*Note: This post has two segments. The first a “short” book review, the second (after the jump) a longer review of Grants life.
This past Christmas my wife, knowing my interest in all things historical, gave me a biography of Ulysses S. Grant by Jean Edward Smith. Up until this point I had known of Grant as a great if not the best Civil War general (at least on the Union side), and as the 18th president of the United States. I knew that he was accused of being a drunk and that Lincoln was especially attached to him as a general, but I was far from knowing the real Ulysses S. Grant. Jean Edward Smith rectified this situation and in 628 pages (plus notes) painted a picture of a man who is “one of the most complex figures in American history.”
It’s fair to say that Smith is not really a Grant apologist. Throughout the book the details of Grants life are displayed for what they are. Grants strengths are seen in contrast to his weaknesses. The high points in Grants life are seen along with the low. As Smith states in the preface:
“The story of his life combines abject failure and world fame. He demonstrated superb mastery of the world’s most powerful army, and was twice elected president with overwhelming majorities. Yet he was incompetent in personal financial matters, excessively generous toward old friends, and overly loyal to those who had served him. He was a withdrawn, seemingly inarticulate man whose writing sparkled with clarity…No subordinate ever doubted what Grant intended, and no military action ever miscarried for lack of direction.”
From Grant’s early years, through the Mexican war, Civil war, Presidency, and all aspect of Grants personal life, Smith does an excellent job of portraying not only Grant the soldier, Grant the General, and Grant the President; Smith portrays Grant the person. In doing so Smith provides great worldview insights into life, war, reconciliation, overcoming weakness, humility, civil rights issues and many other areas. I recommend this book for the history buff, but also for the Christian. Why for the Christian? Because in studying Grant’s life we see God’s acts of providence in a man who may or may not have been saved. We also see examples of humility, responsibility and obedience that mirror in part our lives in Christ. When reading this description of Grant by one of his contemporaries, I noted that parts of this could/should be something that’s said of every Christian (emphasis mine):
“[Grant] had a temperament ‘nothing could disturb and a judgment that was judicial in its comprehensiveness and wisdom. Not an original or brilliant man, but sincere, thoughtful, deep and gifted with a courage that never faltered. When the time came to risk all, he went in like a simple-hearted, unaffected, unpretending hero, whom no ill omens could deject and no triumph unduly exalt.”
Grant never seemed to be a man who desired attention. From his early years on he did as he was asked. When Grant was 17 his father sent him to West Point, not so much to start a military career, but to get a professional education. When the Mexican war broke out Grant was deployed to Mexico and it wasn’t long until he had distaste for the violence of war. After his first battle he wrote to his fiancé Julia “it was terrible to go over the ground the next day and see the amount of life that had been destroyed.” It was interesting to learn that Grant was not especially in favor of the Mexican war, yet he recognized that he was a man under authority and did what he was asked to do. During the Mexican war Grant also studied his Brigadier General Zachary Taylor. In later years the similarity in Taylor and Grant’s leadership style would become evident.
Following the Mexican war Smith chronicles one of the most trying periods of time in Grants life. During this time Grant was discharged from the army for drunkenness (Alcohol would never be a serious personal issue for him again despite the claims of his critics), failed numerous business endeavors and at one point was forced to sell firewood on the streets of St. Louis just to provide for his family.
The Civil war brought about a change to Grants circumstances. Smith’s account of Grant’s Civil war years are riveting…at least to the history enthusiast. Early on in the war Grant realized distinguished himself from the other officers in the army. Smith detailed how the common consensus of the military brass was to win the war by capturing places. Grant however realized that the war could only be won by defeating the rebel army. This difference made life somewhat difficult for Grant but eventually gained him the attention of the President who recognized that Grant, unlike the other generals, was a man that was “willing to fight!” Time and again Grant’s army was put in situations that any other Union officer would have retreated from and time and again Grant, instead of focusing on his own weakness, exploited the weakness of the enemy. Grant’s objective was total victory yet when that victory came at Appomattox it was Grant that led the way for reconciliation. I doubt that the world has ever seen such generous terms of surrender given to a defeated enemy.
Tragedy struck the U.S. shortly after Appomattox as not only was President Lincoln assassinated but the new president was one of the most racist presidents this country has seen. President Andrew Johnson’s views on southern reconstruction were also at odds with Grant’s. Yet during Johnson’s years in office Grant, while doing all he could to bring/keep the country together, submitted to the laws of the land and the chain of command. Grant did everything the law allowed in keeping the president from starting another civil war and taking the country back to pre-civil war politics and policies.
When Grant took office in 1869 he set about doing what he had always done. He hadn’t sought the presidency, but won a landslide victory without even campaigning (a feat he would again accomplish four years later). His presidency was marked with struggles in the south, Indian issues in the west, turmoil in congress, turmoil in the economy and sometimes turmoil in his own cabinet. Grant’s views on the freedmen (freed slaves) and the Indians put him at odds with popular sentiment because Grant viewed them both as human beings and as citizens, or potential citizens of the U.S., a sentiment not shared by some in his own party and by most of the Democratic Party which was defined by a white supremacy. Smith details the highs and lows of Grant’s presidency and in the end the reader comes out with a respect for this man whose greatest strengths (loyalty and trust) sometimes proved to be his greatest weakness as several cabinet members were discovered to have inappropriate financial dealings.
Grants ex-president years included a round the world trip and another period of financial ruin caused by his poor financial skills and over trusting nature. Grant’s final years were also marked by the outpouring of gratitude by a nation that would not exist if God had not placed Grant in the position he did.
At the end of his life Grant had done great things that he had never set out to do, and achieved fame that he had never desired to have. As he lay dying, he wrote to a final visitor:
“It seems that man’s destiny in this world is quite as much a mystery as it is likely to be in the next. I never thought of acquiring rank in the profession I was educated for; yet it came with two grades higher prefixed to the rank of General officer for me. I certainly never had either ambition or taste for political life; yet I was twice President of the United States. If anyone had suggested the idea of my becoming an author, as they frequently did, I was not sure whether they were making sport of me or not. I have written a book which is in the hands of the manufacturers. I ask you to keep these notes very private lest I become an authority on the treatment of diseases. I have already too many trades to be proficient at any.”
