R.E. Lee -the "Defeatist"

[whitworth]

Was Lee seen as a "defeatist" by many in the upper reaches of the Confederacy command, early in the war?

That his assessment of the war was a little too realistic, and too difficult to contemplate. That one Johnny Reb wasn't going to easily defeat seven or ten Yankees. The fact he wasn't in lock step, in my opinion, with the overly optimistic Confederate hierarchy and generals of 1861.

Few seem to understand the transfer of Lee from Virginia to South Carolina and Georgia, early in the war. Here Lee had resigned his U.S. commission to defend Virginia. In late 1861, he get transferred far to the south, some seven months later. Lee can no longer defend Virginia. Perhaps he recognized his views were too hot for the Confederate leaders in the Confederate national capitol of Richmond.

(Lee's command record - "Virginia's land and naval forces (April 23, 1861); commanding Virginia forces (April 23 July 1861); brigadier general, CSA (May 14, 186 1); general, CSA (from June 14, 186 1); commanding Department of Northwestern Virginia (late July-October 1861); commanding Department of South Carolina, Georgia and Florida (November 8, 186 1-March 3, 1862); and commanding Army of Northern Virginia June 1, 1862-April 9, 1865).")

Perhaps Lee was too blunt in his assessment of defending the western counties of Virginia. Bad news did not travel very well in the early Confederacy. Perhaps Lee intimated that the Confederacy could not defend its entire frontier. Plus, it's clear that Virginia leaders never considered the difficulty in protecting their western counties, when they seceded. Except for a few raids, they never quite did for the entire Civil War.

So perhaps Lee accepted the transfer to South Carolina and Georgia, early in the war, knowing that reality would soon face the Confederate leadership, and experienced wartime officers, would become an absolute necessity.

A year later, the Confederate leadership knew they faced a long war, and then they grasped that Lee's "defeatist" views were hard fact.

[OpnDownfall]

Intellectually, Lee recognized the symbiosis between Va. and the confederacy; as one went the other went also. But, 'the war' for southern independence did not engage his heart as did "His War" to defend Va.
The reason(s) for Lee's decision making concerning the war, the south and Va. were, essentially, emotional, not intellectual (especially concerning Va.)
IMO, rational calculation of the odds concerning the chances of southern success in the war, had very little to do with his siding with Va. in its time of peril.
Believing that it would take the very last ounce of courage and determination of the southern people to win their independence, made Lee a pessimist, but probably not a defeatist, at least not early in the war. But whether Va., or the south, really had what took, carried little weight in choosing Va. over his country.
Others on this board have noted that outside Va. (and probably with Va.) Jackson was Seen as the South's representative of military genius and glory. It was only after Jackson's death that Lee really ascended to his eventual Marbel Man status in southern mythology.
It is likely, that many southern politicians and leaders sensed (rather than knew) that Lee's unconditional loyalty really belonged to Va. and only conditionally to the Confederacy.

[cw1865]

At the beginning of the conflict, Lincoln offers command of the Union forces to Lee at the request of Winfield Scott. Why did Scott regard Lee do highly?

[OpnDownfall]

Scott knew Lee from the War in Mexico, when Lee impressed Scott both as a daring scout and talented Engineering Officer and, of course, as a fellow Virginian.

[larry_cockerham]

Whitworth, you wrote:

"So perhaps Lee accepted the transfer to South Carolina and Georgia, early in the war, knowing that reality would soon face the Confederate leadership, and experienced wartime officers, would become an absolute necessity."

Wake up. Lee wasn't "transferred" anywhere. Those former states were simply added to his command. Apparently he forgot that when the AOT needed a little help with Sherman?

[ole]

I'd always considered Lee's SC and GA assignments as a recognition of Lee's well-known skills as an engineer. Those coasts appeared to be, at the time, vulnerable. That the Union didn't have the strength at the time to take them can certainly be considered a prudent measure.

ole

[larry_cockerham]

Originally Posted by ole

I'd always considered Lee's SC and GA assignments as a recognition of Lee's well-known skills as an engineer. Those coasts appeared to be, at the time, vulnerable. That the Union didn't have the strength at the time to take them can certainly be considered a prudent measure.

ole

While Lee was an admirable (no pun) engineer, I don't think he was interested in working on the coast. Big place with many natural forces at play. This was more an attempt on Davis' part to consolidate the command. Something he was less than adept at. The western theatre and a possible leader who could have managed this area (in my opinion one of the Confederacy's most fateful failings) had not yet developed. Beauregard would probably have been the likely choice or perhaps A. Sidney Johnston who fell at Shiloh. Beau was a piece of work, not a commander.

[whitworth]

"But, 'the war' for southern independence did not engage his heart as did "His War" to defend Va."

Lee perhaps is too complex. However I do not see a rah-rah Confederate general. He must have had some private shock, realizing in 1861, that many Virginia counties are undefendable. How much of these ideas would he convey in private conversation with Virginia and Confederate leadership.

Inquiries were made to Lee on how he would defend Virginia. In dispatches, he seems to have attempted to balance between optimism and pessimism. But how do you balance a response to Virginians, who think it will be easy to run all the Yankees out of Virginia, in a week.

"Wake up. Lee wasn't "transferred" anywhere. Those former states were simply added to his command"

That was his command -South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. After his "supervisory work" in western Virginia, it was his only command. For about a year Lee was in a good "backwater command." Perhaps that is painful for some to contemplate.


R.E. Lee -the "Defeatist" in the eyes of some Confederates

Can you imagine Lee telling Stonewall Jackson, why the western Virginia county of his birth, cannot be held by Confederate forces. I'm sure the Virginia politicians had a list of ten Confederate generals, who could capture Washington in a month. It wouldn't have taken long for Lee to become a "Defeatist" in their eyes.

Perhaps the leadership saw Lee, more an army engineer, and not a military commander who would lead them to early and easy victory in 1861.

The problem was -easy and early victory - by the Confederates was not possible.

Late in the war, a diarist said Lee was an "Emancipationist." Fortunately for the United States, the hard core Confederates ruled to the end.

For me I would call R.E. Lee more the realist, surrounded by many living an illusion. One Johnny Reb could always beat 10 Yankees.