Personalities of Lee and Jackson: Reflections in War Tactics

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.

Robert E. Lee was a man of family, culture and tradition. Lee was a man who believed in the old English ways in chivalry. The Southern states fought for the same ideals that Lee stood for. Lee believed that this way of life made men to be of a higher class. He was convinced that these old values can build a better nation. Catton express the Confederacy loyalty to these values by saying: “For four years, the southern states had fought a separate war to up held the ideals for which Lee; as if he himself was the Confederacy… the best thing that the way of life for which the Confederacy stood could have ever had to offer” (410).

Shaara, through his commentary on General Lee, explains that Lee did not want to fight the war but had to. Lee felt it was his duty to fight for his fellow countrymen, but not for a cause, land, or slavery. “So it was no cause and no country he fought for, no ideal and no justice. He fought for his people, for the children, and the kin, and not even the land, because the land was worth the war, but the people were,” General Lee says (Shaara 263). General Lee fights for himself and has no choice but to fight, knowing in the end that he might be wrong with his cause and pay the price someday. General Lee is not a proponent of war, but he will serve his country with honor and duty if necessary.

Comparing these two men, we find that their differences strongly outweigh their similarities. Lee was destined for glory, seeming to only want glory and honor that comes in meeting your enemy face to face. Lee would send troops into battle at the strongest point. Lee was not a bad commander, he had many great victories and was very bold and daring, but he was not the great commander the history books make him. Jackson was a peaceful man, and he would often choose a battle plan that involved little to no fighting. Before he was killed at Chancellorsville while scouting enemy lines, he was well respected among his men. Who was the better commander? History would say Robert E. Lee was, but logic and reason would show us that Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson had the ability and sense to lead his troops more

Despite the mistakes his father and brother made, Lee managed to grow learning the ways of a true Southern gentleman. The departure of his father and two older half-brothers made Lee the man of the house at an early age. His mother, Ann Carter, raised Lee in modest circumstances and helped him to learn standard of conduct. Lee grew up in modest conditions, and though he received the normal education for someone of his class, he had to earn his own living and didn’t live the easy-going plantation life that most members of his family did. Since his mother did not have sufficient cash to send Lee to go to college, he chose instead to enter West Point military and academy. He entered in 1825 at the age of 18. At West Point Lee excelled tremendously. He finished second in his class and didn’t receive one demerit during his four years there (A feat that has yet to be repeated since then). Lee entered Engineer Corps after graduation where he was employed to build and maintain military installations and assist the Federal Government in the enormous work of providing internal improvements in order to settle border disputes on the frontier lands.

Robert E. Lee had many successes in leading the United States Army. What made Lee so remarkable was he carried a lot about what the United States government was doing and believed in a good relationship with the personal that are working for the government. We know that Lee held high standards. He was big on honor, and held people to high standards. He graduated West Point as a military commander. Lee was considered one of the bluest of Virginia blue bloods. Lee was a full blown southerner who would give anything he could to get a southern victory. Lee would be the general of the Confederate Army during the Civil War. Lee first will take over and will be in charge from 1861-1865. What Lee’s first task will be to take his army at Second Bull Run and lead them to a Confederate victory.

135) This describes Major Jackson’s general attitude towards war and towards God. Jackson is extremely pious and does all he can to please God and to follow His path. Newspaper coverage of his battles quickly publicized him and the title Hero was given to Jackson. Throughout the war, Jackson shows dedication, going beyond his orders and chasing away his enemies. He also shows an immense concern for his troops, he “had seen the bare feet, the bloody impressions, and he felt a deep pain, a sadness.” (Pg. 289) His men were shabby compared to the forces of Hancock and Chamberlain.

Among the ranks during the American Civil War stood men such as Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant that will be forever remembered for their leadership qualities. One such man earned his nickname, fame, and popularity during the Civil War as a Confederate general. Thomas Jackson, more commonly known as “Stonewall” Jackson, was a brilliant leader who gained the admiration of all who came to know him. He gained his popularity from his famous Shenandoah Valley campaign in 1862. With integrity beyond reproach, he successfully provided direction, purpose (though skeptical), and motivation to those serving below him during the Valley Campaign.

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.

General Grant and Lee, were two brave soldiers that fought for what they believed in and for their country. These two heroes were leaders in the Civil war, and fought for the North and the South. They were two strong men that were oddly different generals. They represented the strengths of two conflicting currents in society that came to a final collision.

Everybody has different opinions on who they think are good leaders, but it has shown throughout the year that all famous leaders share similar qualities. In Michael Shaara’s novel, The Killer Angels, the leadership qualities Robert E. Lee has, allow him to get soldiers to follow him. These leadership qualities include admiration, intelligence, and wise. The first quality General Lee shows is being admired.

Ulysses Grant and Robert Lee were vital to the United States during the Civil War. Their meeting in a small parlor in Virginia, where they wrote out and signed the terms of the end of the war, brought the war to its near finish. In the article “Grant and Lee: A Study in Contrasts”, author Bruce Catton analyzes the similarities and differences between these leaders’ points of view and qualities. Thus, author, Bruce Catton compares Grant and Lee to demonstrate that all successful people have the same underlying qualities shown through their tenacity and fidelity, while also contrasting them to demonstrate that there are different paths of success, shown through their different backgrounds.

Lee has been charged with being too bloody-minded, of fighting on even when he must have known that his cause was lost. Viewed realistically, this was certainly true; but what the mind knows, the heart cannot always accept. Lee was not alone in failing to admit defeat in a cause to which he was emotionally attached. He fought to the bitter end, and that end came on April 9, 1865, when he surrendered to General Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Courthouse in

Lee was tidewater Virginia, and in his background were family, culture, and tradition . . . the age of chivalry transplanted to a New World which was making its own legends and its own myths. He embodied a way of life that had come down through the age of knighthood and the English country squire. America was a land that was beginning all over again, dedicated to nothing much more