- Joined
- Dec 28, 2008
- Location
- Pennsylvania
I was just browsing through an index of Confederate and Union Generals, some of which I was familiar with, and many I had never heard of. I got to thinking about those we all know--Lee, Meade, Longstreet, Reynolds, Pickett, Hooker--and those whose records were listed but whom I had rarely or never heard of, and I wondered what the difference was.
What makes a general "memorable" to history, and what makes one easily forgotten? Is it their record, their medals, their personality, their self-promotion--who they knew, what they did after the war, etc.? Any one thing, or a combination? I was able to, just in browsing the list, find familiar generals and unfamiliar generals (to me) who had, on paper, similiar military records. But what, in your opinion, sets the R.E. Lees apart from the H.A. Barnums?
Your thoughts?
Pam
What makes a general "memorable" to history, and what makes one easily forgotten? Is it their record, their medals, their personality, their self-promotion--who they knew, what they did after the war, etc.? Any one thing, or a combination? I was able to, just in browsing the list, find familiar generals and unfamiliar generals (to me) who had, on paper, similiar military records. But what, in your opinion, sets the R.E. Lees apart from the H.A. Barnums?
Your thoughts?
Pam