Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Ultimately, Grant may be remembered as one of America's best generals. He is still the only general in history to capture three separate armies, and he presided over Lee's surrender at Appomattox in April 1865. He was also a fair man who treated the Confederates well during their surrender. He was simply determined not to allow the South to be victorious. He sometimes misjudged his generals, and perhaps left some in power longer than they should have been, but ultimately he led the Army to victory, and was responsible for the final battles that laid waste to the Confederacy and led to the end of the war.
He was also a technical general, who understood the need for supplies as much as the need for victory on the battlefield. He knew the South's army was undersupplied and desperate for provisions, and so, when a general was victorious, he ordered them to burn any supplies of value to create more hardships for the Confederates. It seems cruel, but it helped bring the South to its knees and ultimately end the war. Grant was not solely responsible for the end of the war, but his leadership helped make the end possible....
He was a fine general whose command earned respect from the fighting men, and that transferred to their attitude on the battlefield. Men who respect their commander will fight harder and longer because they feel his decisions are sound and his reasoning is just.
Some believe Grant made errors that helped prolong the war, but since he never let up on his determined attacks against Lee's army, these mistakes were overcome by his persistence and ultimate victory. Grant was not a perfect general or man, but he led the troops to victory when it mattered, and much of the North's final success is owed to his leadership, cunning, and knowledge. He influenced the war by his tenacity, which led to victory.
Reference
McPhearson, J.M. (2001). Ordeal by fire: The Civil War and reconstruction. New York: McGraw Hill.
Reference
McPhearson, J.M. (2001). Ordeal by fire: The Civil War and reconstruction. New York: McGraw Hill.
Johnson rebuked generals and Congress continued to pass into legislation laws Johnson had vetoed. Johnson's antics caused more and more supporters to abandon him, and impeachment became a very real concern. Congress voted to impeach Johnson in 1868 after he violated the Tenure of Office Act and tried to remove Secretary of War Stanton, but the Senate did not convict him. During this time, a struggle between the court system
Instead of continuing the campaign, where he had an advantage, McClellan demanded reinforcements, and the campaign missed a golden opportunity to take the capital. McClellan blamed the mishap on the inability of Union troops to join him on the peninsula to aid in the attack, because they were engaged in the Battle of the Shenandoah Valley in the west, but many doubt this, feeling McClellan was simply afraid to
The Battle decimated the troops, but it also affected their morale and their own belief they could win the war. It was a decisive battle for both sides, and when the South lost, it was another element that would lead to their defeat. Union victories in the West (Vicksburg and Port Hudson) simply added to the South's woes as they retreated from Gettysburg. Finally, the third important factor in the
The government also became a large consumer of manufactured goods, which added even more profits to industries' coffers. There were some problems during this time of growth and development, however. The powerful railroads often wielded their power indiscriminately, and many Americans can to criticize the power and exploitation of the railroads and their wealthy owners. Owners often created schemes to make money both from railroads and their construction, which led
Even "Porter Alexander, Lee's ordnance chief and one of the most perceptive contemporary observers of Lee and his Army of Northern Virginia, called his decision to stand at Antietam 'the greatest military blunder that Gen. Lee ever made'" (Owens 2004). Historians are divided as to the real purpose behind the Maryland campaign, which seems like an "isolated maneuver, another manifestation of Lee's innate aggressiveness as a commander. Some have
Chinese-American History The Exclusion Act; Redefining Citizenship Historians have studied the Chinese Exclusion Act extensively and have recorded many aspects of the politics behind the events. However, they often focus their attentions on the motives of the excluders. They pay little attention to those that were excluded and the impact that it had on their lives. One important question has escaped the scrutiny of historians. Why, if they knew of the hardships