Grant Grant the demigod

[Nathanb1]

I didn't mean dc comics superhero. I meant that their reputation tends to elevate them beyond mortal men, so that their mistakes are interpreted as a product of the situation and not a flaw in themselves personally. I perhaps should have used more applicable words in the OP.

Should have been with us at Vicksburg last month...we saw a lot of mistakes and failures attributed to Grant. But he was like that itsy-bitsy spider and kept working. Obviously, after the Civil War, he was lionized (not in Vicksburg) and given the usual fulsome credit we give to military heroes right after they're victorious; but the poor guy took a beating for many, many years, and not just by Lost Cause proponents.

 

[jackt62]

Grant certainly had his share of military blunders (surprised at Shiloh, getting bogged down in the Wilderness, multiple failures to take Petersburg in June 1864), but overall he was a winning commander so you can't beat that record.

 

[unionblue]

I have the pictures of my three greatest American heroes on the wall of my den.

Washington, Lincoln, and Grant.

 

[Cavalry Charger]

Grant Cottage Historic Site hosted a panel discussion on Grant: Mythical Hero or Mere Mortal this past season that some may find interesting in light of the OP: (Notice: The program runs 1.5 hours)View attachment 334301

I have watched this now and found it very interesting and enjoyable.

There are a couple of things I'd like to comment on.

First, the focus on Grant and his horsemanship. We hear so little of this normally, and there's no doubt Grant had a real connection with horses. I do remember hearing and sharing a story here at one time about Grant being a toddler and ending up in a corral with some horses. It was brought to his mother's attention and she seemed unconcerned, but for the life of me now I can't remember the quote. The upshot of it was that she was confident even the toddler Ulysses was safe around horses. It certainly raised my motherly eyebrows!

I was also interested to hear the discussion around Grant's drinking. Seems a lot of that has been discussed along the same lines in the recent thread here. I was most surprised to see one of the panel agreeing with Chernow and not even questioning his conclusion.

The last thing is probably the questions from the audience. Every possible negative focus was put on Grant, including his failed financial deal as President, his Indian policy and expulsion of the Jews. In spite of these being the negatives, and the ones that often raise the most questions, I thought the panelists did a great job of dealing with each of these issues and highlighting Grant the man.

The notion of Grant having 'Asperger's' was also interesting. I would never have considered it, but it brought about some interesting discussion also.

All in all, I greatly appreciate you sharing that video. It was wonderful to see these experts give their opinions on Grant, and each had something unique to add. I am also surprised to see what a young man Frank Scatturo is for all his achievements!

 

[Cavalry Charger]

I do remember hearing and sharing a story here at one time about Grant being a toddler and ending up in a corral with some horses. It was brought to his mother's attention and she seemed unconcerned, but for the life of me now I can't remember the quote. The upshot of it was that she was confident even the toddler Ulysses was safe around horses.

Well, I've found the information I was looking for which comes from Brooks D. Simpson's biography on Grant:

"As a small boy he liked to go out in the stable and sit beside his four-legged friends. Aware of the damage an errant hoof might cause, a neighbour shared her alarm with Hannah Grant. Calmly, Hannah Grant smiled. 'Horses seem to understand Ulysses.'"

 

[Dead Parrott]

The only true demigod in the entire ACW was George McClellan … just ask him.

 

[BillO]

I have the pictures of my three greatest American heroes on the wall of my den.

Washington, Lincoln, and Grant.

Washington, Jefferson and Lee for me. One out of three isn't too bad.

 

[Canadian]

Why do we give superhuman attributes to people like Grant, Lee, and Lincoln. I know they were great men, but they were only human. Likewise for any famous women of the civil war. Admin, please move this thread if needed.

I don't think Grant has been turned into a demigod the way Lincoln and Lee have been. Quite the opposite among the general public, even now after a lot of positive reappraisals. It took a century and three quarters for West Point to honor him with a statue. He still gets a lot of negative press.

 

[Krieger]

I don't think Grant has been turned into a demigod the way Lincoln and Lee have been. Quite the opposite among the general public, even now after a lot of positive reappraisals. It took a century and three quarters for West Point to honor him with a statue. He still gets a lot of negative press.

Yeah, I've only gotten the impression that recently, whenever Grant is talked about by those interested in the subject, there are usually more positives said about him than negatives (which ought to be expected when talking about any victorious commander, frankly). That's about it though, nowhere close to becoming a "demigod". I think it's accurate and fair to say that nowadays his positive attributes are usually given the credit and attention that they haven't really gotten since perhaps the 1880s and his negative attributes aren't relentlessly hammered in so much. I'm sure most the general public doesn't really know much about Grant or care either way no matter how many favorable biographies are written on him.

That said I think I get where the OP is coming from. When the successes of all the combined efforts of everyone in an entire army, from the privates to the regimental commanders to the corps commanders, are ultimately listed as a "Grant win" or a "Lee win" for simplicity's sake (which we all do, of course), it does make them come across as larger than life and gives them more credit than they actually deserve. Obviously the commanding general isn't the one pulling tens of thousands of triggers all day long, leading every attack and rallying every broken unit, innovating/improvising every tactical maneuver and making every necessary sacrifice, and without underlings to do all of those tasks the commander would just be a single man with no real power at all. It's hard not to look at it that way when certain commanders, say Napoleon or Alexander the Great, so completely dominate the stories of their battles and campaigns with their personalities and flair (not to say that they didn't have tactical genius, they very clearly did), but give them unreliable/incompetent subordinates or degrade the quality of their troops enough and their "military genius" disintegrates as soon as the battle commences. I'm sure there have also been plenty of ridiculed loser generals and other officers throughout history who would have been great commanders had they not been placed in difficult or impossible situations (that nearly happened to Washington when he tried to defend New York in 1776).

 

[American87]

Grant and Lee were both fantastic genereals. Why is Mozart so famous? Beetoven? Picasso? They're famous because they're good at what they do. Grant and Lee are just Picassos of warfare.

 

[American87]

I don't think Grant has been turned into a demigod the way Lincoln and Lee have been. Quite the opposite among the general public, even now after a lot of positive reappraisals. It took a century and three quarters for West Point to honor him with a statue. He still gets a lot of negative press.

Lincoln may have stolen much of Grant's thunder. Lincoln is THE Northern hero, because he signed the Emancipation Proclamation and managed the war before Grant even won Vicksburg. Grant was just a general, albeit a really good one, who won the war. Also, he was a Democrat. Yes he served as a Republican president, but before the war was a Democrat. This doesn't bode well in the politcally correct scheme of things. Look at McClellan, for example. He gets a bad rep in many cases because he was a Democrat who opposed Lincoln's war policy.

 

[Cavalier]

I have never been a fan of Grant but am beginning to change my views of him. Never got the impression he was regarded as a demigod.

I was very surprised when I read that he came upon a confederate soldier who was washing in a creek and had a conversation with him. If I remember correctly they both go on their way after speaking socially. What I found odd is Grant's remark that he did not attempt to garner military information from the man. On thinking about it I believe it may have been part of the Victorian sense of honor. I never thought of Grant in quite that way.

John