Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
When should Lee have realized that the war was unwinable? If a great general as most agree, he surely would have come to an earlier conclusion, than some of the other Confederate generals? Certainly some questioning after the fall of Atlanta? Or even after Savannah fell? Or after Hood got his army destroyed at Franklin and Nashville? All occuring in 1864, some months before Appomattox was even a near reality?
Maybe that was the great failing of the great general. Lee could not accept the "demerit" of defeat, even how clear the reality was.
Lee in reality fought to the near absolute end. He complained of desertions right to the near end. He only passingly mentioned how long the Confederacy had fought against overwhelming odds.
But, except for getting his small force wiped out at Appomattox, Lee kept the war going when the war was over, long over.
Maybe it was the demerit of defeat. Robert E. Lee had avoided demerits for nearly all his life.
NO!!
On March 2. 1865
He sent a letter to Grant asking about making a peace with the south rejoining the union. Grant replied stating that was Pres. Lincoln domain.
Lee went to Davis and learned Davis would only accept a peace where the confederacy was a independent nation.
If we accept Lee as a great general, why did he continue the war long after it was lost.
Years ago, I read a "non-battle" book on the Civil War, and it was said a woman was at the Lee home, after the war. It seemed that Lee was deep in thought and the woman asked what troubled him. The answer as I recall was that Lee was thinking of all the soldiers who died after the war was lost.
In a two person dialogue, who can really say if it happened. But a general, especially one as experienced, on reflection knew that the war was lost and proved one serious demerit to his actions.
I've also read that Lee never warned the Virginia leadership of any serious consequences of secession for Virginia. Would Lee have not a single doubt about success?
Maybe the answer to Lee is in this letter. While others were saying that year, that one Johnny Reb could lick seven Yankees, Lee wrote in January, 1861 to one of his sons.
..."If the Union is dissolved, the government disrupted, I shall return to my native state and share the miseries of my people...."
"Share The Miseries Of My People..." Maybe Lee did not see victory even before Fort Sumter. But he had no choice; he had to share the miseries. The word is such a negative word, one would probably not find it, in a letter from any other future Confederate general, early in the war.
For Lee, the only action was one of loyalty to his home state . . ."and share the miseries of my people."
Lee clearly saw a difficult future for Virginia.
I have great sympathy and respect for Gen. Lee. Without doubt he agonized over his decision to leave the Army and go with Virginia. I have no doubt that he felt it was his duty and the right thing to do. However, I still feel that he fits the description of a traitor to the United States which educated him and made him what he was. It was not the State of Virginia that paid for his education at West Point where he learned the art of War and it was not the armed forces of Virginia that gave him his rise to fame in Mexico. Yes, Lee rose by his own ability but it was the United States Government, through its Army, that made him what he was and brought out his ability and when that Government was threatened he turned his back on it. He will always be a tainted and tarnished and tarnished hero to me. The same goes for all Confederates of any rank who were educated or rose to prominence in the US Government Service.
I can agree with the above, except I do quibble about how much Lee 'agonized' over his decision. I am sure he felt grief and even anguish, over 'having' to make such a decision, but IMO there was little, or no, doubt in his own mind of what his decision would be.
To be honest with you using the term traitor is too strong. The Confederacy/southern States are not 'foreign' - Lee is not selling out the US to Mexico/England, etc.
At the beginning of the conflict, I think its fair for individuals to express a duty of loyalty to one side or the other; if they should subsequently change allegiances, then the term 'traitor' can be applied.
What made me use the term "agonized" was the story's one hears about Lee pacing the floor while in his room writing his letter of resignation. I guess the agony is assumed. I agree with the idea of "grief and anguish."
As for the term traitor being too strong I disagree. Lee chose alliegence to someother power than that of the United States. I do believe he had to take an oath to the United States upon entering West Point. Someone more knowledgeable than I will have to speak to that topic, but if he did he broke it. Even without an oath, in my opinion, he turned his back on the Government that educated and trained him and sided with its enemy. Maybe I am applying too strict a a definition of traitor, but thats what I believe.
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
What made me use the term "agonized" was the story's one hears about Lee pacing the floor while in his room writing his letter of resignation. I guess the agony is assumed. I agree with the idea of "grief and anguish."
As for the term traitor being too strong I disagree. Lee chose alliegence to someother power than that of the United States. I do believe he had to take an oath to the United States upon entering West Point. Someone more knowledgeable than I will have to speak to that topic, but if he did he broke it. Even without an oath, in my opinion, he turned his back on the Government that educated and trained him and sided with its enemy. Maybe I am applying too strict a a definition of traitor, but thats what I believe.
Lee claimed allegiance to his native state, Virginia, which as I recall was the first American colony and way up front on statehood. The Confederacy, in their opinion, was trying to uphold the Constitution and improve on the conditions required therein. (I shall duck at this point to await the incoming rounds, a trick I learned from Ole)
__________________ Ancestors in US Army: 13th TN Cav; 10th TN Cav; 3rd NC Inf
Ancestors in CSA Army: 48th VA; 63rd VA, 5th NC Cav; 37th NC
Wife and Grandson's CSA: 15th AL, 51st GA, 41st TN; 36th TN; GA Mil 1197 Dist
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
