Grant or Lee?

[LightSpectra]

Lee had more victories, eh? I suppose I should count the number of battles when each was the commanding officer to determine that. BRB.

Oh wait, the problem with this is that (1) that doesn't mean a damn thing, and (2) it's difficult to differentiate what specific battles are (do we count the Siege of Petersburg as one battle?), and (3) it's difficult to say if we should count smaller battles as victories, where Grant/Lee didn't micromanage the battle at all but was the XO.

 

[jtb1127]

Do people even read the competent - and in several cases, university-accredited - historians on the boards anymore, or are we just here for ballast?

The answer is so obviously Grant that I weep for the future of humanity upon seeing the evenness of this poll.

Go on...

 

[LightSpectra]

Go on...

Go back, rather. You seemed to have missed several pages of discussion.

 

[Skwink]

Do people even read the competent - and in several cases, university-accredited - historians on the boards anymore, or are we just here for ballast?

The answer is so obviously Grant that I weep for the future of humanity upon seeing the evenness of this poll.

Thanks. I guess we ought to just close the topic.

 

[jtb1127]

Go back, rather. You seemed to have missed several pages of discussion.

Sure. Also, do you consider Bruce Catton an accurate source?

 

[LightSpectra]

Sure. Also, do you consider Bruce Catton an accurate source?

His works are over 30 years old. While the facts generally change very little for events as well documented as the American Civil War, interpretations and generalizations do change. Keep that in mind.

 

[jtb1127]

His works are over 30 years old. While the facts generally change very little for events as well documented as the American Civil War, interpretations and generalizations do change. Keep that in mind.

Well anything I would have used to argue with you would have come from Catton's
three-volume series on the war, but if you claim he's too old than you can have your medal. But I'm also unaware of any other civil war historians with as much acclaim as him other than Shelby Foote, who's works are also over 30 years old.

 

[Dachs]

Historian star power doesn't mean that they're right. Sometimes it means the opposite.

But if you want historian star power of a somewhat more modern variety, you should look at James McPherson.

 

[Lord Baal]

Historian star power doesn't mean that they're right. Sometimes it means the opposite.

What Dachs says here is very true, jtb1127. Look at the recent thread on famous British historia Niall Ferguson to see this illustrated. Or, even better, read something by Winston Churchill, who even admitted he was lying to make himself look good, yet is still widely believed.

 

[ParkCungHee]

At least he's better then Stephen Ambrose.

 

[Lord Baal]

At least he's better then Stephen Ambrose.

I'm pretty sure my 9-month old daughter is a better historian than Stephen Ambrose.

 

[MajKira]

I think both were best generals a side could put up into battlefield
North won becuz of more resources and more progression like abolition of slavery, industrialization
overcoming feudal structures
Lees best chance to eventually win the war would be Gettysburg, Pensylvania
Grant pushed the war to an decisive end what McClellan didnt do, he was too cautious
so Grant was the best man to boldly push

 

[Ataxerxes]

I think both were best generals a side could put up into battlefield
North won becuz of more resources and more progression like abolition of slavery, industrialization
overcoming feudal structures
Lees best chance to eventually win the war would be Gettysburg, Pensylvania
Grant pushed the war to an decisive end what McClellan didnt do, he was too cautious
so Grant was the best man to boldly push

McClellan was a rather poor general. Great Organizer, poor leader once the fighting started. One thing in favor of rating Lee as leader of the south was Jefferson Davis. Very few of the generals got on at all with Davis, who was difficult. Lee did. Of course, part of the problem with Davis was the other generals weren't as good as Lee - except possibly Albert Sidney Johnston, who was killed early in the war.

I'm not sure that Gettysburg was the best chance for Lee to win the war. I'd vote for Antietam (might have gotten British and French recognition if Lee had won) or Petersburg/Atlanta. If Sherman hadn't captured Atlanta, I'm not sure Lincoln would have won reelection. That might have mean a brokered peace - a tie is a Confederate victory.

Another question I wouild have would be which was more important, Gettysburg or Vicksburg. Gettysburg was the bigger battle but I've always thought Vicksburg was more important. Hard to imagine Sherman's March if Grant hadn't taken Vicksburg.

 

[Dachs]

I've never understood why A. S. Johnston's generalship is rated so highly by so many people.¹

The man's sole accomplishment before taking command in the West was escaping from California, which, while quite a feat, said nothing about his generalship. He promptly proceeded to badly mismanage the Kentucky situation (even Bragg handled it better, although Breckenridge was the South's best man on the ground there) and give up Nashville practically without a fight. His deployments immediately prior to and in response to the attacks on Forts Henry and Donelson were nonsensical, dispersed force too much, and where there were concentrations, they were precisely where it was least useful for the Confederacy to have them. And then he promptly led an attack on the Federals at Shiloh that was competently managed for perhaps the first five minutes; his decision to lead from the front was completely idiotic and furthermore, got him killed at the worst possible time, during an increasingly confusing battle in which command and control effectively collapsed.

Frankly, the best thing to have happened to Johnston's career was dying heroically: it may have helped lose the rebels the battle, but it ensured he couldn't cock up any more and thus enshrined him in history as a glorious martyr. God damn all Southern gentlemen.

¹ = Actually, I do know why. I blame Shelby Foote, who had the weirdest man-crush on him. Saying that I don't know why was for rhetorical effect.

 

[privatehudson]

One thing in favor of rating Lee as leader of the south was Jefferson Davis. Very few of the generals got on at all with Davis, who was difficult. Lee did. Of course, part of the problem with Davis was the other generals weren't as good as Lee - except possibly Albert Sidney Johnston, who was killed early in the war.

Its also worth considering that the problems between Davis and other generals were not just the fault of Davis. Joseph Johnston for example was frequently unwilling to share his plans or even much of an inkling of his overall intentions with Davis. This stopped some way short of the disrespect McClellan treated Lincoln with but antagonised Davis since he had every right as Johnston's superior to be kept informed of such matters.

 

[Dreadnought]

Grant or Lee? Simple answer.

Sherman.

 

[Ataxerxes]

Its also worth considering that the problems between Davis and other generals were not just the fault of Davis. Joseph Johnston for example was frequently unwilling to share his plans or even much of an inkling of his overall intentions with Davis. This stopped some way short of the disrespect McClellan treated Lincoln with but antagonised Davis since he had every right as Johnston's superior to be kept informed of such matters.

As I indicated, it definitely worked both ways. I didn't mean to suggest it was all Davis. I certainly wouldnt' rank JJ high on either generalship or getting along with Davis. He spent a lot of his time claiming he should outrank Lee, although his battlefield record wasn't good. Dachs covered AS Johnston pretty well, who I admit I didn't know much about, him dying so early. Actually, I can't think of a Confederate general who did keep Davis informed besides Lee.

I'm curious, how would you rate PGT Beauregard? I keep hearing good and bad things about him. He'd make a great triviial pursuit question about which war he fought in with his name. Some people don't stop and think that Louisiana was part of the Confederacy.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Grant or Lee? Simple answer.

Sherman.

"That's a lovely agrarian economy you have there. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it."

 

[Dachs]

I always thought one of the coolest things about Sherman was how he had his troops dismantle an entire town in the Meridian raid at the beginning of 1864. That always seemed more impressive to me than the March to the Sea. Meridian wasn't simply burned, it was systematically stripped of anything and everything that could conceivably have had military value. That's...horribly efficient.

 

[privatehudson]

As I indicated, it definitely worked both ways. I didn't mean to suggest it was all Davis. I certainly wouldnt' rank JJ high on either generalship or getting along with Davis. He spent a lot of his time claiming he should outrank Lee, although his battlefield record wasn't good. Dachs covered AS Johnston pretty well, who I admit I didn't know much about, him dying so early. Actually, I can't think of a Confederate general who did keep Davis informed besides Lee.

Hard to say really but Johnston did stand out in the various books I've read on the Civil War as being particularly obstinate in this regard. He certainly had some talent but could be very pessimistic and reluctant to take risks with the troops under his command. In a peacetime commander or one who had the luxury of outnumbering the enemy that would be a surmountable issue, in Johnston's case it was a major hindrance.

I'm curious, how would you rate PGT Beauregard? I keep hearing good and bad things about him. He'd make a great triviial pursuit question about which war he fought in with his name. Some people don't stop and think that Louisiana was part of the Confederacy.

I think he was arrogant and argumentative with a mixed record so I don't really rate him that highly. My favourite story about him is that his normally black hair went grey during the war. Friends said this was due to the stress he was under, others said it was because the Union blockades prevented his supply of hair dye getting through!