Catton's 'Grant And Lee: A Study In Contrasts'

Another thing that stood out to me about General Lee was that he was not a big fan of slavery. He had command of Northern Virginia during the Civil War, so it does make sense. Lee through out this book shows his love for Virginia. Let’s face it, he is solely in this war because Virginia made the decision to leave the Union. He is very loyal to his home state, and it shows through out the

Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee are two of the most effective military leaders in American history. These men have become symbolic of the two nations at conflict during the Civil War. Both had very different backgrounds and personalities that caused them to differ in their military leadership and accomplishments. Even though General Lee would surrender his army to General Grant, Lee throughout the course of the war proved himself to be a better military leader.

Grant and Lee are completely different when it comes to their views on what the American life style should be. Grants goals and standard are high, as the author says here in this statement: “Grant was the modern man emerging; beyond him, ready to come on the stage, was the great age of steel and machinery, of crowded cities and a restless burgeoning vitality” (411). I think that these values of a much larger and brighter future is a better choice. Thinking ahead rather than staying with the old ways is by far the greatest selection for the nation. Though Lee was a man of great class and noble causes he was forced to surrender to Grant. I suppose that the statement “out with the old and in with the new” is a true one. It would seem that Catton would agree with me when he said: “Lee might have ridden down

“Grant and Lee: A Study in Contrasts,” written by Bruce Catton compares and contrasts the characteristics and lives of two leaders of the Civil War. Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee, two very strong and very different generals, met on April 9, 1865 at Appomattox Court House in Virginia to bring to a close the Civil War. By this time, America had become a country that was starting over with the simple core belief in equal rights for everyone.

Lee was born in the slave state of Virginia on January 19, 1807; fifteen years before Ulysses S. Grant, who was born in Ohio, a free state, on the 27th of April, 1822. The two generals led very different lives: Grant came from a religious, hard working, and relatively poor background, Lee was from an honorable family with a respectable amount of money. The two generals studied in the United States Military Academy in West Point, but with very different intentions; Grant did not have any interest on becoming a soldier, but was forced by his father to enter the school and Lee had every intention on becoming a condecorated soldier. These differences ended up greatly defining their years on the Academy; Lee, who aspired to become a great soldier and future commander, graduated second in the class of 1829, while Grant, who was not very fond of military life, was 21st in a class of 39 students and was assigned to the infantry even though he was considered an amazing horse

This source could be of value to historians due to its focus on Lee as a general and not necessarily about Lee in the civil war. The purpose of this book is not to debate the civil war, but to appreciate Lee’s role as the general. Therefore, the source is biased based on the authors clear appreciation of Lee. The source both gives facts about Lee’s life as well as information about Lee part in the civil war.

Grant viewed his role as formulating general policies for the Union armies and leaving tactical decisions to theater commanders. He favored bold attacks and maneuvers, however, while Meade felt more comfortable waging set-piece battles. Their approaches to fighting Lee were incompatible, and friction was inevitable.” (Civil War Series)

Civil War historians view the Battle of Chancellorsville as General Robert E. Lee’s “greatest and most remarkable” victory (Sears 1). Lee, facing an army twice his size, defies all military doctrine and divides his army multiple times in order to out-maneuver and surprise the Union forces. The daring maneuver succeeds and ultimately forces the Union’s Army of the Potomac to retreat. The victory was another major blow to Union troops, but it came at a huge cost to the Confederacy: the loss of General Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson. By evaluating the battle through the lens of the mission command activities, one can see how Lee’s daring maneuver was actually very calculated and his only option for victory. Throughout the rest of this paper, I will describe the timeline of the battle and how General Lee used the mission command activities of understand, visualize, assess, and lead to ultimately achieve victory at Chancellorsville.

Throughout history, there have been people whose names and faces have become synonymous with the time periods in which they lived. For example, Julius Caesar is synonymous with the late Roman Republic and George Washington is synonymous with the American Revolution. Just like these two men, the name Robert E. Lee has become synonymous with the American Civil War. Not only did Lee rise to become the most important and recognizable person in the Southern Confederacy, but his honor and virtuous acts during and after the war made him a hero to modern-day Americans. Even though he fought for what many consider the morally erroneous side of the war, the virtues of his character have made him a figure in American history

In the end of the Civil War. Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant were considered as heroes. The two generals would earn a great reputation and will go down as one of the best generals for the years to come. These two changed, todays American History and how we can know better understand how the war actually came about. We know that these two made life decisions out on the battle field. We know that the both of them gave everything they had for their homeland. Though we know that their choices would represent each other.

By the end of the Civil War, much of the country thought of General Robert E. Lee and General Ulysses S. Grant as personal heroes. Despite the outcome of the war, both the Union and the Confederates looked towards their leader with admiration. Both men were viewed as spectacular fighters, who were smart and strategic during the war. However, despite similarities between the two Civil War generals their differences in background experiences, personality traits, and personal underlying aspirations made them not only opposites of each other but the perfect champion for the people they were chosen to lead.

The Battle of Gettysburg was amongst one the most important turning points during the Civil War. It was a three-day bloody battle between the Union and Confederate forces which would ultimately lead up to the victory of the Union. In The Killer Angels, Michael Shaara shows a depiction of the battle through the eyes of the officers and tries to give the reader a first-hand look into the daily struggles that they had to deal with when it came to distinguishing between what’s best for their men and chances of success in the battle. In the book, we are introduced with two important officers: Colonel Chamberlain of the Union force, and General Lee of the Confederate force. Throughout the book, we witness different leadership strategies and philosophies between both officers which ultimately serve as their road to success or failure in the battle. Focusing on General Lee’s philosophy on leadership, “To be a good soldier, you must love the army. But to be a good officer you must be willing to order the death of the thing you love.”, it reinforces the idea that in order to fully succeed at battle, you must set aside and sacrifice your sense of sympathy towards your soldiers as a way to avoid making emotional decisions.

In the end of the Civil War. We will consider Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant to all be heroes. The two generals will earn a great reputation and will go down as one of the best generals for the years to come. These two changed, todays American History and how we can know better understand how the war actually came about. We know that these two made life decisions out on the battle field. We know that the both of them gave everything they had for their homeland. Though we know that their choices would represent each other (Eisenburg).

During the times of Civil War, there were many Commanding Generals that came along. But two stand out amongst all, Ulysses S. Grant of United States of America and Robert E. Lee of Confederate States of America. Both men had formally fought, not along side of each other, in the Mexican-American War. At one point Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant worked together in the Mexican-American War. They both gained a war time experience, Grant as a quartermaster and Lee as an engineer who positioned troops and artillery during their participation in the Scott’s march from the coastal town of Vera Cruz to Mexico City. Both men were vastly different with different styles and background who not only won the affection of their men but respect of

One of the most prominent armies of the civil war the Army of Northern Virginia is one of the most commonly analyzed aspects of the confederacy. In J. Tracy Power’s Lee’s Miserables, Power evaluates the mindset of the soldiers by following their correspondence to family members as well as their use of diaries. The book is designed to demonstrate the psychological changes of the soldiers from The Battles of the Wilderness and Spotsylvania to the eventual surrender of the army at Appomattox. Power effectively describes the spectrum of physiological states exhibited by the soldier while maintaining a theme of respect for the generalship of Robert E. Lee. While the work exhibits countless examples that become repetitive, the sentiments of the