The faces of RE Lee

I have to plead ignorance here. I never fully realized that photography in the 1860's was still in its infancy and it was very difficult for photographs of famous leaders to spread around the country. Robert E. Lee falls into this category. For almost the entire war his true likeness remained unknown to many Union officers who face him. I highly suggest that you check out this short 8 minute video which focuses on Lee's image during the Civil War.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UQJKUYBx1A&feature=player_embedded

Who should I promote? Robert E. Lee after the death of Thomas J. Jackson

After Stonewall Jackson was killed the Confederate high command had an important decision ot make. The Army of Northern Virginia had entered a state of change after the beloved commander of the Second Corps met his end by a volley fired by his own troops. Lee had six eligiable candiates to replace Jackson and if you look at the list you could form a second army around these guys.

Richard Ewell-->Served with distinction with Jackson in the Valley and the Second Bull Run campaign where he was wounded.

A.P. Hill-->Lee called him his best division commander. This was very difficult for anyone to argue because Hill's division saved the Confederate right at Sharpsburg and despite a questionable performance at Fredricksburg, Hill's division possessed one of the best fighting forces in America. This was due to the strength of Hill as a commander.

John Bell Hood-->Next to Hill he was argulably Lee's best division commander. Hood had smashed the Union line at Gaines Mill and saved the Confederate left at Sharpsburg in 1862.

Richard H. Anderson-->Had one of the best resumes of any of the six commanders. He served with distinction during the Seven Days Campaign, Antietam and Second Bull Run. Anderson also was a very humble man like R.E. Lee.

Lafayette McLaws-->Another division commander and like Hood he served with skill under the commands of James Longstreet and Jackson. Like Hill he fought in every single battle that the Army of Northern Virginia had ever seen.

Jackson died on May 10, 1863 and by May 23rd the gray-bearded Lee had made his decision. He would divide his army into three corps instead of the two that had previously existed. This would make it easier for Lee and his corps commanders to dictate orders and fight battles. Longstreet would remain in command of the First Corps. As successor to Jackson, General Lee decided that Richard Ewell would become the new commander of the Second Corps.

Meanwhile the command of the newly minted Third Corps would fall to A.P. Hill. Many in the army critisized the decision and stated that the army's commander picked Hill because he was a Virginian. Years later Jefferson Davis would put this theory to rest in his memorirs by stating "There had been complaints in certain quarters that Virginia was getting more her fair share of the promotions. But the truth is that A.P. Hill was clearly entitled to the place, both ont he account of his ability as a soldier and the meritorious services he had rendered, that General Lee did not hestiate to to recommend him, and I did not hestiate to make the appointment."

Source:

Robertson, James I. General A. P. Hill : The Story of a Confederate Warrior. New York: Random House, 1987.

Lee, Jackson and Dr. King day???

Just an interesting article that I cut and pasted fro Wikepedia:

"Lee-Jackson-King Day was a holiday celebrated in the Commonwealth of Virginia from 1984 to 2000.

Robert E. Lee's birthday (January 19, 1807) has been celebrated as a Virginia holiday since 1889. In 1904, the legislature added the birthday of Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson (January 21, 1824) to the holiday, and Lee-Jackson Day was born.

In 1983, President Ronald Reagan approved an Act of Congress declaring January 15 to be a national holiday in honor of civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. Since 1978, Virginia had celebrated King's birthday in conjunction with New Year's Day. To align with the federal holiday, the Virginia legislature simply combined King's celebration with the existing Lee-Jackson holiday.

The incongruous nature of the holiday, which simultaneously celebrated the lives of Confederate generals and a civil rights icon, did not escape the notice of Virginia lawmakers. In 2000, Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore proposed splitting Lee-Jackson-King Day into two separate holidays, with Lee-Jackson Day to be celebrated the Friday before what would become Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. The measure was approved and the two holidays are now celebrated separately."

I just found this fascinating.

Robert E. Lee Timeline or Lifeline

Recently, I've wanted to create a Robert E. Lee timeline for fun. Yes I am such a history nerd but that is what makes me so cool.

Robert E. Lee Timeline

1807 January 9 Robert Edward Lee is born at 'Stratford', Westmoreland County, Virginia
1829 _______ Lee graduates from the United States Military Academy at West Point.
1831 May 7 Arrives at Fortress Monroe for duty.
1831 June 30 Robert Edward Lee and Mary Anne Custis marry.
1832 September 16 George Washington Custis Lee is born.
1835 July 22 Mary Lee is born.
1837 May 30 William Henry Fitzhugh Lee is born.
1839 June 18 Annie Carter Lee is born.
1841 February 27 Elanore Agnes Lee is born.
1843 October 27 Robert Edward Lee, Jr., is born.
1846 February 10 Mildred Childe Lee is born.
1852 September 1 Lee assumes his duties as Superintendent of the United States Military Academy at West Point.
1853 July 17 Lee is Confirmed into the Episcopal Church.
1859 October 17 Lee is ordered to the War Department in regards to John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry. 1859
1859 October 18 Lee leads a command of United States Marines to capture John Brown and his cohorts at Harpers Ferry.
1860 February 9 Lee is ordered to San Antonio, Texas, to take command of the Department of Texas.
1861 April 20 Robert E. Lee resigns his commission in the United States Army.
1861 May 14 Lee is appointed Brigadier General in the Confederate States Army.
1861 June 14 Lee attains the rank of General in the Confederate States Army.
1862 May 31 Joseph E. Johnston is wounded at the Battle of Seven Pines.
1863 July 1-3 Battle of Gettysburg. MORE
1865 April 2 Lee orders the Abandonment of Petersburg, Virginia.
1865 January 23 Lee is named General in Chief of the Armies of the Confederate States.
1866 February 17 Lee appeares before the Joint Committee on Reconstruction on Capitol Hill.
1870 October 12 Robert E. Lee dies in Lexington, Virginia
1975 July 22 Congress Passed a law restoring Lee's Citizenship.
1975 August 5 President Gerald Ford signs in to law the bill Congress passed restoring Lee's Citizenship to the United States.

Today the most famous retreat in American History began

Today, 145 years ago General Robert E. Lee issued these orders which began the long retreat back to Virginia. The Army of Northern Virginia had just been soundly defeated at Gettysburg and the demoralized southern forces picked up the wounded that they could and started for home.

General ORDERS, No. 74.

HDQRS. ARMY OF NORTHERN VIRGINIA,
July 4, 1863.

I. The army will vacate its position this evening. General A. P. Hill's corps will commence the movement, withdrawing from its position after dark, and proceed on the Fairfield road to the pass in the mountains, which it will occupy, selecting the strongest ground for defense toward the east; General Longstreet's corps Will follow, and General Ewell's corps bring up the rear. These two latter corps will proceed through and go into camp. General Longstreet's corps will be charged with the escort of the prisoners, and will habitually occupy the center of the line of march. General Ewell's and General Hill's corps will alternately take the front and rear on the march.
II. The trains which accompany the army will habitually move between the leading and the rear corps, each under the charge of their respective chief quartermasters. Lieutenant-Colonel [James L.] Corley, chief quartermaster of the army, will regulate the order in which they shall move. Corps commanders will see that the officers remain with their trains, and that they move steadily and quietly, and that the animals are properly cared for.
III. The artillery of each corps will move under the charge of their respective chiefs of artillery, the whole under the general superintendence of the commander of the artillery of the army.
IV. General Stuart will designate a cavalry command, not exceeding two squadrons, to precede and follow the army in its line of march, the commander of the advance reporting to the commander of the leading corps, the commander of the rear to the commander of the rear corps. He will direct one or two brigades, as he may think proper, to proceed to Cash town this afternoon, and hold that place until the rear of the army has passed Fairfield, and occupy the gorge in the mountains; after crossing which, to proceed in the direction of Greencastle, guarding the right and rear of the army on its march to Hagerstown and Williamsport. General Stuart, with the rest of the cavalry, will this evening take the route to Emmitsburg, and proceed thence toward Cavetown and Boonsborough, guarding the left and rear of the army.
V. The commanding general earnestly exhorts each corps commander to see that every officer exerts the utmost vigilance, steadiness, and boldness during the whole march.

R. E. LEE,
General.

"How Firm a Foundation"

Another Teddy Roosevelt/Civil War connection

In the beginning and ending credits, the song that was played instrumentally was "How Firm a Foundation", a religious hymn about strength to go on in life. That hymn was played at the funerals of Civil War general Robert E. Lee, and American Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt.

Lee on Longstreet

How did Lee feel about James Longstreet? There are many opinions but here is an section from am 1866 Lee letter that might shed some light on Lee's opinion of his "Old Warhorse"

"You must remember me very kindly to Mrs. Longstreet and all your children. I have not had an opportunity yet to return the compliment she paid me. I had, while in Richmond, a great many inquiries after you, and learned that you intended commencing business in New Orleans. If you become as good a merchant as you were a soldier, I shall be content. No one will then excel you, and no one can wish you more success and more happiness than I. My interest and affection for you will never cease, and my prayers are always offered for your prosperity."
Robert E. Lee, January 19, 1866.

"In my opinion General Robert E. Lee was average" by U.S. Grant

For many Civil War officers the war did not end with the close of hostilities. The battles moved from a war of guns to a war of words. Every veteran, whether he was a private of the President of the Confederacy penned memoirs and histories. These books usually revolved around their own personal experiences and they usually puffed up the writer at the expense of rivals.

One of these famous memoirs was written by Ulysses S. Grant. In the book, Grant provides American with its greatest military memoir. Grant offers opinions about the his chief adversary and you might be aware of him. His name is Robert E. Lee.

Grant's ideas go against the commonly held "mold" of the "Marble Man" and his supporters. These Lost Cause enthusiasts glorified the life and accomplishments of R.E. Lee and painted Grant as a butcher and one of the wars weakest generals. The former President lived during the early years of the Lost Cause and became the first "celebrity" author to challenge the greatness of General Lee. Perhaps part of Grant's opinion was molded by the attacks made by the Lost Cause supporters, Grant saw how these men were painting the history of the war and he wanted to make sure that these exaggerations would not hold up against the judgement of history.

The old Yankee general challenged the glorification of R.E. Lee and scoffed at the notion that Lee possessed superhuman abilities. Grant blamed both the northern and the southern public for giving Lee these qualities when the terrain and a bit of luck provided Lee with the opportunity for success. He used the examples of the Wilderness and Spotsylvania to support his viewpoint. The Confederate army (paraphrasing Grant) was so disrupted prior to the Wilderness that only the choking woods saved Lees army from destruction. Moreover, during the Spotsylvania Campaign Lee had several chances to exploit the vulnerability of the Union army but failed to do so. Lee remained behind his entrenchments as the Union army was separated and vulnerable to attack. Lee seemed immobilized in fog and in his memoirs Grant wrote "he seemed really to be misled as to my designs."

In fact, Grant's opinion of Lee was cited prior to the publication of his memoirs in 1885. After leaving an embattled presidency, Grant took a world tour and traveled to several countries like Egypt and France. A journalist named John Russell Young accompanied Grant and interviewed him several times during the trip. Russell wrote and article about these conversations and published them in 1878. The resulting article indicated that the general could not understand the fuss over Robert E. Lee. Grant believed that his opponent was overrated and Joseph E. Johnston was a greater threat. Lee had the backing of the Copperheads, the southern people and sympathy from the outside world. Together these things painted a rebel general who had no equal in American military history. "Everything he did was right Grant said "He was treated like a demi-god. Our generals had a hostile press, lukewarm friends and a public opinion outside."

Grant pushed further during his interview with Russell stating 'The cry was in the air that the North only won by brute force; that the generalship and valor were in the South. This has gone into history, with as many other illusions that are historical." Grant's next statement must have irked Lost Cause supporters as he stated "Lee was of a slow, conservative, cautious nature, without imagination or humor, always the same, with grave dignity. I never could see in his achievements what justifies his reputation.

Years later as he penned his memoirs, Grant went further into his opinion of Lee and supported his belief that Lee was overrated. In volume one Grant writes "The natural disposition of most people, is to clothe a commander of a large army whom they do not know with almost superhuman abilities. A large part of the National army, for instance, and most of the press of the country, clothed General Lee with just such qualities; but I had known him personally and knew that he was mortal; and it was just as well that I felt this." Wow thats great stuff and it is obvious that Grant might have liked Lee personally but as a fellow professional he felt that Lee military prowess was a fabrication. Grant added further that Lee sat behind strong defensive works and never came out to give him battle in the open field. "In fact, nowhere after the battle of Wilderness did Lee show any disposition to leave his defenses far behind him."

Grants quotes bring up some intriguing questions. Did Grant feel that Lee was a wimp? Grant never questions Lee's manhood but he obviously points out that Lee as a general was not a concern for him during the Overland Campaign. Historian William Blair accuratly states that Grant's Personal Memoirs serves as Grant's own shield from the grave. I think Blair is correct in his assumption.

Robert E. Lee: The armchair general

Robert E. Lee could play the role of an armschair general. Does this comment surprise you? I hate to break it to some people but R.E. Lee was a human being and could be critical of his subordinates. Confederate General Richard S. Ewell was the subject a postwar conversations that Lee held between 1868-1870 with William Preston Johnston and William Allen. This blog isn't meant to be a personal attack on Ewell or Lee but rather a discussion of Lee's critical opinion of Richard Ewell.

Due to ill health and the management of Washington College, R.E. Lee was unable to write his memorirs. Other than Lincoln, these unwritten memoirs would have become the most important Civil War manuscript ever.

It would have been interesting to see what Lee thought of his conduct during the war, his government in Richmond and he strategy in several campaigns. It seems that Lee remained repressed is several of his writings about the war and avoided critizing his subordinates publicly.

This fits Lee's command style and his beliefs of what an armycommanders role was is well documented by Civil War historians. But what of Ewell?



In May 1863, Richard S. Ewell took over the 2nd Corps of Lee's army after Stonewall Jackson crossed over the river and rested under the shade of the trees. His conduct at the 1863 Battle of Wincheser and during the Gettysburg campaign concerned Lee. Ewell did not demonstrate the potential that he had shown as a division commander and his handling of the final moments of July 1, 1863 (prior to sundown) have been debated by historians for decades. One could argue that Ewell was timid and lacked the decisiviness needed to excel as a corps commander.



By the beginning of the 1864 spring offensive it was obvious to some that Ewell needed Lee's guiding hand in order to be successful. General Lee made the unwise decision (though its easy to be an armchair general myself) to not alter his supervisory style with Ewell. Lee had the habit of issuing discreationary, vague orders that allowed his corps commanders to make their own decisions. From these orders the corps commanders would issue their decisions to their division commanders and so on.

James Longstreet and Thomas J. Jackson worked very well under Lee because they knew what he expected and they were excellent commanders in their own right. Ewell was promoted to replace Jackson but he was unable to. Lee's opinion of Ewell (granted it is in hindsight) were pretty straightforward. He told Allan that Ewell had "faults as a miltary leader-his quick alternations from elation to despondency, his want of decision" Lee must have believed that these issues contributed to the Conferate defeat. Although they do not emancipate Lee from his own failures as a commander.

The history of Lee's failure to supervise Ewell are well documentated. As he marched north in June 1863 Lee ordered Ewell to smash Union forces at Winchester, Virginia. A victory there would open up the road north and fulfill the first part of Lee's invasion plans. Ewells orders from Lee instructed him to "be guided by his own judgement in any unforseen emergency." Ewell fullfilled his commanding officers 1868 judgement of him at Winchester with his inital confidence when he saw that he could destory the Federals. However, once Ewell inspected the enemy's works his emotials turned from "elation to despondency." He quickly sent a message to Lee asking for directions from headquarters. The Battle of Second Winchester was a Confederate victory but this was most likely due to the fighting prowess of Jackson's old corps rather than the new 2nd corps commander.

At Gettysburg Lee expressed that Ewell had fought the battle in an "imperfect, halting way" and seemed utterly disastatified with the performance of Mr. Ewell. If Lee realized that Ewell had these weaknesses in 1863 he failed to change his command style with his 2nd corps commander. In hindsight however, it is easy to say that Lee should have fulfilled his subordinate's need for close guidance and explicit orders. In closing, he should have been more forceful with Richard S. Ewell. Cambell Brown, the stepson of Ewell and his staff officer noted than General Lee's "instructions to his Corps Comrs are of a very comprehensive, general description & frequently admit of several interpretations."

Between 1868-1870 Lee expressed concern over Ewell's performance during the Battle of the Wilderness. During this contest Lee issued more unclear oders to Ewell, whose Second Corps occupied the Rebel left flank. The excellent tactictian eye of R.E. Lee saw that victory for the South was at hand if Ewell could cut the Federals off from Germanna Ford. Lee's orders asked Ewell to conduct the attack but only if it could "be done without too great a sacrifice." The ambiguous language of these orders allowed Ewell to remain on the defensive.

In his 1868 conversation with William Preston Johnston the general reminisced about the Wilderness stating that "Ewell showed vacillation" during the battle and "If Jackson had been alive and there, he would have crushed the enemy." William Allan noted that Lee told him that Ewell's movement was meant to be " full attack on flank & intended to support it with all of Ewell's corps...to rout the enemy." We've established that Lee was correct in his assumptions about Ewell but where his orders on May 6, 1864 at the Wilderness a possiblity?

First, Ewell had to attack an entrenched Federal force across rugged terrain. To make matters worse, frequent Union demonstrations had pinned down the Second Corps so that Ewell could not shift units from his right flank without exposing the Army of Northern Virginia to a disasterous counterattack. Ewell had no reserve troops to support his attack or to protect the before mentioned Confederate flank to a Federal countercharge. Ewell was overly cautious but I have to give him credit for not over committing his troops. R.E. Lee....being a human being...is correct in his assumptions about Ewell but his thoughts concerning Ewell's attack on May 6th border on fantasy.

As history records Ewell carried out the attack but his forces were too small to achieve the results that R.E. Lee needed. The limited attack captured two Union generals, captured some needed supplies and a few hundred prisoners. If "Jackson had been there" I doubt that he would have made a different decision. Perhaps Lee was thinking back to 1862 1863 when his army had the offensive firepower to carry out his brilliant attack schemes.

In the end one cannot doubt Lee's critical analysis of Ewell's career as a soldier. Perhaps, as some historians attest that the Jackson's guiding hand that had helped Ewell perform very well during Southern victories was missing. Lee failure to fill contributed to the Confederate defeats at Gettysburg and the draw at the Wilderness as much as Ewells own deficiencies as commander. If you are on Lee's side, Ewell's side, somewhere in between or indifferent you cannot deny that Lee was actually critical of a subordinate. Lee the critic is a microcosm of Civil War history that fascinates me. I will continue to look for more of his critical analysis.

91 blogs so far. Nine more means that I reach 100!!!

Merry Christmas from Robert E. Lee

The holiday of Christmas was very important to Robert E. Lee. Army life took him away for months at a time and the holiday season became the time that the entire Lee famile got together at Arlington. However, a few times Lee was unable to attend Christmas festivities and he would write home to discuss his unhappiness. It is via these letters that Robert E. Lee becomes a human. The joy of family, friends and plum pudding are discussed openly. Yes, the Lee children believed in Santa Claus and were delighted to open their gifts on Christmas morning. These emotional letters take Lee from the "Marble Man" to a man of flesh and blood who loved his family and had a deep passion for the Christmas season. Here is just a few of these fascinating letters.

To his young sons, Rooney and Custis. It is Christmas 1846 and Lee is writing from the Mexican War battlefront:

“I hope good Santa Claus will fill by Rob's stockings tonight that Mildred's, Agnes's, and Annals may break down with good things. I do not know what he may have for you and Mary, but if he only leaves for you one half of what I wish, you will want for nothing. I have frequently thought if I had one of you on each side of me riding on ponies, such as I could get you, I would be comparatively happy.”

The same year (1846) to his wife Mary, Lee writes:

“We have had many happy Christmas' together, and this is the first time that we have been entirely separated at this holy time since our marriage, and though I have been absent on two or three other occasions on the day itself, yet have not been far distant and always arrived during the holy days. We have therefore nothing to complain of and I hope it has not interfered with your happiness, surrounded as you are by father, Mother, children and dear friends. I therefore trust you are well and happy and that this is the last time I shall be absent from you during my life. May God preserve and bless you till then and forever after is my constant prayer.”

1851, Lee to his son Custis who was enrolled at West Point:

“We came on Wednesday morning. It was a bitter cold day, and we were kept waiting an hour in the depot at Baltimore for the cars, which were detained by the snow and ice on the rails. We found your grandfather at the Washington depot, Daniel and the old carriage and horses, and young Daniel on the colt Mildred. Your mother, grandfather, Mary Eliza, the little people and the baggage, I thought load enough for the carriage, so Rooney and I took our feet in our hands and walked over . . . .The snow impeded the carriage as well as us, and we reached here shortly after it. The children were delighted at getting back, and passed the evening in devising pleasure for the morrow. They were in upon us before day on Christmas morning, to overhaul their stockings. Mildred thinks she drew the prize in the shape of a beautiful new doll; Angelina's infirmities were so great that she was left in Baltimore and this new treasure was entirely unexpected. The cakes, candies, books, etc., were overlooked in the caresses bestowed upon her, and she was scarcely out of her arms all day. Rooney got among his gifts a nice pair of boots, which he particularly wanted, and the girls, I hope, were equally pleased with their presents, books, and trinkets.

Your mother, Mary, Rooney, and I went into church, and Rooney... skated back along the canal (Rooney having taken his skates along for the purpose,) and we filled his place in the carriage with Miss Sarah Stuart, one of M.'s comrades, Minny Uoyd was detained at home to assist her mother at dinner but your Aunt Maria Fitzhugh brought her and Miss Lucretia Fitzhugh out the next day, and Wallace Stiles and his brother arriving at the same time, we had quite a table-full...

I need not describe to you our amusements, you have witnessed them so often; nor the turkey, cold ham, plum pudding, mince-pies, etc. at dinner. I hope you will enjoy them again, or some equally as good...”

This 1856 letter from Texas (where Lee was stationed at that time) mirrors the 1846 letters from Mexico. Lee writes:

“The time is approaching when I trust many of you will be assembled around the family hearth at dear Arlington, to celebrate another Christmas. Though absent, my heart will be in the midst of you, and I shall enjoy in imagination and memory, all that is going on. May nothing occur to mar or cloud the family fireside, and may each be able to look back with pride and pleasure at their deeds of the past year and with confidence and hope to that in prospect. I can do nothing but hope and pray for you.”

“I have been recalling dearest Mary the many happy Christmases we have had together, and the pleasure I have enjoyed with you, your dear parents and the children around me. I ought not therefore to repine at an occasional separation from you, but be grateful for what I have had, and be prepared to keep this solitary and alone My prayers and thoughts will be with you and all will receive my fervent salutations. I hope nothing will be omitted that I could have done, to make each one happy.”

Christmas 1860. The Civil War is fast approaching and despite the ill health of his wife, Colonel Lee found time to write to Arlington:

“Although you anticipated a quiet Christmas, I hope it was a happy one to you all, and that you were filled with gratitude for the many blessings that surrounded you. Although distant, my heart and thoughts were ever present with you and my prayers were offered for Heavens choicest benefits for you all.... Here we are far removed and get the essence of all disunion movements from the New Orleans papers.... I am particularly anxious that 'Virginia should keep right, and inauguration of the Constitution, so I would wish that she might be able to maintain it and save the union.'”

Wow now that is powerful stuff. I wish all my readers Happy Holidays!!

Book Review #6 Lee and His General in War and Memory

When you go to a local bookstore or library you are overwhelmed by the number of Civil War books. With so many books it is impossible to read them all. If you have a deeply rooted interest in the Civil War it is likely that you have read the basics. You know the facts and the basic plotline of the war and you can go deeper into the things that interest you. Is it Lincoln? Is it Lee or Grant? Is it the common solider? A specific campaign or battle? Is it…..well you get the idea. I cannot even calculate the number of Civil War books that I’ve read. It numbers in the thousands. But what are the best books that I’ve ever read? This new series will discuss and review these.

Lee and His Generals in War and Memory by Gary W. Gallagher is one of the best books that I’ve ever read. I am a bit biased because I enjoy Gallaghers writing and I have profound interest in the Lost Cause. This collection of twelve essays, Gallagher examines Robert E. Lee, his principal subordinates, the treatment they have received in Confederate military history and the continuing influence of the Lost Cause on Civil War literature. The historical image of Lee and his generals were shaped by a large degree by the writings of ex-Confederates. These reminiscences were utilized by Civil War historians of later generations and are still used to interpret the conflict. Lost Cause leaders portrayed Lee as a perfect Christian warrior and Thomas J. Jackson as his peerless lieutenant. Their failings were the result of incompetent performances by other generals. Sound familiar? It should because Lost Cause mythology is taught in our schools and you probably have read books by Bruce Catton and Douglas Freeman who are just two people who have perpuated the myths.

The book is divided into four parts and I will briefly discuss them here. Part I offers four essays of Lee and they explore is decisions during Sharpsburg, Gettysburg and the Overland Campaigns. Another essay discusses Lee’s generalship in light of Thomas Connolly and Alan T. Nolans “anti-Lee” books. Gallagher attests that Lee’s generalship was suited for the Confederate people and even though it was bloody it extended the life of the Confederacy beyond the realm of possibility. “More than once he brought them to the verge of independence, in the process creating a record of military accomplishment amid difficult circumstances.” Part II has five essays the scrutinize several of Lee’s subordinates. Included amongst these essays are James Longstreet, Richard Ewell, A.P. Hill, Jubal Early, Stonewall Jackson and John Magruder. Margruder is one of the best because it explores the career of the virtually unknown generals whose exploits go unnoticed by the casual Civil War buff. The Jackson article is equally interesting because it seeks to answer if Jackson’s reputation as a general is justified by his performance. All five of these pieces not only consider how Lost Cause literature built up or destroyed reputations but also illuminate the ways that post-Civil War authors have written of these men.

Part III is wonderful because it takes Lost Cause authorship a step further. Rather than devote essays entirely to the impact of the Lost Cause on post-Civil War authors like Douglas Freeman, Gallagher take it in a different direction. He exposes the writings of Jubal Early and LeSale Corbell Pickett and how they influenced the Lost Cause myth. The Early article explores his undying love for the Southern cause and how he extolled that on Lee and Jackson. The Ms. Pickett article exposes her as a person who succeeded in making her husband the perfect Lost Cause warrior and overstated his role in the conflict. This work was actually counterproductive because historians are still struggling to understand Pickett as a man and as a general. This confusion is due to Ms. Pickett’s writings and possible forgeries of her husbands letters.
The final section contains two essays devoted to Civil War media and how it is influenced by the Lost Cause. The best article of the two would be of interest to those who have sat through Ken Burns 1990 Civil War documentary. Few realize that it too was heavily influenced by the Lost Cause and Gallagher alludes to the fact that this influence may have been motivated by the entertainment aspect rather than the historical record. Burns sought to entertain his viewers rather than provide an good record of the war. Virtually unexplored are the roles played by citizens, blacks, slaves and women. Burns devotes some time to these subjects and instead focuses on the Virginia theater. The other article deals with battlefield preservation and how neo-Confederates seek out battlefields in order to pay homage to Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia. How should Americans view the war? These are interesting questions and I think anybody would enjoy these two articles because they make you think about your own viewpoint of the war.

Some reviews might say that these articles are “above” the casual Civil War leader but I don’t believe that is true. The average layman and the Civil War buff will thoroughly enjoy these essays and on your next trip to the library or bookstore you have to get a copy. It will attract anybody interested in General Lee, the Army of Northern Virginia and the establishment of popular images of the Confederate military. With the thousands of Civil War texts on hand this one will undoubtedly make you a better historian.

Gallagher, Gary W. Lee and His Generals in War and Memory. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1998.

Did Lincoln and/or Lee sleep with hookers???

I mentioned that I just finished Reading the Man which is a book about Robert E. Lee. Currently, I am back on my Lincoln kick and I have finally obtained a copy of Lincoln's Melancholy by Joshua Wolf Shenk. They are excellent texts and I could not put Reading the Man down and the same is true for Lincoln's Melancholy.Both books raise an interesting question that is UNPROVEN but the probability for it is very high. Did Lincoln and or Lee sleep with prostitutes? In the 1800's it was common for a career army officer and a traveling lawyer to engaged in sexual liaisons with prostitutes. Both men could have practiced this habit.Lee spent most of his career in army outposts where many of his fellow officers got sex from prostitutes. Lincoln traveling on the law circuit for most of his career as a lawyer where prostitution was common. Lincoln lived with Joshua Speed for several years and in Lincoln's Melancholy it states that Speed's affection for prostitutes was well known. This means that we can directly place Lincoln with prostitutes but that doesn't mean that he did anything with them. The sickest thing is to think that Speed and Lincoln shared the same bed, which was a common thing back then when beds were scarce but how many times did the sheets get washed? What a sick thought. The sex lives of our heroes is sometimes a mystery. Not that we want to know the details but wouldn't the respect for your hero have the possibility of changing if you knew a bit more? Sleeping with hookers shows a lack of character and respect but in the 1800's it was common and an accepted practice. We must avoid making our Civil War heroes into perfect molds of granite or bronze. I mean they are human after all with desires, lusts, hatreds, jealousies to go along with the good things that make them heroes. Did Lee and or Lincoln sleep with prostitutes? It is likely but we may never know the answer. The documents that could point to that might be lost, destroyed or in some archive somewhere. "Honest" Abraham and "Bobby" Lee were men with the same lusts and desires that men of all ages share. If the opportunity was there they MAY have taken it or they MIGHT have avoided it. As to the rest it is forever a part of history.

As for the official word I haven't found anything that directly ties either man to hookers. The option was there and anything is possible. Lee and Lincoln have been painted as perfection and this would be an ultimate blemish on their reputation. Moreover, the men who made them perfect could have hidden any liaisons from the historical record.

By the way I picked the Natalie Portman photo because it was the only one I could find of a person that looked like a prostitute. Its all I could get.

October 12, 1870, Robert E. Lee's last day

Just because I forgot to post on the 137th Anniv. of General Lee's death here we go. Lee suffered a stroke on September 28th from which he never recovered. Lee died from the effects of pneumonia, a little after 9 a.m., October 12, 1870, two weeks after the stroke, in Lexington, Virginia. According to history his last words were "Strike the tent" and that he revisitied Virginia battlefields in his dreamish state. The stoke made speaking nearly impossible for Robert E. Lee. This was backed up by Mary Lee and others who were present at Lee's bedside. It is likely that his famous last words were conjured up by Lee supporters and Lost Cause leaders.

According to J. William Jones' Personal Reminiscences, Anecdotes, and Letters of Gen. Robert E. Lee, his last words, on the day of his death, were:

"Tell Hill he must come up. Strike the tent."

Ken Burns film The Civil War uses Jones account. I do not know if Jones was at Lee's bedside and even if he was the family of Lee wrote of his passing. Again, Mary Lee and one of Lee's daughters wrote of Robert's death scene and neither of them make any mention of any last words. Furthermore, Lee's stroke caused Aphasia and this would have made communication impossible. Whatever you wish to believe General Lee died on his day. He was 63 years old or was he???? Read my other blog about General Lee's age at the time of his death.

Robert E. Lee wasn't born on Jan 19th or was he?

This is my 50th blog and I am so happy with each and everyone of them. I hope that you are enjoying them too. Here is number 50:

The study of Robert E. Lee and Abraham Lincoln had been my life's favorite pastime. Elizabeth Brown Pryor has recently published Reading the Man: A Portrait of Robert E. Lee Through His Private Letters and this has offered me insights to Lee's character. Its great stuff and I am sure that I will offer more blogs on it as I continue to read from my current position on page 58. (The book is 476 pages of excitement)Every Lee book and encyclopedia entry will tell you that Lee was born on January 19, 1807. Back in the days before birth certificates were the norm people recorded birthdates in family bibles. Elizabeth Brown Pryor published a letter from Lee that tells the reader that he might have been born on a different date.In his application to West Point Lee wrote a cover letter introducing himself. A letter stating a cadets age, studies and background were required by West Point officials.

In this document Lee writes "I completed my eighteenth year on the 29th of last January." Before furthering my discussion of this letter I have to state that it is dated Feb. 28, 1824. I also have to state that the Lee bible (according to research conducted by Pryor) dates Lee's birth as Jan. 19th 1806 with the "6" crossed out and a "7" put in its place.Did the person who recorded the date make a mistake and write 1806 instead of 1807? Pryor makes an error because she fails to point this out as a possibility. Since Lee was born in January and the year had just changed the person recording his birthdate might have assumed it was still 1806. I highly doubt that Lee changed the date himself because West Point wasn't in the habit of asking families for their bibles in order to confirm birthdates.

Pryor's explanation for the change "the family changed the date for unknown reasons" and her research indicates that West Point records confirms a 1806 birthdate. However, isn't this what Lee's letter said in the first place? I am not criticizing Pryor's research but these are just my thoughts on this topic. Why would Lee make himself one year older than he actual was? I think Liz Pryor hits the nail on the head in her commentary. Lee wanted to boost his age to give his application an advantage by making him appear more mature and responsible. Many teenagers today lack responsible habits and 19th century teens were no exception to that rule. Making oneself appear older can have its advantages and going to West Point in the 19th century is no exception to that idea. Pryor notes another interesting fact about Lee's letter. The family bible, West Point records and history all agree that Lee was born on January 19th. If you reread Lee's quote that I used he incorrectly states his birthdate as Jan. 29th. Harry Lee (Lee's father), was born on Jan. 29th and Lee's mistake here is worth noting.

Why did Lee write down the wrong date? Was he so excited about the application process to West Point that he wrote a "2" instead of a "1"? I doubt that we will ever find out the answer but the fact that this question exists intrigues me.Elizabeth Brown Pryor's book is amazing and you have to get a copy to read. Personally, I am waiting for the softcover version but I did go to my local library and managed to get a copy. I am enjoying the book and her end notes are awesome as well. I will review the book as soon as I finish it. Until next time America!

Quote of the day:"So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that Slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interest of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this that I would have cheerfully lost all that I have lost by the war, and have suffered all that I have suffered to have this object attained."General Robert E. Lee, May 1, 1870

Robert E. Lee for President??????????????

As I am approaching the final pages of Lee: The Last Years by Charles Flood I found something that I didn't know before. It is a little known fact but the New York Herold didn't endorse U.S. Grant for President because they were a Democratic newspaper. Back in the day, certain newspapers supported candiates and although this hasn't changed in today's world it was more implicit in 1868.The Herold couldn't come up with a general that could beat Grant in the election of 1868. After their effort went unsatisified they printed an article that nominated Robert E. Lee for president. "We will recommend a candiate...General Robert E. Lee...He is a better soldier than any of those they have thought upon and a greater man." This statement occured just thirty-eight months after Lee had hung up his sword at Appomattox Court House.Lee had molded an army from scratch, baffled Northern armies for four years and his defeat was due to the sheer numbers that Grant forced upon the Army of Northern Virginia. This is the true beginning of Lee becoming a national hero and symbol on the Northern front. In many ways, the Lee cult led by Jubal Early weren't the first to raise Lee to such a high pedestal. What the Herold didn't understand was that Lee's citzenship had not been restored and he could not become the President of the United States. I have never found any document written by the general that states his position on the matter. Grant's reputation was slightly tarnished by a corrupt presidency that was not his fault.What would the Presidency of Robert E. Lee have been like? It is hard to say because he was a general and not a politican. He was a conservative who wanted to keep things as close to the prewar era as he could. That doesn't mean that he didn't understand that society was changing and was going to continue to racially evolve. Lee did not consider the media a friend. When speaking of the war he wrote "We appointed all our worst generals to command our armies, and all our best generals to edit the newspapers." I suppose after enduring George Bush's presidency I can safely say that Robert E. Lee would have been a better fit. Oh well, I guess what might have been is forever lost to history.

The Battle of Antietam Anniv. Blog

The battle was over by 5:30 p.m. Losses for the day were heavy on both sides. The Union had 12,401 casualties with 2,108 dead. Confederate casualties were 10,318 with 1,546 dead. This represented 25% of the Federal force and 31% of the Confederate. More Americans died on September 17, 1862, than on any other day in the nation's military history, including World War II's D-Day and the terrorist assaults of September 11, 2001. On the morning of September 18, Lee's army prepared to defend against a Federal assault that never came. After an improvised truce for both sides to recover and exchange their wounded, Lee's forces began withdrawing across the Potomac that evening to return to Virginia.President Lincoln was disappointed in McClellan's performance. He believed that McClellan's cautious and poorly coordinated actions in the field had forced the battle to a draw rather than a crippling Confederate defeat.

Historian Stephen Sears agrees.[46]" In making his battle against great odds to
save the Republic, General McClellan had committed barely 50,000 infantry and
artillerymen to the contest. A third of his army did not fire a shot. Even at
that, his men repeatedly drove the Army of Northern Virginia to the brink of
disaster, feats of valor entirely lost on a commander thinking of little beyond
staving off his own defeat." Stephen W. Sears, Landscape Turned Red

Today in Civil War History

Just a quick blog about an unusual event in the Civil War. This event offically began on September 13, 1862 after the Army of Northern Virginia began its invasion of Maryland. Lee's army had pushed the Army of the Potomac away from Richmond during the Seven Day's Campaign of June-July 1862. The following month the Confederates easily defeated General John Pope's army at Second Manassas. Flush with victory, Lee believed that one more win against the Union army would give the Confederacy the foreign help that they needed to win. However, to protect his supply line and flanks Lee had to capture Harpers Ferry.

The town of Harpers Ferry had been a supply depot and a place of importance because of John Browns Raid in 1859. Lee dispatched Stonewall Jackson and his men to sieze the town and the heights that surrounded it. General Jackson's men occupied the stregigic heights after the Union forces under Colonel Dixon Miles abondoned them without a fight. By September 15th, Jackson had his cannon trained on the Union garrision and he ordered the bombardment to begin.

Federal forces surrendered on the same day after Colonel Miles realized that Jacksons forces would overrun the garrision easily. The siege of Harpers Ferry gave the Confederacy 12,520 prisoners, 73 artillery pieces and a great deal of supplies. It was a great success but before the Confederates could enjoy the fruits of their victory a message reached General Jackson. The Army of the Potomac had arrived just outside Lee's defensive position near a small creek called Antietam. Jackson left men under General A.P. Hill to mop up any work that existed after the sucessful siege and quickly marched to join Lee. On September 17, 1862 the Battle of Antietam or Sharpsburg began. It would be the bloodiest day in the history of the war that almost crushed the Army of Northern Virginia forever. This is due to Lee's stregigic boldness in the fact of a superior enemy but Harpers Ferry had to be take in order to protect his army. Lee's invasion of Maryland could be deemed a failure except for the siege of the small town where the war truely began.

Rickard, J (16 May 2007), Siege of Harper’s Ferry, 13-15 September 1862 , http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/battles_harpers_ferry1862.html

Confederates buried at Arlington

Few who visit Arlington National Cemetery know of a spectalur monument to the enemies of the Union. Yes, the Confederacy has a monument in their honor at the place where so many American heroes are buried. The memorial is located in Section 16 of the cemetary and is a great part of the tour. When I visited Arlington in 1986 I was unaware of such a memorial and it has only recently come to me attention.Arlington National Cemetery rests on the grounds that Mary Custis Lee inherited from her father and was the home of both her and Robert E. Lee. The North started to bury their dead at Arlington in 1864 after the Federal government aquired the land because the Lee's failed to pay back taxes.

As of 2006, more than 320,000 people are buried at Lee's former estate. Ironically, the first soldier buried at Arlington was a Confederate prisoner of war! The overwhelming number of military deaths in 1864 caused many Confederates to be buried at Arlington not far from their former enemies. After the war the family members of these troops were not permitted to visit the graves of their loved ones or to decorate them. By 1900 the ill feeling that followed the war had died away as the reunited country fought Spain and the government opened to doors of Arlington to the former Confederates. By the end of June Congress authorized that a section of Arlington National Cemetery be set aside for the burial of Confederate dead. Southern dead was transferred from cemeteries around Washington and buried in a special section of Arlington National Cemetery. It was hoped that a Confederate memorial would finalize the peace between both North and South.Around 482 soldiers from the south are buried at this famed resting place. Among the persons buried there are 46 officers, 351 enlisted men, 58 wives, 15 southern civilians, and 12 unknowns. This pretty much represents the fighting force of the Confederacy on the battlefield and the homefront. They are buried in concentric circles and their graves are marked with headstones that are distinct for their pointed tops. Some resentment never dies and legend has it that the pointed tops were created so "the yankees can't sit on them".

Southern leadership led by the United Daughters of the Confederacy petitioned to erect a major monument to the Confederate dead. On March 4, 1906 Secretary of War William Howard Taft signed the necessary documents to allow the construction of a Confederate monmument at Arlington. The memorial was placed in the center of the concentric circle with the rebel gravestones stretching in every direction. The Confederate Monument was unveiled before a large crowd of northerners and southerners on June 4, 1914, which was the 104th birthday of Jefferson Davis. President Woodrow Wilson addressed the huge gathering and veterans of both the Union and Confederacy placed wreaths on the graves of their former foes. This symbolizes the feelings of reconciliation between the North and South, the memorial's central theme. Also, Bennett H. Young (1843-1919) who was a Confederate officer who led forces in the St Albans raid was present at the dedication.

The monument was sculpted by Moses Ezekiel, a Confederate veteran who is now buried at the base of his marvelous piece of craftsmenship. Moses resembles me a lot and I find that really fascinating. Exekiel's creation is 32 feet high with the statue of a woman at the top that symbolizes the south. Her head is crowned with olive leaves, her left hand extends a laurel wreath toward the South, acknowledging the sacrifice of her fallen sons. Her right hand holds a pruning hook resting on a plow stock. These symbols bring to life the biblical passage inscribed at her feet: "And they shall beat their swords into plow shares and their spears into pruning hooks." The plinth on which she stands is embossed with four cinerary urns symbolizing the four years of the Civil War. A frieze of 14 inclined shields represents all 13 states of the Confederacy including Maryland which supported the Southern cause. Other pictures on the monument show the woman (the south) being held up by Minerva, Goddess of War and Wisdom. Also, the good that came out of the war is also depicted. A soldier kissing his baby as she is held by a mammy, a young officer standing alone, a former slave following his former master and a young lady binding the sword and sash of her soldier.The inscription on the memorial reads:Not for fame or reward,Not for place or for rank,Not lured by ambition,Or goaded by necessity,But in SimpleObedience to DutyAs they understood it,These men suffered all,Sacrificed all,Dared all--and died. Later three final Confederates were brought to the cemetary and are buried at the base of the monument with Ezekiel. They are Lt. Harry C. Marmaduke who served in the Confederate Navy, Capt. John M. Hickey of the Second Missouri Infantry and Brig. Gen. Marcus J. Wright who commanded brigades at Shiloh and Chickamauga. The Confederate Memorial at Arlington is open for the public to visit today. I urge you to take a peek at it if you are in the area or planning a trip to Washington D.C. because it was a token of peace and respect between two sections of the country that still don't see eye to eye on many things. Perhaps it can help everyone heal and foster good feelings for years to come.

Sources and further infomation:

http://www.arlingtoncemetery.org/visitor_information/Confederate_Memorial.html

Visit Ezekiel's grave here: http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=2999

Peters, James Edward. Arlington National Cemetery: Shrine to America's Heroes. Woodbine House, 1986.http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pp/pphome.html

"That Old Man...."

It is a well known fact that Robert E. Lee and George Pickett had a checkered history. The most obvious connection between the two men was the Battle of Gettysburg in 1863. On the third and final day of the battle Lee sent Pickett's Division across a mile of open field to engage the enemy. General Pickett watched in horror as nearly half of his division was utterly destroyed. Pickett was a man with a lot of personal pride and Gettysburg became the beginning of the end for his career and his health. He never forgave Lee but the relationship between the two would continue its downfall.In 1865 as the thinning ranks of Lee's army was barely holding its own around Petersburg, Lee knew that he had to get his army out of there.

A critical crossroads called Five Forks was the key to Lee's escape if Grant was able to push him out of the besieged city. In command of the Confederate defenses at Five Forks was General George Pickett. Lee ordered that Five Forks be held "at all hazzards." Pickett left his headquarters on April 1, 1865 to attend a shad (fish) bake at a neighboring generals tent. This was the sameday that Grant ordered an attack at Five Forks. The Federals easily defeated their enemy and Pickett's troops were routed. Lee was so angered by Picketts behaviour that he ordered his removal from command. Due to the chaos along the retreat Lee's order wasn't carried out. As the Confederates fled Petersburg Lee spotted Pickett riding his horse alongside his men. "Is that man still with the army" he asked his aide. This was a severe rebuke from Lee who was reported to have "always" referred to his fellow officers by name or rank. If Pickett ever heard of Lee's words is unknown but if he did they would have severed their relationship for good.Lets fast forward to 1870 as Robert E. Lee health was slowly fading. He decided to take a trip south during the spring months to restore his failing health with one of his daughters.

After leaving Lexington his first stop was the former Confederate capital at Richmond. Colonel John S. Mosby heard of Lee's arrival and showed up to pay his respects to his former chief. "Both of us were thinking about the war" Mosby later wrote "neither of us referred to it."After a great visit with General Lee, Mosby left and as he walked away from the hotel he encountered General Pickett. The former leader of the most famous charge in American history had fallen on hard times and ended up in the insurance business. How ironic is that? Mosby convinced Pickett to pay his respects to his former commander because according to Mosby, Lee looked "pale and haggard." Basically, Mosby was telling Pickett to see Lee because he didn't look healthy and he could die.Pickett hestitated but eventually both he and Mosby went to visit Robert E. Lee. Their meeting was cold and uncomfortable for all three of them. Both were civil towards one another but Mosby stated that Lee's glacial manner was matched by Pickett's icy demenor.

After a few minutes Mosby broke up the reunion by rising to his feet and leaving with George Pickett. The parting between the two men was brief. Their exact words to one another went unrecorded but what was said afterwards by Pickett was written for prosterity by John Mosby."The old man had my division slaughtered" said Pickett. Obviously these words by Pickett show that he remained bitter over the destruction of his division at Gettysburg. Mosby needed a good reply and he told George Pickett "Well, it made you immortal." Perhaps Mosby was trying to help the old division commander by letting him know that history will forever remember that grand old charge. Author William Fulkner later wrote that every southern boy dreams of it be two o'clock and being a participant of Pickett's Charge. I doubt if George Pickett could see how famous both he and his men are today that he would be happy. It must have been a painful heartache for the old general to bear and there are some things that time never heals.Pickett died in 1875, Lee died in October of 1870 and Mosby survived them both by dying in May 1916. Besides the fact that Pickett's Charge is such a force in popular media concerning the war and tourism at Gettysburg the old general has other forms of imortality. Fort Pickett in Blackstone, Virginia is named in his honor. In Richmond, where Pickett is buried, his former soldiers errected a monument alongside his gravesite that was originally meant to be place on the Gettysburg battlefield. Moreover, history and popular culture have painted Pickett as a tragic hero which is no doubt enhanced by actor Stephen Lang's protrayal of him in the film Gettysburg (1993).

Sources:

Clark, Champ, and the Editors of Time-Life Books, Gettysburg: The Confederate High Tide, Time-Life Books, 1985.

Flood, Charles Bracelen. Lee--the Last Years. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1981.

Lincoln and Lee: Forever Linked in Histroy

President Abraham Lincoln and General Robert E. Lee are forever linked in our minds because they were the major players on each side during the Civil War. Their last names begin with the same letter but the similarities don't stop there. After dying their contemporaries painted them as the idealistic vision of perfection. These colleagues claimed that Lee and Lincoln had few vices and were the greatest leaders in their respective fields. The truth behind these claims is not the purpose of this blog because they share something that few people discuss and many are unaware of.

Despite the wealth of R.E. Lee and Abe Lincoln books out there today neither man wrote personal memoirs. All historians have to go by are the letters, reports and documents written by these men. Yes, it is better than nothing but lets not forget that their contemporaries wrote their first biographies. Lee and Lincoln have been unable to speak on many of their actions and they may remain silent forever.

If Lee's heart had held up and/or Booth's bullet had misses Lincoln's head than we might have the memoirs of these great men. Why did Lee order Pickett's Charge? How impressions did Lincoln get from his cabinet when he announced the Emancipation Proclamation? These and a million other questions go unanswered unless a lost document shows up in some dusty archive somewhere.

What does the lack of personal memoirs cause? For one thing, it causes many historical questions to go unanswered because we cannot view the events through their own eyes. Moreover, historians of Grant and Sherman can read the words of those men and make historical judgement based on the facts written. In many ways we cannot do this with Lincoln and Lee. Many of the facts behind their actions come from their documents and letters. As historians we have to make due with what we have and many libraries hold thousands of these valuable items. It is a shame that Lee's postwar descriptions of his campaigns and Lincolns post-administration view of his presidency go unanswered. Unfortunately these moments are lost forever to history. However, if anyone asked me the two historical books that I would like to read the most it would be the Memoirs of Abraham Lincoln and the Memoirs of Robert E. Lee. Great stuff.