Member Review Grant's Memoirs

[35th MA InfRegt]

We have grants word in his memoir. If you are saying it's untrue I'd like to see it. Please provide documentation of Sherman's movements during the donelson campaign so that we know he couldn't have been in smithland

I checked an online copy (Hathitrust) of Sherman's Memoirs. He never mentions Smithland at all. He was on February 13th, 1862, ordered by Halleck to go to Paducah and assume command of the District of Cairo. Eicher & Eicher (page 485) list Sherman as formally assigned to the District of Cairo on February 14th, 1862 On reaching Paducah, he found a dispatch from Halleck dated February 15th, 1862 ordering Sherman to forward " everything you can spare" to Grant at Fort Donelson. Fort Donelson surrendered the following day (the 16th). This, including the text of Halleck's two messages, can be found on page 221 of Sherman's Memoirs as paginated in the edition I checked on Hathitrust. Given this timeline, far as I can tell, Grant's memory of Sherman being at Smithland during the siege of Fort Donelson would appear to be in error. It is a fairly trivial error in my opinion, but even as an admirer of Grant, I see no point in declining to acknowledge that this claim appears to be an error.

Memoirs of General William T. Sherman / by himself

 

[David Moore]

An interesting aspect of Grant's Memoirs is that John Rawlins and Elihu Washburne are barely mentioned in them. Without those two men there may never have been a General Grant.
A good read and good history aren't the same thing. The problem is people especially people with a beginning or casual interest in the War take the Memoirs as gospel. I kind of did until I broadened my reading.

 

[JackADriscoll]

The thing that challenges me with memoirs is differentiating between deliberately lying, not remembering the truth, deliberate lies of omission, or just not thinking it important. Since that seems that may not have happened (I also think it very trivial) is something like that deliberate and to what end? I'm not sure that can be answered.

 

[35th MA InfRegt]

The thing that challenges me with memoirs is differentiating between deliberately lying, not remembering the truth, deliberate lies of omission, or just not thinking it important. Since that seems that may not have happened (I also think it very trivial) is something like that deliberate and to what end? I'm not sure that can be answered.

Grant having a poor memory of events or relatively minor facts that had occurred over twenty years previously would be my guess rather than a deliberate lie. Remember, Grant is busy dying at the time he is writing the Memoirs, and under tremendous emotional stress, so with the best of intentions, and even assuming his fact-checkers were up to snuff, errors of this sort are all but inevitable. Deliberate lying and lies by omission concerning matters of importance (like being surprised at Shiloh) are another matter entirely. Those have been debated to death on the forum, so I am not too interested in revisiting them.

 

[121st PA Vols]

It's the most famous and popular CW memoir by far, and without doubt the celebrity of its author in the decades after the war is the best explanation. That being said, I did enjoy reading the Memoirs, and found Grant's writing style very easy to follow. But it's important to emphasize that Grant downplayed episodes that did not present him in the most favorable light so reading the Memoirs by itself is not a great way to be informed on the objective facts of the war.

I think that's what A. Roy (above) was suggesting, mentioning there is a difference between Memoirs and Autobiography. And agree absolutely that memoirs are not a great way to be informed on the objective facts of the war. Excellent point as that can be a point of confusion.

 

[121st PA Vols]

Grant having a poor memory of events or relatively minor facts that had occurred over twenty years previously would be my guess rather than a deliberate lie. Remember, Grant is busy dying at the time he is writing the Memoirs, and under tremendous emotional stress, so with the best of intentions, and even assuming his fact-checkers were up to snuff, errors of this sort are all but inevitable. Deliberate lying and lies by omission concerning matters of importance (like being surprised at Shiloh) are another matter entirely. Those have been debated to death on the forum, so I am not too interested in revisiting them.

Importantly, the man had to be on some potent meds as well.

 

[35th MA InfRegt]

Importantly, the man had to be on some potent meds as well.

If memory serves, Grant was reportedly given morphine on a number of occasions, and his throat was swabbed with cocaine. I have no idea how often he received such medication, but the clearness and precision of his writing suggest to me this was not a daily or even frequent occurrence.

 

[A. Roy]

But "Triumph Over Alcoholism" is one of those books I don't think I'm ever going to bother with.

Even though Chernow's biography isn't the topic here, it might be worth starting a new thread about Chernow's approach to Grant and alcohol -- I might do that, as it could be an interesting discussion. I'm guessing it's been touched on before at CWT, but it doesn't hurt to revisit a topic.
ARB

 

[JackADriscoll]

Uppers and downers. That was probably pretty lit. If I wrote a memoir I would talk about the job I'm currently doing but none of my coworkers would make the story. It's not that I don't like them I just don't find them important to me.

 

[DanSBHawk]

I didn't imply that Grant wrote "that Sherman had already arrived at Smithland during the siege" and, therefore, wasn't twisting Grants words. As stated, Grant wrote in his Memoirs, "During the siege General Sherman had been sent to Smithland, at the mouth of the Cumberland River, to forward reinforcements and supplies to me."

Sherman wasn't even ordered to Paducah until 2/13. As I stated, Sherman wasn't at Smithland, as far as I know. He didn't reach Paducah until February 15th. So boats sent to Grant during the siege "with supplies or reinforcements" before that date could not have "brought a note of encouragement from Sherman."

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Sherman was at Smithland during the siege?

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Sherman sent any messages to Grant during the siege? If so, where is it?

Days after Donelson fell, on the 19th, Grant referred to "the kind tone" of Sherman's letter. So, at best, we have one undated letter; so it couldn't have been "every boat that came up with supplies or reinforcements."

Please provide proof for your suppositions.

Grant did not claim that Sherman was at Smithland during the siege. Sherman was sent during the siege. He received orders and travelled to Smithland.

Look in the memoirs at where this paragraph is located in the narrative. The Battle of Fort Donelson is over. Grant is discussing the aftermath of the battle. The sentence immediately preceding the Sherman paragraph is "During the 16th, after the surrender, additional reinforcements arrived."

So it's absolutely clear that Grant is writing about Sherman sending supplies and reinforcements after the battle. Grant is right. Your misrepresentation of Grant's writing is wrong.

I would guess that if checked out your other claims about the memoirs above, I would find similar misrepresentations.

 

[DanSBHawk]

I checked an online copy (Hathitrust) of Sherman's Memoirs. He never mentions Smithland at all. He was on February 13th, 1862, ordered by Halleck to go to Paducah and assume command of the District of Cairo. Eicher & Eicher (page 485) list Sherman as formally assigned to the District of Cairo on February 14th, 1862 On reaching Paducah, he found a dispatch from Halleck dated February 15th, 1862 ordering Sherman to forward " everything you can spare" to Grant at Fort Donelson. Fort Donelson surrendered the following day (the 16th). This, including the text of Halleck's two messages, can be found on page 221 of Sherman's Memoirs as paginated in the edition I checked on Hathitrust. Given this timeline, far as I can tell, Grant's memory of Sherman being at Smithland during the siege of Fort Donelson would appear to be in error. It is a fairly trivial error in my opinion, but even as an admirer of Grant, I see no point in declining to acknowledge that this claim appears to be an error.

Memoirs of General William T. Sherman / by himself

Grant doesn't claim Sherman was at Smithland during the siege. Only that Sherman was sent during the siege. There's no error, just a misunderstanding.

 

[DanSBHawk]

Regarding the inaccuracies in Grant's Memoirs, the best assessment is by John Marszalek and Louie Gallo in their annotated version of Grant's Memoirs.

Marszalek noted that the inaccuracies were fewer than he expected.

 

[Joseph A. Rose]

We have grants word in his memoir. If you are saying it's untrue I'd like to see it. Please provide documentation of Sherman's movements during the donelson campaign so that we know he couldn't have been in smithland

Halleck to Cullum 2/13/62 OR 7:1:609 "HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI, Saint Louis, February 13, 1862. Brigadier-General CULLUM, Cairo: General W.T. Sherman is assigned to the command at Paducah. One regiment and battery leave here to-day and two more will follow immediately. They will touch at Cairo and Paducah. Stop them, if you fear an attack and want them. H.W. HALLECK, Major-General."

Sherman to Halleck 2/15/62 OR 7:1:618 "PADUCAH, February 15, 1862 General HALLECK: Arrived at Paducah. All quiet. Nothing on the road from Blandville or Mayfield. Nothing new from the Cumberland or Tennessee. I don't think the mortar boats can be brought upstream; the current is too strong. Left Lyford last night hard at work, but making no progress. I think General Tilgham [?] and prisoners had better be sent to Cairo and there offered terms. If officers elect to go on parole to Cincinnati, they could go by rail. W.T. SHERMAN, Brigadier-General."

I searched that OR for "Sherman" and "Smithland"; there's nothing there to substantiate Grant's assertion beyond what I posted.

 

[JackADriscoll]

Grant doesn't claim Sherman was at Smithland during the siege. Only that Sherman was sent during the siege. There's no error, just a misunderstanding.

https://digitallibrary.tulane.edu/islandora/object/tulane:13017

Official letter from William Tecumseh Sherman, Headquarters, Paducah, Kentucky, to Captain [Gilbert A.] Pierce, no place | Tulane University Digital Library

digitallibrary.tulane.edu

I was looking around and tulane has some scanned in copies of period documents. Kinda neat

 

[10th Michigan Infantry]

This here I believe is that last photo of Grant, just before he died as he was writing his memiors. Quite sad to see him in this state.

I think if there was ever to be a movie on Grant, it should start with him in this picture, in his last days, and should perhaps be of the perspective of Grant looking back on his life during the war.

 

[Joseph A. Rose]

I checked an online copy (Hathitrust) of Sherman's Memoirs. He never mentions Smithland at all. He was on February 13th, 1862, ordered by Halleck to go to Paducah and assume command of the District of Cairo. Eicher & Eicher (page 485) list Sherman as formally assigned to the District of Cairo on February 14th, 1862 On reaching Paducah, he found a dispatch from Halleck dated February 15th, 1862 ordering Sherman to forward " everything you can spare" to Grant at Fort Donelson. Fort Donelson surrendered the following day (the 16th). This, including the text of Halleck's two messages, can be found on page 221 of Sherman's Memoirs as paginated in the edition I checked on Hathitrust. Given this timeline, far as I can tell, Grant's memory of Sherman being at Smithland during the siege of Fort Donelson would appear to be in error. It is a fairly trivial error in my opinion, but even as an admirer of Grant, I see no point in declining to acknowledge that this claim appears to be an error.

Memoirs of General William T. Sherman / by himself

Thank you.

Yes, compared to the other errors in the Memoirs, this one is trivial. But Grant showed many times in the Memoirs and outside of them that he would distort history (e.g., denying the Shiloh suprise and stating that he was quite prepared), and he showed many times over, in the Memoirs and outside of them, that his memory wasn't very good (e.g., not remembering whether any of Buell's troops were at the battle of Shiloh besides Nelson's division).

The other examples of Grant's writing that I provided in this thread and are far weightier, and generally easier to prove (e.g., Belmont's caualty figures). The other people here ignore those, while implying that it's just somehow possible for Sherman to have sent these messages from Smithland; they are seemingly desirous of avoiding any real analysis of the Memoirs' misstatements.

 

[Joseph A. Rose]

https://digitallibrary.tulane.edu/islandora/object/tulane:13017

Official letter from William Tecumseh Sherman, Headquarters, Paducah, Kentucky, to Captain [Gilbert A.] Pierce, no place | Tulane University Digital Library

digitallibrary.tulane.edu

I was looking around and tulane has some scanned in copies of period documents. Kinda neat

Thank you. That letter indicates that Sherman stayed at Paducah during this period. I have seen others to that effect, and I've seen nothing (outside of Grant's assertion) to show that Sherman was at Smithland.

 

[DanSBHawk]

https://digitallibrary.tulane.edu/islandora/object/tulane:13017

Official letter from William Tecumseh Sherman, Headquarters, Paducah, Kentucky, to Captain [Gilbert A.] Pierce, no place | Tulane University Digital Library

digitallibrary.tulane.edu

I was looking around and tulane has some scanned in copies of period documents. Kinda neat

Paducah and Smithland are very close to each other. Smithland was the location of the supply depot that provided supplies to Grant.

 

[Joseph A. Rose]

If memory serves, Grant was reportedly given morphine on a number of occasions, and his throat was swabbed with cocaine. I have no idea how often he received such medication, but the clearness and precision of his writing suggest to me this was not a daily or even frequent occurrence.

I think that brandy was also prescribed.

The frequency of the morphine injections is indicated by Grant's notes (unfortunately, I don't note the source of these):
6-29-85 "The pain is almost unendurable. I think it will just take me away one of these evenings. Can I have another injection? But my thighs are so bruised they are black and blue from needle marks. I cannot have another injection in the stomach as it is so sore I couldn't take another. Can we give it in the chest, as yesterday?" . . . 7-1-85 "Could not the morphine be injected elsewhere other than the arms and thighs? I am now so sore as a pin cushion and could barely straighten up. I know the veins in the arm are useless. I am scarred every which way."

 

[Joseph A. Rose]

Regarding the inaccuracies in Grant's Memoirs, the best assessment is by John Marszalek and Louie Gallo in their annotated version of Grant's Memoirs.

Marszalek noted that the inaccuracies were fewer than he expected.

Marszalek? You're kidding, right? If you're looking at biased history, analyze his writings.

He edited Grant's Memoirs and didn't even note that Grant denied the Shiloh surprise. Nor did he comment on "we were not again molested on our way to the boats" and many other Grant misstatements. Marszalek understimated Union casualties at Belmont (although not as badly as Grant), even though the Chicago Tribune arrived at the correct number just days after the battle, and Hughes agreed that it was 607.

Marszalek also wrote that "Buell was in command of the 4th Div., Army of the Ohio."