Lee Lee's opinion of Grant

DWMack65

Private
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Location
Transplanted yankee now residing in SC
I was reading a book about Grant by James Marshall-Cornwall. On the baack is a quote by General Lee in which he says, "Now, I have carefully searched the millitary records of both ancient and and modern history, and have never found Grant's superior as a general. I doubt his superior can be found in all history". High praise from Grant's Counterpart in the war, right? But Lee also was quoted as saying in a letter to his son, I think, "Grant's talent seems to lie in aquiring superior numbers". Is Lee talking out of both sides of his mouth. I know it's not really that important, but he just seems to contradict himself regarding his feelings about Grant. Just wanted to get some thoughts from you guys.
 
I've never heard that quote and it sounds suspicious to me. Lee thought highly of Grant, but when asked after the war who was the most capable Union general he faced, he answered without hesitation McClellan.
 
I'm not so sure about it either, but context is everything. Where and to whom is Lee supposed to have said the first quote? You might say something different in the presence of a lot of old Union men than you'd say in a letter to your son. And for that matter, what was the context of the quote in the letter to the son?
 
This is what I found on it. It's a, "I heard him say." Taken in the context shown, Lee was complimenting himself by exaggerating Grant.


I think this site may be the "Grant Shrine".

http://library.msstate.edu/usgrant/newsletter2.asp

The following conversation of General Robert E. Lee is taken from the biography of Grant by James Grant Wilson.
Within a few weeks of Grant's death, a member of General Lee's staff said to a friend, who had mentioned Hancock's high opinion of his old chief: "That reminds me of Lee's opinion of your great Union general, uttered in my presence in reply to a disparaging remark on the part of a person who referred to Grant as a 'military accident, who had no distinguishing merit, but had achieved success through a combination of fortunate circumstances.' General Lee looked into the critic's eye steadily, and said: 'Sir, your opinion is a very poor compliment to me. We all thought [pg. 26] Richmond, protected as it was by our splendid fortifications and defended by our army of veterans, could not be taken. Yet Grant turned his face to our capital, and never turned it away until we had surrendered. Now, I have carefully searched the military records of both ancient and modern history, and have never found Grant's superior as a general. I doubt if his superior can be found in all history.'"​
 
If Lee considered tenacity a military skill, I could see how Lee might say both things.
 
I do know that Colonel Marshall spoke at Grant's funeral a lengthy eulogy.

I have only seen in published in my grandfather's book "Under Both Flags," published in 1869 -- Colonel Marshall's Eulogy of General Grant, pages 128 through 130.

Knowing that Colonel Marshall was General Lee's military secretary, present at Appomattox and outlived General Lee, in addition to being the grand-nephew of Justice Marshall; the message he gave was that Grant was knightly and noble and General Lee thought so also.

Grant's terms, according to Colonel Marshall, was carefully written as to not humiliate the Confederate Army. The terms addressed the shedding of American Blood...not South, not North --not Confederate, not Union/Federal. This impressed General Lee, with emotion according to Colonel Marshall.

Since Colonel Marshall acknowledged that several others of General Lee's staff were present at Grant's funeral services --had Colonel Marshall misspoken anything touching on General Lee's words, feelings and impressions would have been countered.

Just some thoughts.

Respectfully submitted,
M. E. Wolf
 
Perhaps that comment about superior numbers and resources came from Lee's farewell to his troops. (If I'm not mistaken, Marshall drafted that.) Lee said that in his statement - I think he believed it and it consoled his men at least somewhat. He did truly believe the ANV couldn't be beat any other way, or he would not have ordered Pickett's Charge. Lee is the last person to enhance his own reputation in a backhanded way, though! If Lee really said that about Grant then he really meant it - I don't think it was a clever manipulation to bump up his reputation by exaggerating Grant's. He wasn't the only Confederate general to praise Grant - Forrest called him "magnificent". Longstreet also respected him, having known him for a good deal longer since they were related by marriage. Richard Ewell, before Grant was in command, expressed a hope the Yankees would forget they had him! None of these generals were any slouches at being great themselves and altogether their opinion seems to be uncommonly high.
 
This is what I found on it. It's a, "I heard him say." Taken in the context shown, Lee was complimenting himself by exaggerating Grant.


I think this site may be the "Grant Shrine".

http://library.msstate.edu/usgrant/newsletter2.asp

The following conversation of General Robert E. Lee is taken from the biography of Grant by James Grant Wilson.
Within a few weeks of Grant's death, a member of General Lee's staff said to a friend, who had mentioned Hancock's high opinion of his old chief: "That reminds me of Lee's opinion of your great Union general, uttered in my presence in reply to a disparaging remark on the part of a person who referred to Grant as a 'military accident, who had no distinguishing merit, but had achieved success through a combination of fortunate circumstances.' General Lee looked into the critic's eye steadily, and said: 'Sir, your opinion is a very poor compliment to me. We all thought [pg. 26] Richmond, protected as it was by our splendid fortifications and defended by our army of veterans, could not be taken. Yet Grant turned his face to our capital, and never turned it away until we had surrendered. Now, I have carefully searched the military records of both ancient and modern history, and have never found Grant's superior as a general. I doubt if his superior can be found in all history.'"​

Thanks for this.
 
Just thinking....what's the date of the letter to the son? Maybe he grew to respect Grant more and more as time went on.....


General Robert E. Lee, C.S.A., to someone who had slandered Grant:
"Sir, if you ever again presume to speak disrespectfully of General Grant in my presence, either you or I will sever his connection with this University. (Yet Lee had a slightly different opinion in 1864, when he wrote his son: "His talent and strategy consists in accumulating overwhelming numbers.")"
http://www.granthomepage.com/grantgeneral.htm


also here. No date I don't think, but its in this book

http://books.google.com/books?id=py_MFhZf9qIC&pg=PA378&lpg=PA378&dq=General+Grant's+talent+overwhelming+numbers&source=bl&ots=NDqcdMNaNp&sig=GmqO2sVRiOpXXwFMHkSOBx78wSY&hl=en&ei=1aoyTazFIYKglAffqv2rCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=General%20Grant's%20talent%20overwhelming%20numbers&f=false
 
I'm sure Lee respected Grant more after the surrender than before, due to his generous terms.

I don't think Lee was dazzled by Grant's strategy or tactics. Lee knew that Grant had blundered several times, giving the Lee the chance to strike a powerful blow that would have turned Grant back.

I think Lee made it well understood when he was trying to assemble the information for his memoirs, that it was the numbers and resources, more than the General. He wanted it made public, the odds his men fought against.

dvrmte
 
General Robert E. Lee, C.S.A., to someone who had slandered Grant:
"Sir, if you ever again presume to speak disrespectfully of General Grant in my presence, either you or I will sever his connection with this University. (Yet Lee had a slightly different opinion in 1864, when he wrote his son: "His talent and strategy consists in accumulating overwhelming numbers.")"
http://www.granthomepage.com/grantgeneral.htm


also here. No date I don't think, but its in this book

http://books.google.com/books?id=py...l Grant's talent overwhelming numbers&f=false

I can't find the letter nor attribution online. If you would be so kind? If properly attributed, the date and which son should be given. That would tell us a lot.
 
I can't find the letter nor attribution online. If you would be so kind? If properly attributed, the date and which son should be given. That would tell us a lot.


It was his Son, Custis. I have read attributions in several places, which is why I know the quote. But as for finding the actual transcript of the letter, I haven't found it.

http://books.google.com/books?id=zB_-R1rE7m0C&pg=PA342&lpg=PA342&dq=His+talent+and+strategy+consists+in+accumulating+overwhelming+numbers&source=bl&ots=ZI3ODUSt8S&sig=5mxU-s7JC88UDpp6Ljy2oAVuvSU&hl=en&ei=DWczTeH8OIGdlgfisLkR&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CC8Q6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=His%20talent%20and%20strategy%20consists%20in%20accumulating%20overwhelming%20numbers&f=false
 
Taken in the context shown, Lee was complimenting himself by exaggerating Grant.
The same could be said of Lee's speaking of McClellan as the most capable general he faced (and subsequently whipped like a rented mule). So not only did it take an awesome general to beat Lee, Lee was also able to beat other awesome generals. Lee must be pretty awesome himself!

Of course, it's always polite to compliment your opponent no matter what you really think of his skills.
 
Lee's comment is from a letter written to his son Custis in July of 1864, when he'd just been treed in Petersburg. In context, it says something considerably different:

quote

"...Where do we get sufficient troops to oppose Grant? He is bringing to him now the Nineteenth Corps, and will bring every man he can get. His talent and strategy consists in accumulating overwhelming numbers. I see it stated in the papers that the enemy has abandoned the Trans-Miss. country. Is it so? ..."

unquote

Source: "Life and Letters of Robert Edward Lee: Soldier and Man" by John William Jones Pages 306-307

Footnote 9 in this link explains Lee's thinking when making the remark:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Rs...&resnum=1&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

He was worried that Grant could get reinforcements from somewhere and he (Lee) couldn't.
 
I would say General Lee had some respect for General Grant. A common sence look at it. Grant was a “put your head down and bull through” type of General. Lee knew this. Likewise, by the time Grant came East, well the Northern war production was making more than the Union Armies could ever use. And the Southern Armies, logistically, were on their last legs. Just one example was the Union Infantrymen were required to fire 80 rounds per day while in the Petersburg trenches. The ANV soldiers we scrambling around trying to find all the Union spent bullets (to be remolded), and then the one with the most weight of spent bullets each day would be granted a day out of the trenches (which he used to forage for food). Further, Lee knew that if Grant maneuvered him into a war of attrition (like Petersburg), and even if the Union Army lost 2 men for every 1 loss in the ANV, Lee and his staff would inevitably be standing with their swords by themselves facing Grant with at least 3 or 4 Corps. And, Grant was able to trap Lee in this war of attrition, and Lee knew it. Did Lee respect him, yes, in a degree as a General that had the numbers and material and was going to use them, which Grant did (which his predesessors hadn't).
 
Back
Top