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.
Very Good Point Whitworth, despite his unassuming demeanor, Lee had a pretty big ego, very counscious of his lineage And (very importantly) his familial relationship to George Washington, against whom he always compared himself and his actions. It seem that he felt it necessary to fight to the last extremity to make up for the fact that he failed where Washington succeeded, a very severe blow, IMO, to his ego.
We can never really know when Lee 'knew' the war was lost. I do not believe that, objectively, he really thought the south could win the war. He was fighting for Va. and his own self image, as a patriotic Virginian.
Certainly, during Grant's Overland Campaign, (and especially from the Petersberg Lines) if you read his communications to Davis, his dire predictions of the results of his Not receiving significant reinforcements and supplies, when he knew that such reinforcements and supplies could not be forthcoming (Sherman firmly controlling the AoT) one can assume that he was inferring to Davis that the war was lost, without his actually having to state that unpleasant fact.
When should Lee have realized that the war was unwinable? ...
Lee was not fooled. He understood by late 1864 how bad things were, and seems to have privately indicated to his government how bad the long-term view was. I am sure he knew, for example, that he could not hold Richmond-Petersburg once Spring came with good campaigning weather; he indicated the distinct possibility of this to Davis.
But it is only in September of 1864 that the Confederacy's fate becomes clear. Before the fall of Atlanta, it was quite possible that Lincoln would lose the Fall election and that a war-weary North would negotiate some kind of settlement. In August, Lincoln was depressed enough to believe it was what would happen.
As long as that possibility existed, any Confederate commander should have refused to concede defeat. Doing anything else would be a disservice to his cause, an encouragement to the enemy. It was Lee's duty at that point to fight just as hard as he could and to reject defeat.
By mid-October, everything has changed. Atlanta fallen, Farragut at Mobile Bay, Sheridan's victories in the Shenandoah made Union victory seem clear. At that point, Confederate commanders still need to be scratching for every advantage they can find, in the fading hope Lincoln will lose.
After Lincoln wins, it is clear the Union will continue the war into 1865. This is very bad for the South. It shortly gets worse, as Sherman rips through Georgia to Savannah and Hood heads to disaster at Franklin and Nashville. By the New Year, no intelligent soldier could have held out realistic hope that the Confederacy could continue to fight in the field against the Union. As Sherman tramped across the Carolinas and Confederate ports fell, hope became a forgotten thing.
Somewhere in there, Lee has the duty to make this clear to Davis. I think he tried, but never bluntly said: "We have lost. Take whatever terms they will offer" Davis, seemingly living in a dream world, refused to seek a negotiated peace that did not leave an independent Confederacy.
Lee's duty in here is two-fold. One side is to make the most bristling and threatening impression he can, so that the Confederacy has some strength to negotiate from. The other is to show Davis clearly how hopeless this situation is.
Before Five Forks, resistance still had some effect. By Appomattox, further fighting was useless loss of life. Lee played the string out, but he didn't go past what he should have been expected to do, IMHO.
Davis, OTOH, seems to me to have put his own vision and hope ahead of the fate of his people. I see far more to blame him for than Lee.
I recall reading recently that the Confederates felt fairly confident into the fall of 1864, that despite the losses of the Overland Campaign, they felt they had given better than they got. In hindsight, 1864 was seen as the year of decline.
In another context, Max Hastings, the British military historian wrote that the time before the end of a conflict was one of maximum danger and chaos, as the leadership urge a fight to the death, command and control degrade, etc.
IMO Lee maintained what he considered a perfect subservience to his Commander-in-Chief that he apparently modeled on his understanding of the relationship George Washington had maintained with the Continental Congress.
The question inherent in Whitworth's Post, is whether such an ideal was what was needed from Lee in 1864-1865?
IMO Lee maintained what he considered a perfect subservience to his Commander-in-Chief that he apparently modeled on his understanding of the relationship George Washington had maintained with the Continental Congress.
The question inherent in Whitworth's Post, is whether such an ideal was what was needed from Lee in 1864-1865?
I think the time periods need to be defined better to study this question. I see them this way:
1) May to August, 1864
-- steadfast fighting of the Union is the only duty. Vistory still possible.
-- No decisive Union triumphs. Lee holds Richmond, Hood/Johnston hold Atlanta. Early's raid on Washington.
2) September to November, 1864
-- Things going badly, but maybe Lincoln will lose the election
-- Atlanta falls. Farragut wins at Mobile Bay. Sheridan victories in the Shenandoah.
3) December 1864 to March 1865
-- Holding on, maintaining a front, as things get worse.
-- Sherman's March to the Sea and through the Carolinas. Hood defeated at Franklin & Nashville. Fall of Ft. Fisher and Charleston.
4) April 1865
-- The end
-- Union breakthroughs. Confederate forces melting away or overwhelmed.
In phases 1 & 2, Lee could not have resigned or surrendered his army. To do so would have been virtually an act of treason, abandoning his country in a time of need.
In phase 3, Lee should be urging Davis to look to the future and make peace on whatever terms he can get. Lee did at least some of that, but perhaps not as sternly and bluntly as he should have.
In phase 4, all hope rapidly evaporates. Lee does what he can and then surrenders to avoid the useless shedding of blood.
Opn Dpwmfall, "perfect subservient" is the perfect description of Lee's thinking as regards the commander in chief, Jefferson Davis. Jefferson Davis was a graduate of West Point, a soldier in war -The Mexican War and Secretary of War of the United States in the mid-1850's.
He would express his ideas and not attempt to force them on Davis. One wonders if Lee had been a little stronger.
Yes Lee was a product of that Virginia hierachy, where a Washington, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe would lead a citizenry that would follow. A different system than the one we follow today. Our's is a little more democratic.
And of course, Lee's father was still the noted general of the Revolution, even if he died in debt. Lee noted in a letter to his wife of his visit to his father's grave on one of the Georgia barrier islands, early in the war.
I read that Lee's father's cousin was the presenter of the 10th amendment, for adoption, to the U.S. Constitution, which fostered a belief by many that the states held primary power in the constitution. A thought which would lead to civil war.
Yes, Lee was perfectly subservient to Jefferson Davis, right up to the surrender at Appomattox Courthouse.
Lee conducted himself through his life and the Civil War, with one eye in the mirror of the past and the other on the history books to be written about him later. What the history books said about Robert E. Lee was much more important to Lee, than what the history books said about the cause of Southern Independence.
This is not a criticism of Lee's character nor his generalship, merely an observation that his style was a conscious construction of a 'Legendary' persona and that it happened to fit in with the conscious building of a 'Marble Man' mythos constructed after his death, by other men.
Lee became a legendary figure, that led the south into history wrapped in the mantle of the 'Lost Cause' Carefully avoiding any admission that perhaps, Lee had more than a little to do with the losing of that 'cause'
To Robert Edward Lee, the cause was more important than the results of the war. Lee was in a position in history and on the field that he could not escape. It was his destiny. Certainly a commander of his level of experience and an open eye knew the war was effectively over perhaps prior to Gettysburg. Supplies were few and far between and there were few Southerners left standing eligible for recruitment. A partial political solution resulting from the grand scheme to bring pressure on Washington might have helped the cause as far as long term settlement of southern grievances were concerned. He fought to the end, albeit at a slower pace. No choice.
He fought to the end, albeit at a slower pace. No choice.
Amen. For a man like Lee, giving up must have been the ultimate degradation. Calling a halt was Davis' job. Something drove him to keep the farce going after it was clear to everyone that it was over. Pride? Hope? Grit? I have my my opinion. 'Spect each of you has yours.
Ole
__________________ 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
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Lee the Enigma 
Linear Mode
