Davis Can Jefferson Davis be Considered a Great Leader and Honorable Man? (poll)

Can Jefferson Davis be Considered a Great Leader and Honorable Man?

  • Yes

    Votes: 29 44.6%
  • No

    Votes: 27 41.5%
  • Don't Know

    Votes: 9 13.8%

  • Total voters
    65

gem

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Can Jefferson Davis be Considered a Great Leader and Honorable Man?
 
Very honorable, and decent unless he didn't like you, then you were not gonna like him!
If I remember the quote correctly, Sam Houston once said of Davis, "Ambitious as Lucifer, cold as a snake", me personally I think Sam Houston would fit that bill better than Davis, but Davis came off that way for a lot of folks. I think it may have to do with his health that Davis gave a bad impression to many, they probably just caught him on a bad day. Over and over again...

As a great leader? I'd say Davis had his moments. In the Mexican War, specifically at the Battle of Buena Vista Davis was good. As Secretary of War, Davis did well. During the Richmond Riots his actions of standing in front of the mob throwing the money from his pockets to the starving rioters of Richmond and how he handled it was brilliant leadership. But his micro-managing the war was an Achille's heel to the Confederacy, along with his fierce loyalty to his friends in command, (Braxton Bragg the biggest example), when it was obvious they needed to be replaced was bad leadership, but good honor.

I voted yes, with Davis there was never a simple explanation, he was a complicated man, often a contradiction, but I'd yes, on a good day lol.
 
Very honorable, and decent unless he didn't like you, then you were not gonna like him!
If I remember the quote correctly, Sam Houston once said of Davis, "Ambitious as Lucifer, cold as a snake", me personally I think Sam Houston would fit that bill better than Davis, but Davis came off that way for a lot of folks. I think it may have to do with his health that Davis gave a bad impression to many, they probably just caught him on a bad day. Over and over again...

As a great leader? I'd say Davis had his moments. In the Mexican War, specifically at the Battle of Buena Vista Davis was good. As Secretary of War, Davis did well. During the Richmond Riots his actions of standing in front of the mob throwing the money from his pockets to the starving rioters of Richmond and how he handled it was brilliant leadership. But his micro-managing the war was an Achille's heel to the Confederacy, along with his fierce loyalty to his friends in command, (Braxton Bragg the biggest example), when it was obvious they needed to be replaced was bad leadership, but good honor.

I voted yes, with Davis there was never a simple explanation, he was a complicated man, often a contradiction, but I'd yes, on a good day lol.

Good assessment. Davis was clearly a principled, honorable man who did great service to the US, and tried to do the same for the CS, even if the results were not always the best.
 
Within the context of his time and community, Davis was an honorable man.
Considering the available candidates to head the rebel 'government', Davis was easily the best available. He had strong experience in public service and came close to being President of the United States- were it not for the split in the Democratic Party.
However, experience does not necessarily make great leaders. This was true of Davis, who was a poor leader.
 
Look, if anyone knew better than to break up, and bring war the Union over slavery, it was Jeff Davis. Not only was he conniving, dictatorial, and micro-management in the extreme on the Southern people, he couldn't even honorably surrender to proper authorities when time came!

Then after all that, he tried to spend the rest of his life spinning the history of what happened before, and during the war, in such a way that slavery was not the true cause of things.

He purposely went against the US Constitution, brought war onto the United States by leading a rebellion against it, and lied about the why of it afterwards.

Not honorable.

Kevin Dally
 
Last edited:
I don't think much of his cause, but he was certainly consistent until the war was over. Then we have his postwar writings, which are appalling and at odds with his prewar beliefs.

As far as Davis as war leader, I've got some respect for how hard he tried. He had a near impossible task, a host of carping critics and some uniformed prima donnas (any day Davis didn't throw a chair at Joe Johnston's head was a personal triumph).
 
Look, if anyone knew better than to break up, and bring war the Union over slavery, it was Jeff Davis. Not only was he conniving, dictatorial, and micro-management in the extreme on the Southern people, he couldn't even honorably surrender to proper authorities when time came!

Then after all that, he tried to spend the rest of his life spinning the history of what happened before, and during the war, in such a way that slavery was not the true cause of things.

He purposely went against the US Constitution, brought war onto the United States by leading a rebellion against it, and lied about the why of it afterwards.

Not honorable.

Kevin Dally

I've always been curious why Davis didn't stay and surrender honorably and got into the whole running away thing. Any thoughts on why he did run away and just kept running till caught? A very ignoble end compared to his generals and enlisted men.
 
I've always been curious why Davis didn't stay and surrender honorably and got into the whole running away thing. Any thoughts on why he did run away and just kept running till caught? A very ignoble end compared to his generals and enlisted men.

I'd imagine the fear that he'd be arrested (which he was), tried for treason, and very possibly be hanged in the end had something to do with it. It wouldn't have been unreasonable at the time to assume that would be a likely fate for him.
 
I've always been curious why Davis didn't stay and surrender honorably and got into the whole running away thing. Any thoughts on why he did run away and just kept running till caught? A very ignoble end compared to his generals and enlisted men.
I understand that the Federal government made it known they would not treat with Confederate Officials, reason why it was the military leaders of the Confederate Forces were left to do that. Also I believe Davis and crew had idea's of getting to the Trans-Miss area to keep prosecuting the war, but I don't know how long THAT idea was going to last. In the end more than several "leaders" in the Confederacy were arrested, but latter released. Which is more "honorable"...stay, surrender, and hope for mercy from your captors, or cut and run, and STILL end up at the mercy of your captors?:O o:

Kevin Dally
 
I'd imagine the fear that he'd be arrested (which he was), tried for treason, and very possibly be hanged in the end had something to do with it. It wouldn't have been unreasonable at the time to assume that would be a likely fate for him.

I agree with your thought that Davis might have thought that, yet Lincoln had never given any indication he wanted to do anything like that with him or any of the Southern Generals. Certainly I could be mistaken, but I thought it wasn't till Johnson took over that there were possible hints about that sort of thing.
 
We all sort of posted at the same time - and then Lincoln's death certainly complicated everything.

If Lee didn't have enough men and had to surrender, why did Davis think there were enough troops in the trans-Mississippi to keep fighting to any end?
 
I'd imagine the fear that he'd be arrested (which he was), tried for treason, and very possibly be hanged in the end had something to do with it. It wouldn't have been unreasonable at the time to assume that would be a likely fate for him.
And yet other Leaders in the Confederacy stayed, took their chances, were arrested, and latter released.

Kevin Dally
 
I think all leaders are both great and bad at times, one of many ways to judge them is whether they were great more than they weren't. In this respect I think Davis has plenty of good and some great moments but probably more that weren't.

Was he a great leader? I think "great" is too much. I'd argue Lee and Grant were great leaders, though Davis IMHO fits somewhere between fairly bad to fairly good.

As far as an "honorable" man? I am definitely distinguishing this from a "good" man a completely different question. Someone can be a complete jerk while being quite honorable. I don't really know. I'm not sure I've heard anything genuinely dishonorable about Davis despite many people who thought he was or wasn't a good man, so I don't really have an opinion.
 
Not sure about Davis being " a terrible leader".
Yes it is absolutely true that Sam Houston and William Sherman at the start of the Civil War where far more realistic in forecasting the end result of the Civil War. On the other hand many revolt's start with unrealistic expectations.
We have debated endlessly if Davis could of led the Confederacy to eventual Independence.
Not sure how Davis ultimately could of achieved that goal.
A. Forty percent of the Southern population was black and either enslaved or if free on the whole heavily discriminated against.
1a. The British proved 80 odd years earlier that blacks if given the opportunity can and will make effective soldiers against those who mistreated and exploited them all their lives.
2a. If given the opportunity slaves will gladly flee for the possibility of a better life.
2. At least ten percent of the white population would support the Union.
3. Many Civil War's involve foreign nations military involvement I.e. The American Revolutionary War.
3a. No foreign nation as far as we know promised secessionist leaders that their nation would militarily intervene or provide financial and material assistance.
4. The eleven Confederate States are out numbered by the other states.
4a. No way to determine if the border states will support the Confederacy and if so how much.
4b. No way to restrict the Union from recruiting overseas.
5. No blue water Navy.
The Confederacy is wholly dependent on exporting agricultural commodities.
Only a large blue water Navy can protect the export of products.
Raider's and blockade runners are all well and good but in the long term they are simply an inadequate alternative to a blue water Navy.
6. Industrial output.
Yes the Confederacy had some industry but size matters. Bigger is always better.
With all the above basic advantages the Union had even a brilliant Confederate leader could not over come them.
Leftyhunter
 
  • Like
Reactions: gem
Can Jefferson Davis be Considered a Great Leader and Honorable Man?
Davis and the other secessionist leaders greatly ignored the fact that prior the Civil War black men could and did fight well in the American Revolutionary War, the St. George's Legion in the French Revolutionary War and most importantly in the Haitian War of Independence.
Leftyhunter
 
Good assessment. Davis was clearly a principled, honorable man who did great service to the US, and tried to do the same for the CS, even if the results were not always the best.

President Davis did the best he could under adverse circumstances. He made mistakes, but so did Lincoln; all national leaders do. Unfortunately, the president had less room for error than most of them.
 
Back
Top