Book Review! American Ulysses: A Life Of Ulysses S. Grant by Ronald C. White (and more thoughts on the Lost Cause)
It’s going to be impossible for me to approach this book review without a generous dose of context and background. So here it goes. I’m wading into some deep waters here emotionally but I need to get it out.
The first time I really learned about Ulysses S. Grant was from my beloved friend and mentor Jerry Maxwell - my high school history teacher. He is THE reason I have my interest in history and this blog almost 40 years after his civil war class I took as a sophomore in high school. I need to make that clear because I will always be thankful for that relationship, but I have to also be honest about where I’ve diverged from his teachings and how I’m still sorting it out.
Let’s start with some notes from that class. Page 57 is where he introduces us to Grant in detail for the first time:
….had seen him nude since he was 6.
That page of notes says a lot. Slob, bottom half of his class at West Point, excessive drinking, ruins 3 businesses, almost bankrupts the country, lost tons of men, 20-25 cigars per day, couldn’t stand the sight of blood, his “favorite thing to brag about” was no one had seen him nude since age 6….. Not such a flattering introduction huh?
I have over a full page of notes on Confederate General Stonewall Jackson’s fatal wounding at Chancellorsville and death soon after.
I have two sentences - two - about the entire Vicksburg Campaign which lasted over 6 months and was a triumph for Grant.
And listen, I love Maxwell. I’ll always be grateful for how much he taught me, supported me and for his friendship. He passed away in 2011 not long after he published the biography of Confederate artillery Major John Pelham A Perfect Lion - a very well researched and thorough bio with great storytelling which transported me back to Jerry’s classroom while reading it. I miss him - he was the guy I would call before I visited any battlefield to get tips on what to see etc.
If Jerry were here today I would like to have a word with him about how much of what he taught us was rooted in Lost Cause mythology. It feels odd to say this about him without him being here to defend himself but he did us a significant disservice here. That page of notes above should never be anyone’s introduction to Grant. The first shot of the Civil War isn’t fired at Fort Sumter in my notes until Page 42. 42 pages of notes on the lead up to the war. You know how much time we spent on Reconstruction - the aftermath? None. He made a joke about it that I’ll never forget - that it was a boring topic and we weren’t going to spend time on it. I now know that it is indeed a critical topic, and informs so much of the black experience in America and the beginnings of the Civil Rights movement - not to mention Grant’s role in it which I never knew. Oh I knew he wasn’t a military genius, that he was a slob, that he was a drunk, that he ruined every business he touched, that he smoked 20-25 cigars per day and on and on and on…
But if the coming storm and the buildup to the Civil War is important, so is the result and the role Grant played. It was in the back of my mind for years - that I should probably read a book on Reconstruction but Maxwell said it was boring… so I didn’t bother. And it turned out to be a massive blind spot for me historically.
So as I mentioned earlier I learned almost nothing about Grant’s Vicksburg Campaign which gave the U.S. control of the Mississippi River and helped to suffocate the Confederacy in Jerry’s class. I have since visited the Vicksburg battlefield with my family (in April of 2017) and learned more about it back in 2008 from my friend Jay Hopson when I first met him. Jay grew up there and ended up being the first white head football coach in the SWAC at Alcorn St. in Lorman, Mississippi - the first black land grant university in the United States. It was established during Grant’s presidency in 1871. Jay told me how they didn’t celebrate Independence Day in Vicksburg for over 100 years since that’s the day the siege ended and the city fell in 1863. I also didn’t learn anything about Grant’s commitment to enforce the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments giving freed slaves citizenship and the right to vote along with his vigorous efforts to squash the KKK and the horrific violence against African Americans in the South. None of this was mentioned in Maxwell’s class.
I did learn the surgeon’s name who performed the amputation surgery of Stonewall Jackson’s arm at Chancellorsville after being wounded accidentally by his own troops. The story is indeed fascinating and there is no doubt that plenty of Maxwell’s magic was in the storytelling. The death of a general and the decisions that were made to try to save him are important aspects of the story of the Civil War. As for the surgeon his name was Hunter McGuire, he was 29 and a good surgeon for the time despite being young. His name was underlined in my notes (like Grant & Sherman’s above on page 57) which indicated his was a name we had to know. But here’s my question on the importance of knowing who Hunter McGuire was - you know, at the end of the day…
WHO GIVES A SHIT?
At the end of the day do I need to know who Hunter McGuire was, yet nothing about Reconstruction? It’s upsetting. I was a bit brainwashed. Keep in mind I’ve been against what I’ve known of Lost Cause mythology - of course. I’ve written about it - I’ve argued for the removal of Confederate monuments that were erected in random cities of the south between 1890 and 1920 for example which were for the sole purpose of furthering the idea of Lost Cause / White Supremacy during peak Jim Crow. I’m anti-racist in my mind. Have been for a long time. But some of this stuff I was taught I didn’t even know how deep the many layers went and where they came from. What their purpose was. It certainly didn’t occur to me to question Jerry Maxwell on the notion that Grant was an overrated general (and human for that matter). And while I don’t think it can be debated that Stonewall Jackson was a great general, how much bias, how much agenda has been behind creating, sustaining and growing that legend over the years at the expense of some truths that were suppressed, distorted, ignored. I’m deprogramming myself, trying to separate truth from myth, fact from bias. I’m reading a book right now by Ty Seidule called Robert E. Lee and Me: A Southerner’s Reckoning with the Myth of the Lost Cause to help me with that as a follow up to White’s book on Grant (which I am indeed getting to for those of you who are still here…. lol). I may have yet more to say about this and maybe a book review on that one - we’ll see. In the meantime let’s get to Grant…
American Ulysses
My overall very simplified take on Grant now coming out of this read is that he was my kind of guy. By that I mean he was fiercely loyal, very trusting (too much so), a principled man, faithful, a family man and a bit flawed sure, but humble. Not a narcissist. Not a DRUNK. Not simply a “butcher” as a general. He was not a genius per se but he certainly wasn’t dumb. He WAS a better general than I’ve previously given him credit for.
Now yes, I can’t help but question a couple things in this book. White clearly makes a conscious decision that the alcohol is not an important part of Grant’s story - to the point you’d almost think he barely ever drank. It’s barely mentioned other than to say that as a problem it was talked about but exaggerated by his enemies and pretty much not the case. Hmmm…. maybe, maybe not I guess? Take the 1854 court-martial in my notes. My notes seem to say he was court-martialed for excessive drinking and would have been guilty if he didn’t resign first. And that’s it.
That’s one way to tell it.
Another way to tell it was that he was assigned to Fort Humboldt (Pages 118-120) in the middle of nowhere in Northern California. Lonely, depressed and longing to be with his family including a child he hadn’t even met yet, 2nd in command to an old hard ass who he got into it with 11 years earlier at Jefferson Barracks in St. Louis after he finished West Point. Who knows how personal it was for Robert “Old Buck” Buchanan when Grant started drinking to self medicate and Buchanan gave him the option to resign over it or stand trial? I’m sure the fact that Grant got drunk at some middle of nowhere military outpost with virtually nothing to do was really worth that court martial. Gimme a break… At least one account by a W.I. Reed, a contractor who supplied beef to Fort Humboldt observed that Grant took to drink as a result of his forced idleness but in “far less” quantities than the other officers.
The truth is usually somewhere in between. After White’s book I’m inclined to believe that the truth favors Grant way more than it doesn’t. Call me “easily swayed” I guess.
White Has Restored Grant
So ultimately I think this book does what it was intended to do and that’s restore Grant to his rightful place as a giant in American History and I rarely got the sense he had to twist himself into pretzels to do it. I think Grant’s reputation has taken a bit of a beating over the years because his presidency was indeed rocked by scandals involving people who were close to him and because of the Lost Cause narrative that the South fought a noble fight for their rights and freedom against overwhelming odds - astonishingly it’s a narrative still being fought daily on social media and in the news. Presidential hopeful Nikki Haley was skewered for her tone deaf answer omitting slavery as a cause of the Civil War at a recent town hall only to basically admit she erred in doing so during a guest spot on Saturday Night Live - a former governor of South Carolina no less - maybe not-so-ironically the first state to secede in 1860. Without slavery it becomes much easier to paint the rebels as freedom fighters and the United States as aggressors and in Grant’s case a butcher who only beat Lee because of overwhelming odds. Yes, Grant used his overwhelming numbers (along with Sherman’s and Sheridan’s collectively in Georgia and the Shenandoah Valley) to beat Lee and end the war. Yes, he sacrificed wayyyy too many lives doing it at Cold Harbor for example. I’ve visited these battlefields and you can’t deny this was the case. And believe me just by saying THAT I get people accusing ME of being a “Lost Causer.”
But that’s the not the entire story. Grant’s performance in the earlier battles under his command in the West were flawed here and there but impressive overall. War isn’t an exact science. And what Grant did in Virginia when he took over was what was needed to bring the war to an end and by all accounts he didn’t take pleasure in it. He wasn’t a bloodthirsty psychopathic warmonger by nature. Relatively speaking of course - yes Grant gave the orders. But Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest for example? There’s a general who seemed to enjoy it a little more. Don’t @ me - this is a blog - these are my opinions - I’m not a professional historian. But I’m not just any amateur either. I’m an amateur who has put a TON of time in on these things over the years and I know way more than most people. Feel free to disagree with me in a civil way (pun only slightly intended).
Meanwhile check out this little exercise - I asked Chat GPT to give me 100 words on why Grant was bad and then 100 words on why Grant was good. Take a look:
ME: “Tell me in 100 words why Ulysses S. Grant was a bad general and president”
ChatGPT: “Ulysses S. Grant, though celebrated for his Union victories during the Civil War, faced criticism for his heavy casualties and reliance on brute force tactics. His leadership lacked strategic finesse, often resorting to costly frontal assaults. As president, his administration was marred by corruption scandals like the Credit Mobilier and Whiskey Ring affairs, tarnishing his reputation. Grant's leniency toward Reconstruction policies failed to address deep-seated racial tensions, allowing for continued discrimination against African Americans. Economic turmoil during his tenure further fueled discontent. While Grant's leadership had moments of triumph, his legacy is marred by military recklessness and administrative failings.”
ME: “Tell me in 100 words why Ulysses S. Grant was a great general and president”
ChatGPT: “Ulysses S. Grant demonstrated exceptional military prowess during the Civil War, implementing innovative strategies that led to crucial Union victories at Vicksburg and Appomattox, ultimately securing the Union's triumph. As president, he staunchly supported Reconstruction efforts, advocating for civil rights protections and federal intervention to suppress the Ku Klux Klan's violence. Grant's administration saw economic prosperity and advancements in infrastructure, including the transcontinental railroad. His diplomacy defused tensions with Britain during the Alabama Claims dispute, preserving peace. Despite challenges like corruption scandals, Grant's leadership laid the groundwork for a more united and progressive America, cementing his legacy as a transformative figure.”
Pretty wild huh? There are a few points in these two essays that are both true such as the criticism for his heavy casualties in the Virginia Campaign vs. Lee for example and the praise for his innovative strategies that led to crucial U.S. victories such as Vicksburg in particular. But here’s what I’m wondering lately regarding the criticism: If Grant is criticized for Cold Harbor as he should be, why does Lee seemingly get a pass for Pickett’s Charge…? It was a massive frontal attack that failed at Gettysburg. I hadn’t thought about that until very recently. And wherever it was on the Internet that Chat GPT found a credible take on “Grant’s leniency toward Reconstruction policies” I’d like to know… that to me is a crock. It’s completely contradicted in the second essay which seems to be the true story that White lays out in detail about Grant’s advocacy for civil rights protections and basically a war against the Klan. Grant was praised by none other than Frederick Douglass who referred to him as a “trusted” President and also added that “The black soldier was welcome in his tent, and the freedman in his house.” Credibility on the subject of race doesn’t come from a much better source than Frederick Douglass in my opinion. The scene of Douglass’s speech in Grant’s presence at the dedication of a statue at the Centennial celebration of 1876 is recounted on pages 573-574.
Once again the truth is somewhere in the middle of these two AI essays but I’m convinced it’s at least 70-30 FOR Grant after reading White’s book.
*Sidenote: great example of why AI like Chat GPT can be helpful for some things, but not for everything…. I thought this was an interesting way to use it to help illustrate a point.
A Few Other Items I love From The book
White’s Take on Cold Harbor
As for Cold Harbor I get the sense that White wanted to gloss it over a bit. He discusses how Grant may have felt some urgency to catch Lee’s army in the open and strike a final blow, sensing an opportunity to do it at Cold Harbor. Okay true. But there were several issues that arose in getting his troops to arrive and prepare to launch the assault. After a two day delay which gave Lee time to fortify his defenses Grant went forward with it anyway. U.S. forces suffered 7000 casualties, many in the first 30 minutes, while Lee suffered fewer than 1500. White goes on to tell us “In the conduct of war, the attacking force will almost always receive more casualties than the defending force.” It’s the only time we hear this explanation for casualty numbers in the book. It’s a stretch to apply it to Cold Harbor to soften the carnage at best, a transparently disingenuous attempt to spin it and cover for Grant’s horrific blunder at worst - sorry. So maybe this indeed is a little bit of White twisting into a pretzel on page 361.
Politics and grant’s presidency
One of the thoroughly painted anecdotes in the book describes Grant as president walking across Lafayette Park to visit Charles Sumner to appeal to Sumner’s vanity in informally approaching him about a treaty to annex Santo Domingo (modern-day Dominican Republic) which Grant really wanted to get done (page 510). The story is rife with juicy anticipation of this meeting where Sumner offers Grant a glass of sherry which Grant turned down. One of the few mentions of alcohol in the book and it’s one where Grant turns down a drink. But picturing that scene is amazing - imagine that today! The president casually walks across the park for a little informal business meeting…. almost one hundred years into American history, 4 years after a massive Civil War and this was still how it was done. He left that evening thinking he had Sumner’s support. He didn’t. The ensuing political drama and power struggle that unfolds is fantastic. I loved reading about Grant as president which I knew very little about.
Grant’s Travels ARound the world And discussions with John Russell Young
Grant’s travels overseas after his presidency are amazing. The enjoyment he got out of it and the way he was received all over the world is really fascinating. England, Germany, Italy, Scandanavia, France, Spain, Egypt, Jerusalem, Russia, China, Japan - for 2 years he traveled the globe. During some of his travels he had a bunch of conversations with John Russell Young which I just find to be such a cool and candid sharing of his thoughts. I may have to read Young’s book on those travels which were abridged by Michael Fellman in 2002. I love hearing his takes on other Civil War generals as he reflects on that time over a dozen years later from halfway around the world. For example he says the tactics that made Stonewall Jackson so successful early in the war wouldn’t have worked later in the war against better U.S. generals like Sherman, Thomas, Sheridan, Meade “or any of our great generals.” Interestingly enough Maxwell taught us that Sherman & Sheridan were not great generals and merely rode on Grant’s coattails which I also now believe may be a bit of a questionable stance. He also didn’t think Lee was the best Confederate General - he thought Joseph E. Johnston was better.
On McClellan (page 608) Grant said that part of the challenge Little Mac had was that he took over when the war was new. The conditions of success were so trying - everything was new, “with a restless people and Congress” and if you think about it it’s a good point regarding the 1862 Peninsular Campaign in particular because McClellan was the one who was expected to go on the offensive and move a new army to capture Richmond. I guess that would have been pretty tough for anyone. Lee has a bit of an inherent advantage playing defense in that first full year of the war. I’m not sure I feel McClellan gets a pass on Antietam when he literally had Lee’s lost orders in his hands ahead of time, but it’s interesting to hear Grant cut him that slack.
I love the story of Grant meeting with Otto Von Bismarck - the German chancellor. Bismarck congratulated Grant on saving the Union and Grant replied that not only did they save the union but they destroyed slavery.
Grant’s Final Years and my final thoughts
Grant faced some serious hardships with grit and grace after being swindled out of all of his money by a Wall Street hotshot and then getting sick with cancer. It’s hard not to appreciate his determination to finally write his memoirs, the money from which would secure the future for his beloved Julia and his family. His love story with Julia is woven throughout the book and brings us closer to him and to them as a team.
Whew… that’s a lot. I know this may confuse the many North Farmington Raider alumni who also remember Jerry Maxwell as the greatest teacher ever and haven’t given this topic much thought in this context, but once again I ALSO think he was my greatest teacher. This wasn’t easy to put in writing, but after reading White’s book on Grant I had to. I hope if Jerry is reading this from up there that he’s not upset with me - I’d like to think he wouldn’t be. That he’d be pleased at the critical thinking and research I’ve been doing on these things, and I would love to have had the chance to debate them with him.
In any event I feel that this book is required reading - Grant is way more important than people realize and his reputation is rightfully and finally growing as a president. The latest ranking by presidential historians put him at 17th out of 46th which is much more accurate than where he’s been ranked in the past (as low as 38th in the mid 90’s) in my opinion. Highly recommended and I hope this write up on the book and the considerable context included was worth your while!
M10 Social is owned by Doug Cohen in West Bloomfield, MI and provides social media training and digital marketing services from the Frameable Faces Photography studio Doug owns with his wife Ally. He can be reached there at tel:248-790-7317, by mobile at tel:248-346-4121 or via email at mailto:doug@frameablefaces.com. You can follow Doug’s band Vintage Playboy at their Facebook page here. You can also visit our other business Detroit Jerky at the website www.DetroitJerkyLLC.com!
******************************************************************************************
Tune in to the 📷Doug&Ally📷Morning Show T-F between 8:30 & 11 EST UTC-4 on Heckle by following them on Heckle or Twitter at @frameablefaces! Also check out the Doug & Ally Morning Show podcast at anchor.fm/frameablefaces and everywhere you listen to podcasts! Doug also tweets at @dougcohen10 and @M10Social!