight against his own people.
Where was Robert Lee born?
Born to Revolutionary War hero Henry “Light-Horse Harry” Lee in Stratford Hall, Va. , on January 19, 1807, Robert Edward Lee graduated second in the class of 1829 from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point — without earning a single demerit — and was assigned to the Corps of Engineers.
Who was Lee married to?
Two years later, he married Mary Anna Randolph Custis, a descendant of George Washington. During the Mexican War, Lee served on Gen. Winfield Scott’s staff and earned three brevets for gallantry, both of which contributed to his subsequent appointment as superintendent of West Point.
Which general had the most challenging taks at hand?
Furthermore, General Grant had the much more challenging taks at hand. General Grant had to conquer a land mass according to Professor Foner “the Equivalent size of Western Europe.”. Whereas all Lee had to do was defend land, a much easier task than conquering foreign territory.
Was General Grant a scholar?
General Grant was a scholar, not some uneducated man sending his troops to the slaughter. General Lee had many opportunities to break further into the north and even torch the White House, and the General refuses to take up on these potential opportunities.
Who was the greatest general of the Civil War?
General Grant VS General Lee : Who Was The Greatest General Of The American Civil War? Genral Robert E Lee has gained this reputation for being some sort of military genius on the battlefield. Furthermore, General Grant of the Northern Army has gained a reputation for being some sort of “butcher” according to Columbia University Professor & Legendary Historian Eric Foner. However, that couldn’t be further from the truth. When in fact General Grant was an avid student of ancient military tacticts and more recent battles such as Napoleon. General Grant was a scholar, not some uneducated man sending his troops to the slaughter.
What does Bonekemper describe Lee's tactics?
Speaking of tactics, Bonekemper describes Lee’s tactical skills as “too complex,” “simply ineffective,” “too vague,” and “discretionary.” As for Grant, simply insert the word “not” in front of all the descriptions of Lee’s tactical deficiencies and you’d have Bonekemper’s version of Grant’s tactical genius.
What did Bonekemper write about the Emancipation Proclamation?
Speaking of the Emancipation Proclamation, Bonekemper writes that Lincoln’s public pronouncement of that sterile statement “foreclosed European intervention” in the war.
What is the proximate cause of an event?
In other words, what was the one thing that happened that more than any other caused a certain event to occur? Regarding the massacre of men in the Confederate army, the proximate cause was not Robert E. Lee’s abilities as a general, but it was Abraham Lincoln’s violation of the U.S. Constitution and the subsequent invasion of the South by armies of the United States, at his command.
What publications does Ron Paul write?
His articles on the NDAA, the Constitution, states rights, drones, and the surveillance state have appeared in national and international publications, including LewRockwell.com, the Ron Paul Forums, the Tenth Amendment Center, Infowars, the Guardian (U.K.), and Business Insider, among others.
What happened after the failed European Revolutions of 1848?
After the failed European revolutions of 1848, many militant, aggressive Germans immigrated to the U.S., especially the Midwest . These were revolutionaries experienced in conflict, dedicated to social revolution by violence, and ignorant or contemptuous of American constitutionalism.
Who wrote that the South needed to rationalize the cause and effects of the war?
So, when Bonekemper writes that the South needed to “rationalize” the cause and effects of the war, it would seem that by his purposefully erroneous retelling of the facts surrounding those causes and effects, that he is the one who has some need to rationalize.
Did Grant's aggressiveness win the war?
Here’s a sample of the “similarities” catalogued by Bonekemper: Both generals were aggressive, but “Grant’s aggressiveness won the war, while Lee’s lost it.”. Speaking of the casualties of the war, Bonekemper writes that “amazingly, almost one-fourth of Southern white males of military age died during the war.”.
What is the best biography of Grant?
Jean Edward Smith’s 2001 book entitled simply Grant is an excellent, sympathetic biography of Grant. He pointed to Grant’s decisiveness at Fort Donelson, his Vicksburg campaign’s amphibious crossing, his moving forward after the Wilderness, and his surreptitious crossing of the James River as examples of Grant’s greatness. He contended that Grant was the strategic master of his Confederate counterparts, had a lower casualty rate than Lee, and demonstrated his strategic skills by focusing on enemy armies rather than on mere geographic goals. Smith not only described the greatness of Grant as a Civil War general but also the many overlooked positive aspects of his eight-year presidency. Smith detailed President Grant’s efforts to protect Negroes’ rights in the postwar South and Indians’ rights in the West and said that “mainstream historians, unsympathetic to black equality, brutalized Grant’s presidency.”
How did the North win the Civil War?
In their exhaustive 1983 study of the war, How the North Won: A Military History of the Civil War, Herman Hattaway and Archer Jones concluded that Grant was responsible for recognizing the North’s need to effectively use its superiority. Although they disclaimed the significance of turning points, they concluded that Grant’s seizure of Fort s Henry and Donelson and his approval of Sherman’s March to the Sea were decisive events.
What was Grant's second day offensive at Shiloh?
McFeely made it appear that Grant’s second-day offensive at Shiloh was a spur-of-the-moment idea conceived only that morning, and he then criticized Grant for failing to pursue the Rebels with his exhausted army. He claimed it was Grant’s rivalry with McClernand that got him focused on Vicksburg.
What was Grant's burning desire?
Grant suffered from a “burning, persistent desire to fight, to attack, in season and out of season, against intrenchments, natural obstacles, what not.”. Mediocre Confederate General Jubal Early led the way, along with incompetent Confederate General William Nelson Pendleton, in creating the Myth of the Lost Cause.
Why did Grant fight Lee?
He fought Lee at every turn primarily because he wished to deny Jefferson Davis the option of shifting Confederate troops from Virginia to Georgia where they might slow Sherman’s progress.
What was Grant's military genius?
Perret praised Grant’s “military genius” and credited him with creating two concepts that the U.S. Army has been using ever since: the use of converging columns (Grant’s 1864–5 national strategy) and the wide envelopment (Grant’s sweeping around Lee’s flank throughout 1864 and 1865).
What book did the Confederates publish in 1880?
The 1880s publication of Battles and Leaders of the Civil War, containing the recollections of the war’s participants, provided former Confederates with an opportunity to impugn Grant.
What was Lee's best hope of survival?
Since the South had a lack of fighting men compared to the North, its best hope was to keep casualties to a minimum, to live to fight another day. Lee’s offensive tactics ensured the Army of Northern Virginia sustained greater casualties than it could afford. Had he fought defensively most of the time, Lee would have saved soldiers who could fight again, perhaps outlasting the North’s will to win.
Why did the North keep pressure on the South?
First, the North had to keep pressure on all of the South’s armies simultaneously to keep the Confederacy from using its interior lines of communication to shift forces quickly. Second, he realized the North had greater manpower and could replace its losses more easily than the South. If he kept pressure on Lee’s army and kept it fighting, eventually Lee would run out of men. While this increased Grant’s casualties in the short term, it shortened the war and lessened overall casualties.
Why did Lee invade the North?
For instance, a major reason Lee invaded the North in 1863 was the lack of food to be found in northern Virginia following the wintering of both armies there. Rather than deal with the supply problem at home, he chose to invade Pennsylvania and live off the land. But how long could he possibly stay? This only solved part of his problems. More important, a battle was inevitable. He would have to return to deal with his wounded and replace his losses, even if he were victorious.
What was Grant's true talent?
Grant’s true talent lay as a strategist. He saw the big picture clearly. His Vicksburg Campaign was brilliant, even though the battles were won in a pedestrian manner. He outmaneuvered his opponent and prevented him from combining forces. As commander of all the armies in 1864, Grant understood two aspects of the war that those before him did not.
What was Lee's major flaw?
Lee’s major flaw, though, was as a strategist. In a word, he was not. His concern was northern Virginia and nothing else. Throughout the war, he resisted attempts by Jefferson Davis to draw forces from the Army of Northern Virginia to reinforce the western armies. Only once did it happen, when Longstreet went west and fought at Chattanooga, but not without Lee’s efforts to stop it. He also opposed attempts to make him commander in chief of Southern forces until it was too late for it to be of any benefit.
Was Grant a good quartermaster?
In some ways, Grant is the mirror image of Lee. He was a mediocre student, 21st in a class of 39, and a failure as a career military man. He was not very good as a civilian, either, failing as a farmer and a president. And, unlike Lee, he was a good quartermaster who made certain his men were well-supplied. In other ways, they were very much alike. Like Lee, Grant was decisive and bold. The Vicksburg Campaign alone proves this. Grant also was not afraid to fight. He won battles and his men loved him.
Was Lee a good general?
Lee, second in his West Point class, an engineering officer, a career military officer, truly was a great general. As a tactician, he was head and shoulders above Grant. (Thomas, however, is another question.) Good defensively, Lee was even better on the offensive. He was bold and decisive, a calculating gambler. Can anyone who has studied the Battle of Chancellorsville deny it? Splitting his army on several occasions, he surprised his opponents and won the day. Lee was a master of the holding attack, a tactic George Marshall would later instill as the only tactic taught at the Army War College prior to World War II.
How did Grant and Lee defeat Lee?
In that process, Lee and Grant were pretty evenly matched. Had he better managed his other peripheral offensives (like at Bermuda Hundred, Mobile, and Shenandoah), Grant would have probably destroyed Lee through sheer attrition. But Lee was able to reinforce his army and maintain his original strength. But, rather than keep plugging away with little flanking maneuvers, which Lee would surely parry again, Grant opted for a larger maneuver against Richmond and its supply lines through the city of Petersburg. By threatening that critical point, Grant forced Lee to stand and fight. There, Grant repeated the Siege of Vicksburg, and destroyed Lee's Army. By 1865, Lee was short of food, supplies, and men. He barely had enough to hold his lines outside of Petersburg, and once he abandoned the city, Lee barely even held his army together. Ultimately, Grant's persistence, aggression, and simple tenacity succeeded in beating Lee, in conquering the unconquerable.
How old were the pyramids of Giza?
When Napoleon supposedly said this, the three pyramids of Giza would have been 4300-4400 years old (by modern radiocarbon dates), making Napoleon's estimate remarkably close, allowing poetic license for round numbers. And whether or not the quote is invented, a cursory Googling of the quote gives me this source, making it at least as old as 1897, well before modern radiocarbon dating.
What was Lee's short of food?
By 1865, Lee was short of food, supplies, and men. He barely had enough to hold his lines outside of Petersburg, and once he abandoned the city, Lee barely even held his army together. Ultimately, Grant's persistence, aggression, and simple tenacity succeeded in beating Lee, in conquering the unconquerable.
How many volumes of history of the Overland Campaign?
Gordon Rhea's four volume history of the Overland Campaign
Where did Lee and Grant live?
Both seems to have been comfortable in the geography they knew best, Lee in Virginia and Grant along the Mississippi river. Lee was not keen to go to the West and Grant just came to East because he had no chance I think.
When did the Mexican army kill protesters?
On 2 October 1968, the Mexican army killed hundreds of student protesters, 10 days before the Mexico 68 Olympics began. Why is this event mostly ignored in English-language material when discussing the global '68 protests, or even student massacres in general (as opposed to Tiananmen or Kent State)?
Was Lee a tactician?
Lee was no doubt a brilliant tactician and quite intelligent reading the enemy intentions, he knew very well how much pressure apply to the Army of the Potomac and was in most cases a couple of steps ahead of his counterpart. By contrary Lee never seem to have had an strategic approach to the whole war beyond his area of operation in and around Virginia. True that Jefferson Davies did ask Lee for this, he would put Lee in command of the Confederacy armies late in the war but too late to have any effect. So we always see Lee planning for the Army of Northern Virginia, that was his responsibility, and somehow it was expected that Southern victories and exhaustion of the North on both its politicians and public opinion would let the South prevail. Remember that the South need not to win, just not to loose. This does not mean Lee may have not had a strategic plan if it was required but it never was made his duty as I see it.
