By Frank P. Varney
Just a few days before his death on July 23, 1885, former
President, Ulysses S. Grant, penned the final pages of his memoirs. Published posthumously, consisting of two
volumes, the “Personal Memoirs of U. S. Grant,” was an instant best seller, and
the income derived from its royalties restored the Grant family fortune which
he had lost through several bad business decisions. Mark Twain, Grant’s publisher, lauded the
memoir as a “literary masterpiece.” The
memoirs are highly regarded by military historians and literary critics alike,
and nearly 140 years after its author’s death it has yet to go out of print.
Ulysses S. Grant parlayed his fame as the victor of the
Civil War into a political victory when he was elected the 18th President of
the United States in 1868. Periodically
historians tend to rank the Presidents from best to worst, and Grant’s lack
luster performance as President, combined with several political scandals of
those in his administration, typically leaves him ranked near the bottom, with
most historians summarizing Grant as an honest man but a poor judge of
character.
In his memoirs Grant makes several negative representations
of a few fellow Union Army generals. If Grant
was such a poor judge of character, then why do most historians take what Grant
wrote in his memoirs as the gospel truth?
If Grant could be wrong about the character of the men that he appointed
to places of high esteem during his administration, couldn’t his negative
characterizations in his memoirs be incorrect as well? Frank P. Varney, Professor of History at
Dickenson State University, has asked that very same question and his research
has led him to some startling conclusions about what we think we know about the
Civil War, and how much of it was shaped by the writings of Ulysses S. Grant.
Citing multiple historians, tracing their sources Dr. Varney
uncovered many noted historians have taken Grant at his word, using his memoirs
as a single source for various incidents of the war. Professor Varney, using multiple primary
sources, compared them to Grant’s writings to uncover striking differences
compared to what his contemporaries wrote.
And in at least one instance it appears that Grant falsified the records
of the War Department to the detriment of others.
Though several of Grant’s brothers-in-arms careers were, or
were very nearly ruined, by his unflattering assessments of their abilities,
Dr. Varney’s book, “General Grant and the Rewriting of History” focuses mainly
on William S. Rosecrans, and discusses in some depth the battles of Shiloh,
Iuka, Corinth, Stones River and Chickamauga.
Dr. Varney’s chapters are organized much like a geometric
proof. Each starts out with “The Context”
where he sets the stage for what is about to be discussed. “The Controversies” follow, first giving a
brief bullet point list of the controversies discussed in the chapter, and then
one by one discussing each controversy in depth. Varney’s “Evaluation” follows, and when
appropriate the professor discusses the historiography of the topic discussed. He compares what both Grant and other
historians have said against the primary records, and states his conclusions.
“General Grant and the Rewriting of History” is a stunning
example of the craft of history. Professor
Varney may have changed future narrative of the Civil War, and William S.
Rosecrans may at long last get credit where credit is due, for both his
triumphs and his failures.
Professor Varney’s book is well and convincingly written and
exhaustively written. Though not a book
for Civil War novices, students of the war will have their long held views of
the war challenged by this thought provoking work.
ISBN 978-1611211184, Savas Beatie, © 2013, Hardcover, 336
Pages, Photographs, Maps, Footnotes, Appendix, Bibliography & Index.
$32.95. To Purchase the book click HERE.
