Grant Grant the "butcher".

And those names were refuted by people who knew him and in real time. It's a problem when we make judgments based on a selective reading of history.
So did Hiram get his reputation via Jubal Early and those ubiquitous lost causers or from his own crowd?
 
I may have missed it, but I don't recall Phil Sheridan of George Thomas writing that Grant was either a butcher or a drunk.
The accusations seemed to come mainly from people who were on the losing side of the war, or lost their commands due to apparent incompetence. To my recollection though, Robert E. Lee would not allow these labels to be applied to General Grant in Lee's presence. Of course I may have forgotten. :smile coffee:
 
I may have missed it, but I don't recall Phil Sheridan of George Thomas writing that Grant was either a butcher or a drunk.
The accusations seemed to come mainly from people who were on the losing side of the war, or lost their commands due to apparent incompetence. To my recollection though, Robert E. Lee would not allow these labels to be applied to General Grant in Lee's presence. Of course I may have forgotten. :smile coffee:

"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." [Robert E. Lee, quoted in S. S. McCormick, The Outlook, Vol. LVI, p. 686]

Lee was also quoted, reportedly by a member of his staff who heard him say it, "Sir, your opinion is a very poor compliment to me. We all thought 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." [James G. Wilson, General Grant, pp. 366-367]
 
But Grant had a perfect opportunity to be a butcher. Sheridan says, at Appamattox, I have them in my hand, all I have to do is close my figurative grip.
All Grant had to say was go ahead Sheridan, because I am a butcher.
He went in another direction though. :hot:
 
"There is no difficulty in composing a final evaluation of Ulysses S. Grant. With him there be no balancing and qualifying, no ifs and buts. He won battles and campaigns, and he struck the blow that won the war. No general could do what he did because of accident or luck or preponderance of numbers and weapons. He was a success because he was a complete general and a complete character. He was so complete that his countrymen have never been able to believe he was real...Grant was, judged by modern standards, the greatest general of the Civil War. He was head and shoulders above any other general on either side as an over-all strategist, as a master of global strategy. Fundamentally Grant was superior to Lee because in a modern total war he had a modern mind, and Lee did not. Lee was the last of the great old-fashioned generals, Grant was the first of the great moderns." [Military Historian T. Harry Williams]

"Grant was necessary to bring the war to a close... his positive qualities, his power to wield force to the bitter end, much entitle him to rank high as a commanding general. His concentration of energies, inflexible purpose, imperturbable long-suffering, his masterly reticence, ignoring either advice or criticism, his magnanimity in all relations, but more than all his infinite trust in the final triumph of his cause, set him apart and alone above all others. With these attributes we could not call him less than great." [Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain]

"The strong and salutary characteristics of both Lee and Grant should live in history as an inspiration to coming generations. Posterity will find nobler and more wholesome incentives in their high attributes as men than in their brilliant career as warriors. General Grant's truly great qualities - his innate modesty, his freedom from every trace of vain-glory or ostentation, his magnanimity in victory, his genuine sympathy for his brave and sensitive foemen, and his inflexible resolve to protect paroled Confederates against any assault... will give him a place in history no less renowned and more to be envied than any other man." [General John B. Gordon, CSA]

"It will be a thousand years before Grant's character is fully appreciated. Grant is the greatest soldier of our time if not all time... he fixes in his mind what is the true objective and abandons all minor ones. He dismisses all possibility of defeat. he believes in himself and in victory. If his plans go wrong he is never disconcerted but promptly devises a new one and is sure to win in the end. Grant more nearly impersonated the American character of 1861-65 than any other living man. Therefore he will stand as the typical hero of the great Civil War in America." [William T. Sherman]

"Criticism cannot deprecate the really great qualities of General Grant. His task was one to tax a Bonaparte. He had determined, unflinching courage and he adds to the laurels of Lee. No other Northern general could have accomplished more against the genius of a soldier. It was Grant, who, in the face of the gravest difficulties, won the war. He deservedly ranks among the greatest of Americans." [Theodore A. Dodge]

And it's too bad that today's southerners who profess to honor the confederate soldiers of the 1860s don't follow the lead of those same soldiers of the 1860s in their appreciation for a truly great man:

"As to my own fate, I know not what is in store for me. I believe the politicians in Washington are bent on the most extreme measures, and if they have their way will stop at no humiliation they can heap on me. My sole reliance is on General Grant. I have faith in his honor and his integrity as a soldier, and do not believe he will permit the terms of my surrender of the parole given me, to be violated." [Robert E. Lee, May, 1865]

"Lee was correct in trusting General Grant, because at that time, Stanton and President Johnson were intending to put Lee under arrest. But Grant declared to Johnson that if any Federal official molested Lee, then he would surrender his commission in the United States army. I have always felt that General Grant should be entitled to the gratitude of all Confederate soldiers for this act." [Joseph E. Johnston]

In 1869, some members of Congress wanted to put a massive painting of Lee surrendering to Grant in the Rotunda of the Capitol. They visited Grant, who was President-elect, to gain his approval. Grant, who was usually calm, got upset and said, "No, gentlemen, it won't do. No power on earth will make me agree to your proposal. I will not humiliate General Lee or our Southern friends in depicting their humiliation and then celebrating the event in the nation's capitol." This immediately ended any discussion of the painting.

"In common with most Southern soldiers, I had a very kindly feelings towards General Grant, not only on account of his magnanimous conduct at Appomattox, but also for his treatment of me at the close of hostilities. I had never called on him, however. If I had done so, and if he had received me even politely, we should both have been subjected to severe criticism, so bitter was the feeling between the sections at the time. General Grant was as much misunderstood in the South as I had been in the North. Like most Southern men, I had disapproved the reconstruction measures and was sore and very restive under military government; but since my prejudices have faded, I can now see that many things which we regarded as being prompted by hostile and vindictive motives were actually necessary, in order to prevent anarchy and to insure the freedom of the newly emancipated slave.

"I had strong personal reasons for being friendly with General Grant. If he had not thrown his shield over me in 1865, I should have been outlawed and driven into exile. When Lee surrendered, my battalion was in northern Virginia, a hundred miles from Appomattox. Secretary of war Stanton invited all soldiers in Virginia to surrender on the same conditions which were offered to Lee's army, but I was excepted. General Grant, who was then all-powerful, interposed, and sent me an offer of the same parole that he had given Gen. Lee. Such a service I could never forget. When the opportunity came, I remembered what he had done for me, and I did all I could for him." [John S. Mosby]

"The facts of my calling upon Grant in 1885 at Mt. McGregor were these: I wanted him to know the Confederate soldiers appreciated his conduct at every surrender during the war, and after the war in Reconstruction days." [Simon Bolivar Buckner]

"No man could be thrown in for any length of time with Grant, without admiring him with all his abilities and respecting him. He was with all his abilities one of the simplest, most confirming and trustful of men. The greatest mistake the Southern people ever made was not realizing that is they had permitted him, he would have been the best friend they had after the war." [John Wise, CSA, Recollections of Thirteen Presidents]
 
My total for Seven Days, Antietam, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, Overland Campaign, Siege of Petersburg, and Appomattox is-

160,000 casualties suffered
210,000 inflicted

Have I left out any battles?

In his talk, Bonekemper just gave the casualty totals, saying that he devoted 40 pages of his book to explaining how he calculated them. Since I haven't read his book, I can't comment on his calculations.
 
In The Myth of the Lost Cause by Edward Bonekemper there are tables backing up the casualty counts. There is a table for Lee and Grant apiece showing which battles they fought and the casualty counts (confederate and union). The tables are on pages 129-130. I don't think its legal to take pictures and upload them. :frown:
 
Last edited:
Does anyone have a source that has overall casualties for Lee and Grant to compare this to?

I have a spreadsheet here.

Grant
Battle casualties received: 147,024 (of which Lee inflicted 109,526 or 75%)
Battle casualties inflicted: 113,491
Surrenders at Fort Donelson, Vicksburg and Appomattox: 66,050

Lee
Battle casualties received: 181,117
Battle casualties inflicted: 236,826

Lee vs Grant directly:
Lee's battle casualties: 75,993 (this includes battles of the Overland and Appomattox campaigns fought by Sheridan, without which this would be around 60,000)
Grant's battle casualties: 109,526 (105,000 if Sheridan excluded)
To which can be added 27,805 paroled

Grant vs other opponents
Rebel casualties: 37,498
Grant's casualties: 43,498
To which some add the Donelson and Vicksburg captures of 38,245

I always find Grant to be a less than stellar battlefield commander who twice got lucky when an incompetent opponent backed themselves into a siege against a river.
 
I have a spreadsheet here.

Grant
Battle casualties received: 147,024 (of which Lee inflicted 109,526 or 75%)
Battle casualties inflicted: 113,491
Surrenders at Fort Donelson, Vicksburg and Appomattox: 66,050

Lee
Battle casualties received: 181,117
Battle casualties inflicted: 236,826

Lee vs Grant directly:
Lee's battle casualties: 75,993 (this includes battles of the Overland and Appomattox campaigns fought by Sheridan, without which this would be around 60,000)
Grant's battle casualties: 109,526 (105,000 if Sheridan excluded)
To which can be added 27,805 paroled

Grant vs other opponents
Rebel casualties: 37,498
Grant's casualties: 43,498
To which some add the Donelson and Vicksburg captures of 38,245

I always find Grant to be a less than stellar battlefield commander who twice got lucky when an incompetent opponent backed themselves into a siege against a river.
Captured or surrendered soldiers are part of casualties. This includes the surrender of Lee to Grants army at Appomattox.

What battles are in your spreadsheet?

Bonekemper has:

Seven Days
Cedar Mountain
Second Manassas
Chantilly
Harpers Ferry
Cramptons Gap and South Mountain
Antietam/Sharpsburg
Fredericksburg
Kelly's Ford
Chancellersville
Brandy Station
Winchester (1863)
Aldie, Middleburg, Upperville
Hanover
Gettysburg
Retreat from Gettysburg
Bristoe Station
Kelly's Ford and Rappahannock Station
Mine Run
Wilderness
Spotsylvania Court House
North Anna River
Cold Harbor
Petersburg Assaults
Petersburg Seige
Appomattox Campaign
 
Last edited:
My total for Seven Days, Antietam, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, Overland Campaign, Siege of Petersburg, and Appomattox is-

160,000 casualties suffered
210,000 inflicted

Have I left out any battles?
Cedar Mountain
Brawner's Farm
Second Manassas
South Mountain
Mine Run Campaign
Gettysburg is more than just the Battle of Gettysburg. It includes 2nd Winchester, Sporting Hill, Hanover, Fairfield, Gettysburg Retreat, etc.
Bristoe Station
Revised
190,000 casualties suffered
243,000 inflicted
 
"There is no difficulty in composing a final evaluation of Ulysses S. Grant. With him there be no balancing and qualifying, no ifs and buts. He won battles and campaigns, and he struck the blow that won the war. No general could do what he did because of accident or luck or preponderance of numbers and weapons. He was a success because he was a complete general and a complete character. He was so complete that his countrymen have never been able to believe he was real...Grant was, judged by modern standards, the greatest general of the Civil War. He was head and shoulders above any other general on either side as an over-all strategist, as a master of global strategy. Fundamentally Grant was superior to Lee because in a modern total war he had a modern mind, and Lee did not. Lee was the last of the great old-fashioned generals, Grant was the first of the great moderns." [Military Historian T. Harry Williams]

"Grant was necessary to bring the war to a close... his positive qualities, his power to wield force to the bitter end, much entitle him to rank high as a commanding general. His concentration of energies, inflexible purpose, imperturbable long-suffering, his masterly reticence, ignoring either advice or criticism, his magnanimity in all relations, but more than all his infinite trust in the final triumph of his cause, set him apart and alone above all others. With these attributes we could not call him less than great." [Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain]

"The strong and salutary characteristics of both Lee and Grant should live in history as an inspiration to coming generations. Posterity will find nobler and more wholesome incentives in their high attributes as men than in their brilliant career as warriors. General Grant's truly great qualities - his innate modesty, his freedom from every trace of vain-glory or ostentation, his magnanimity in victory, his genuine sympathy for his brave and sensitive foemen, and his inflexible resolve to protect paroled Confederates against any assault... will give him a place in history no less renowned and more to be envied than any other man." [General John B. Gordon, CSA]

"It will be a thousand years before Grant's character is fully appreciated. Grant is the greatest soldier of our time if not all time... he fixes in his mind what is the true objective and abandons all minor ones. He dismisses all possibility of defeat. he believes in himself and in victory. If his plans go wrong he is never disconcerted but promptly devises a new one and is sure to win in the end. Grant more nearly impersonated the American character of 1861-65 than any other living man. Therefore he will stand as the typical hero of the great Civil War in America." [William T. Sherman]

"Criticism cannot deprecate the really great qualities of General Grant. His task was one to tax a Bonaparte. He had determined, unflinching courage and he adds to the laurels of Lee. No other Northern general could have accomplished more against the genius of a soldier. It was Grant, who, in the face of the gravest difficulties, won the war. He deservedly ranks among the greatest of Americans." [Theodore A. Dodge]

And it's too bad that today's southerners who profess to honor the confederate soldiers of the 1860s don't follow the lead of those same soldiers of the 1860s in their appreciation for a truly great man:

"As to my own fate, I know not what is in store for me. I believe the politicians in Washington are bent on the most extreme measures, and if they have their way will stop at no humiliation they can heap on me. My sole reliance is on General Grant. I have faith in his honor and his integrity as a soldier, and do not believe he will permit the terms of my surrender of the parole given me, to be violated." [Robert E. Lee, May, 1865]

"Lee was correct in trusting General Grant, because at that time, Stanton and President Johnson were intending to put Lee under arrest. But Grant declared to Johnson that if any Federal official molested Lee, then he would surrender his commission in the United States army. I have always felt that General Grant should be entitled to the gratitude of all Confederate soldiers for this act." [Joseph E. Johnston]

In 1869, some members of Congress wanted to put a massive painting of Lee surrendering to Grant in the Rotunda of the Capitol. They visited Grant, who was President-elect, to gain his approval. Grant, who was usually calm, got upset and said, "No, gentlemen, it won't do. No power on earth will make me agree to your proposal. I will not humiliate General Lee or our Southern friends in depicting their humiliation and then celebrating the event in the nation's capitol." This immediately ended any discussion of the painting.

"In common with most Southern soldiers, I had a very kindly feelings towards General Grant, not only on account of his magnanimous conduct at Appomattox, but also for his treatment of me at the close of hostilities. I had never called on him, however. If I had done so, and if he had received me even politely, we should both have been subjected to severe criticism, so bitter was the feeling between the sections at the time. General Grant was as much misunderstood in the South as I had been in the North. Like most Southern men, I had disapproved the reconstruction measures and was sore and very restive under military government; but since my prejudices have faded, I can now see that many things which we regarded as being prompted by hostile and vindictive motives were actually necessary, in order to prevent anarchy and to insure the freedom of the newly emancipated slave.

"I had strong personal reasons for being friendly with General Grant. If he had not thrown his shield over me in 1865, I should have been outlawed and driven into exile. When Lee surrendered, my battalion was in northern Virginia, a hundred miles from Appomattox. Secretary of war Stanton invited all soldiers in Virginia to surrender on the same conditions which were offered to Lee's army, but I was excepted. General Grant, who was then all-powerful, interposed, and sent me an offer of the same parole that he had given Gen. Lee. Such a service I could never forget. When the opportunity came, I remembered what he had done for me, and I did all I could for him." [John S. Mosby]

"The facts of my calling upon Grant in 1885 at Mt. McGregor were these: I wanted him to know the Confederate soldiers appreciated his conduct at every surrender during the war, and after the war in Reconstruction days." [Simon Bolivar Buckner]

"No man could be thrown in for any length of time with Grant, without admiring him with all his abilities and respecting him. He was with all his abilities one of the simplest, most confirming and trustful of men. The greatest mistake the Southern people ever made was not realizing that is they had permitted him, he would have been the best friend they had after the war." [John Wise, CSA, Recollections of Thirteen Presidents]
As you so often do, Al, you have done a beautiful job of compilation. Thank you for such a moving tribute to Grant.
 
K,

I would like to pursue this accounting, immediately. Can you offer me any more information on the dead animals/waterway incident? Who suggested this? One of the guides? Any sources discussed? I am gobsmacked by this allegation. B
I may have erred in attributing the claim to Ed. I think it may have been Terry who said it, since I just found this 2004 article in which he said the same thing.

[Grant] engaged in an early form of bio-warfare by dumping rotting animal carcasses into a stream that provided the city with drinking water, Winschel said.
Terry Winschel was chief historian at Vicksburg National Military Park for 24 years, has authored half a dozen books on the Vicksburg Campaign, and may be the most expert person on Vicksburg in the country. I have tremendous respect for him, so I'm afraid the ball is in our court to prove him wrong.

Just wanted to get back to you, @Bee, as well as @contestedground, @cash, @shermans_march, @wausaubob and others who have weighed in for Grant on this thread. One of the things that has always made Grant different, in my mind, from so many other commanders in the war has been what I've always seen as his fundamental decency. But perhaps war makes devils of us all.
 
Last edited:
I may have erred in attributing the claim to Ed. I think it may have been Terry who said it, since I just found this 2004 article in which he said the same thing.

[Grant] engaged in an early form of bio-warfare by dumping rotting animal carcasses into a stream that provided the city with drinking water, Winschel said.
Terry Winschel was chief historian at Vicksburg National Military Park for 24 years, has authored half a dozen books on the Vicksburg Campaign, and may be the most expert person on Vicksburg in the country. I have tremendous respect for him, so I'm afraid the ball is in our court to prove him wrong.

Just wanted to get back to you, @contestedground, @cash, @shermans_march, @wausaubob and others who have weighed in for Grant on this thread. One of the things that has always made Grant different, in my mind, from so many commanders in the war has been what I've always seen as his fundamental decency. But perhaps war makes devils of us all.
I just want to know what source he got that claim from.
 
I just want to know what source he got that claim from.
I wished I'd asked Terry about it when I had the chance. Instead, I just agonized about it later to my sister. Ironically, she, who is much more sympathetic to the South than I am, didn't have nearly as much of a problem with it as I did. War is hell, these things happen, he did what would get the job done, etc. I think it didn't disillusion her because she never had Grant on a pedestal to begin with.
 
I may have erred in attributing the claim to Ed. I think it may have been Terry who said it, since I just found this 2004 article in which he said the same thing.

[Grant] engaged in an early form of bio-warfare by dumping rotting animal carcasses into a stream that provided the city with drinking water, Winschel said.
Terry Winschel was chief historian at Vicksburg National Military Park for 24 years, has authored half a dozen books on the Vicksburg Campaign, and may be the most expert person on Vicksburg in the country. I have tremendous respect for him, so I'm afraid the ball is in our court to prove him wrong.

Just wanted to get back to you, @contestedground, @cash, @shermans_march, @wausaubob and others who have weighed in for Grant on this thread. One of the things that has always made Grant different, in my mind, from so many other commanders in the war has been what I've always seen as his fundamental decency. But perhaps war makes devils of us all.
In his book "Triumph and Defeat: The Vicksburg Campaign" Vol 2, page 132, Winschel writes:

upload_2017-6-23_16-47-18.png


Michael Ballard also wrote that it was the retreating confederates that poisoned the water.
 
Back
Top