Scathing article about Grant's military and political career (1877)

David Moore

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Location
Washington, DC
This is from The National Quarterly Review. It is long and covers much territory but is well worth reading.
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=iau.31858045492224;view=1up;seq=221
Some points:
It was published not only while Grant was alive but also as an preemptive strike against a possible third term.
It's discussion of the 1864-5 campaign and comparisons with McClellan mirrors much of what has been discussed on this site.
The discussion of Vicksburg and the conclusion that there wasn't much of a grand plan on Grant's part mirrors the conclusion Rowena Reed came to in her 1978 book on combined military operations.
The author also has praise for James McPherson.

So what to make of the article?

It can be ignored or dismissed (which I think most of those involved the various Grant discussions on this site will do.)
It can be attacked but that should involve actually reading the article.
It can be appreciated as more evidence that USG and his careers, military and civilian, were subject to severe criticism during his lifetime.
 
You must log in or register to view this reply.
 
Back
Top