Presidents by Name
Presidents by Date
View Flash Version
By: Elizabeth D. Samet
Updated: September 8, 2023 | Original: May 13, 2020
In March 1864, Ulysses S. Grant went to Washington, D.C., to receive his commission from Abraham Lincoln as lieutenant-general in command of all the Union armies. After several years of frustration with a parade of unsuitable commanders, the president had finally found the man who would defeat Robert E. Lee ’s Army of Northern Virginia and thus effectively end the Civil War .
The choice was surprising to many who had known Grant in former days. Ten years before, in April 1854, Captain Grant had submitted his resignation under a cloud.
In one of history’s unexpected developments, the military profession Grant “had always disliked,” in the words of his biographer Bruce Catton, ultimately “turned out to be the calling made for him.” How did an ambivalent soldier who had been away from the army for several years—and who had drifted during that interval from one civilian occupation to another in search of elusive success—end up leading a vast force to victory and saving the Union?
Grant’s predecessors in command of the Union Army were far more accomplished in military art and science. Winfield Scott , whose experience dated back to the War of 1812, had led the army since 1841. George B. McClellan , who replaced the aging Scott early in the Civil War, was an able administrator who organized the Army of the Potomac. In the 1850s, McClellan had studied the Crimean War at first hand as a member of an official delegation of American observers. Henry W. Halleck, the author of Elements of Military Art & Science , was regarded as a master theoretician.
Yet McClellan and Halleck both proved reluctant to take decisive action in the field. After the Battle of Shiloh, it took the latter almost a month to advance 20 miles south to attack the vital Confederate railroad junction at Corinth , Mississippi.
Lincoln grew so frustrated with McClellan’s inaction that he responded to the general’s October 1862 request for more horses with an exasperated telegram: “I have just read your despatch about sore tongued and fatiegued [sic] horses. Will you pardon me for asking what the horses of your army have done since the battle of Antietam that fatigue anything?”
By contrast, Grant had never been an enthusiastic student of military art and science. Even his fiercely loyal lieutenant William T. Sherman doubted Grant’s “knowledge of grand strategy, and of books of science and history.”
He told his friend precisely that in a March 1864 letter, in which he also concluded that Grant’s triumph owed in large measure to his fundamental “common-sense” and to his “chief characteristic,” an unshakeable “faith” in victory. That faith was justified by a serendipitous combination of qualities that enabled Grant to become one of the most extraordinary military leaders in American history.
Grant didn’t go in much for doctrine, but he brought a relentlessly aggressive approach to warfare. He always favored activity and forward movement to standing still. Even in victory, he would be frustrated by subordinates’ failure to pursue the retreating enemy.
In his memoirs, he records an incident that reveals his philosophy. In 1863, Union General William Rosecrans refused an order to advance to meet an enemy force while Grant was laying siege to Vicksburg, the key to controlling the Mississippi River, because Rosecrans claimed that doing so would violate the “military maxim ‘not to fight two decisive battles at the same time.’” Grant was singularly unimpressed: “If true,” he observes, “the maxim was not applicable in this case. It would be bad to be defeated in two decisive battles fought the same day, but it would not be bad to win them.”
When, in the summer of 1864, Grant informed the cautious Halleck, back in Washington, of his refusal to disengage Lee and withdraw troops to quell draft resistance in the North, Lincoln responded in language that encapsulated Grant’s tenacious approach: “I have seen your despatch expressing your unwillingness to break your hold where you are. Neither am I willing. Hold on with a bull-dog gripe [sic], and chew & choke, as much as possible.”
Sherman told his fellow officer James Harrison Wilson, “I am a damned sight smarter man than Grant; I know a great deal more about war, military history, strategy, and grand tactics than he does; I know more about organization, supply, and administration and about everything else than he does; but I’ll tell you where he beats me and where he beats the world. He don’t care a damn for what the enemy does out of his sight, but it scares me like hell!”
Grant’s refusal to be paralyzed by imagining what the enemy was doing owed to an epiphany early in the war when he was leading a regiment for the first time, in pursuit of Confederate Colonel Thomas Harris in Missouri.
“As we approached the brow of the hill from which it was expected we could see Harris’ camp, and possibly find his men ready formed to meet us, my heart kept getting higher and higher until it felt to me as though it was in my throat,” Grant recalls in his memoirs.
But when he had the good fortune to find the camp abandoned, Grant’s “heart resumed its place.” He learned the vital lesson that his adversary “had been as much afraid of me as I had been of him... From that event to the close of the war, I never experienced trepidation upon confronting an enemy, though I always felt more or less anxiety.”
In April 1862, during the bloody two-day Battle of Shiloh , Grant did not share his colleagues’ bleak view. Sherman was demoralized by the first day’s fighting, while Don Carlos Buell , who arrived with reinforcements in the midst of the battle, advised retreat. Grant refused: “The distant rear of an army engaged in battle is not the best place from which to judge correctly what is going on in front,” he asserts in his memoirs.
By the next day, he continues, “We had now become the attacking party. The enemy was driven back all day, as we had been the day before, until finally he beat a precipitate retreat.”
In May 1864, after fighting to a costly stalemate in his first battle with Robert E. Lee, at the Wilderness , in Virginia, Grant surprised and delighted the Union Army of the Potomac by not retreating, as they had done so many times before under different commanders.
“Most of us thought…that the next day we should recross the river,” a captain in a Massachusetts regiment remembered, “but when the order came, ‘By the left flank, march!’ we found that Grant was not made that way, and we must continue the fight.”
Sherman likewise celebrated Grant’s decision: “When Grant cried ‘Forward!’ after the battle of the Wilderness, I said: ‘This is the grandest act of his life; now I feel that the rebellion will be crushed.’ I wrote him, saying it was a bold order to give, and...it showed the mettle of which he was made.”
What Sherman called Grant’s “simple faith in success” proved infectious. His confidence and determination made others believe in themselves as well: “when you have completed your best preparations, you go into battle without hesitation...no doubts, no reserve,” Sherman wrote to Grant. “I tell you that it was this that made us act with confidence. I knew wherever I was that you thought of me, and if I got in a tight place you would come—if alive.”
But Grant was no mystic, nor was he reckless. His confidence was rooted in an unswerving sense of purpose, an unflappable nature, an ability to delegate responsibility as opposed to micromanaging, and knowledge gained by cool and careful observation over the years.
In the Mexican War , he studied two commanders in action: Winfield Scott and Zachary Taylor , whose nicknames—“Old Fuss and Feathers” and “Old Rough and Ready”—encapsulate their antithetical styles. From Taylor, who always “put his meaning so plainly there could be no mistaking it,” Grant learned the importance of clear and direct communication.
It was in Mexico, while serving as regimental quartermaster and involving himself in as many battles as he could, that Grant had learned the decidedly unromantic aspects of war: the ingenuity required to feed and supply an army, the hazards of poor camp sanitation, the value of different kinds of expertise and the unequivocal brutality of combat.
In the last year of the Civil War, as casualties mounted and the horrors of trench warfare accumulated in the Battles of Cold Harbor and Petersburg , Grant remained fixed in his purpose to destroy Lee’s army.
In addition to being a gifted writer, Grant was an expert listener—“at his best,” one staff officer suggested, in “sudden emergencies.” Faced with a new situation, as he was on arriving in the besieged city of Chattanooga in late 1863, Grant sat “as silent as the sphinx” while officers delivered their reports, according to an eyewitness. Then, after firing “whole volleys of questions,” he proceeded to write out a series of dispatches.
The biographer William McFeely explains the significance of this episode: Grant’s “orders and telegrams...demonstrated a grasp of the whole of the Western Theater of the war. From the disjointed reports he had been given, he put together a coherent picture of the terrain of an area new to him, and of the vast confused array of men who contended for it.”
Grant’s memory for terrain was photographic. One staff officer observed that after one hard look at a map, “he could follow its features without referring to it again. Besides, he possessed an almost intuitive knowledge of topography, and never became confused as to the points of the compass.” This gift was complemented by superb horsemanship, which allowed Grant to see for himself as much of the battlefield as possible.
In the Eastern Theater, which he studied for only eight weeks, Grant revealed a thorough grasp of the strategic situation. He decided to leave executive command of the Army of the Potomac to George G. Meade in order to give himself time to manage an extensive area of operations stretching from New England to New Mexico, from Minnesota to Mississippi.
“Wherever Lee goes,” he ordered Meade, “there you will go also.” Keeping Lee’s army engaged, Grant unleashed Philip Sheridan’s cavalry on the Shenandoah Valley , the breadbasket of the Confederacy, and freed Sherman to march through the South destroying railroads, supplies—and morale.
Yet none of this would have been possible had Grant not also comprehended the war’s larger political context and harmonized his efforts on the battlefield with the aims of the Lincoln administration. As the latter enlarged from preservation of the Union to the freeing of enslaved persons in the Confederacy with the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863, Grant’s policies and vision likewise evolved.
His way of prosecuting the war and securing the peace revealed a sure understanding of the war’s political stakes—and of the fact that the South’s best hope of victory was to sap the political will of the North by prolonging the war.
For Grant, who as a young man had fought in the Mexican War, a conflict in which he did not believe, the Civil War was a war of principle. At the conclusion of his memoirs, he sums it up with his customary lucidity when he describes the Confederate cause as “one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse.”
This essay does not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.
An up-close look at the people, places and turning points of the American Civil War.
Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.
By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.
More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us
Born Hiram Ulysses Grant, in Point Pleasant, Ohio, the future General-in-Chief's name was changed due to a clerical error during his first days at the United States Military Academy at West Point. To his friends, however, he was known simply as "Sam." After a mediocre stint as a cadet, he graduated twenty-first out of the thirty-nine cadets in class of 1843. Yet despite his less than exemplary school record, he performed well as a captain during the Mexican War (1846-1848), winning two citations for gallantry and one for meritorious conduct. Only when the fighting stopped and Grant was assigned monotonous duties at remote posts far from his wife and family did he again begin neglecting his work and drinking heavily. He resigned in 1854 to avoid being drummed out of the service.
Grant spent the next six years in St. Louis, Missouri with his wife, Julia Dent Grant. After several short-lived pursuits, including a brief episode as a farmer, he moved to Galena, Illinois to be a clerk in his family's store. When the Civil War began in 1861, he jumped at the chance to volunteer for military service in the Union army. His first command was as the colonel of the 21st Illinois Infantry, but he was quickly promoted to brigadier general in July 1861, and in September was given command of the District of Southeast Missouri.
His 1862 triumphs at Fort Henry and Fort Donelson in western Tennessee won him the nickname “Unconditional Surrender” Grant, and placed him before the public eye. However, when a surprise attack by Confederate forces at the Battle of Shiloh yielded devastating casualties during the first day's fighting, President Abraham Lincoln received several demands for Grant's removal from command. Nevertheless, Lincoln refused, stating, “I can’t spare this man. He fights.” The following day, Grant's Army - bolstered by troops under Maj. Gen. Don Carlos Buell - fended off Confederate advances and ultimately won the day.
Grant’s hard-won victory at Vicksburg , Mississippi, in May of 1863 was a strategic masterpiece. On May 1, 1863, Grant's army crossed the Mississippi River at the battle of Port Gibson. With Confederate forces unclear of his intentions, Grant sent a portion of his army under Gen. William T. Sherman to capture the state capital, Jackson, while setting his sights on Vicksburg with a view toward permanently closing the Confederate supply base. When initial assaults on the city demonstrated the strength of Vicksburg's defenses, the Union army was forced to lay siege to the city. On July 4, 1863, after 46 days of digging trenches and lobbing hand grenades, Confederate general John Pemberton 's 30,000-man army surrendered. Coupled with the Northern victory at Gettysburg , the capture of Vicksburg marked the turning point in the war. It also made Grant the premier commander in the Federal army. Later that same year, Grant was called upon to break the stalemate at Chattanooga , further cementing his reputation as a capable and effective leader.
In March 1864, President Lincoln elevated Grant to the rank of lieutenant general, and named him general-in-chief of the Armies of the United States. Making his headquarters with the Army of the Potomac, Grant was determined to crush Robert E. Lee and his vaunted Army of Northern Virginia at any cost. Though plagued by reticent subordinates, petty squabbles between generals and horrific casualties, the Federal host bludgeoned Lee from the Rapidan River to the James in what one participant would later describe as "unspoken, unspeakable history." The battles of the Wilderness , Spotsylvania , Cold Harbor and the subsequent siege of Petersburg effectively destroyed the rebel army, leading to the fall of Richmond and Lee's surrender at Appomattox Court House . Though Grant’s forces had been depleted by more than half during the last year of the war, it was Lee who surrendered in 1865.
After the Civil War, President Andrew Johnson named Grant Secretary of War over the newly reunited nation. In 1868, running against Johnson, Ulysses S. Grant was elected eighteenth President of the United States. Unfortunately, though apparently innocent of graft himself, Grant’s administration was riddled with corruption, and scandal.
For two years following his second term in office, Grant made a triumphal tour of the world. In 1884, he lost his entire savings to a corrupt bank. To make up some of his losses, he wrote about his war experiences for Century Magazine. They proved so popular that he was inspired to write his excellent autobiography, Personal Memoirs of U.S. Grant , finishing the two-volume set only a few days before dying of cancer at the age of sixty-three. Ulysses S. Grant is buried in New York City in the largest mausoleum of its kind in the United States. Reminiscent of Napoleon's tomb in Paris, Grant's tomb is a National Memorial.
You may also like.
30 Tuesday Sep 2014
Posted by Steve in Best Biographies Posts , President #18 - U S Grant
≈ 141 Comments
American history , biographies , book reviews , Geoffrey Perret , H.W. Brands , Jean Edward Smith , Josiah Bunting , presidential biographies , Ronald C. White , Ulysses S Grant , William McFeely
Despite the pivotal role he played in the Civil War and the importance of his administration to Reconstruction, I don’t recall spending any meaningful time studying Ulysses S. Grant in school.
My only brush with his presidency involved memorizing his name as one of the then-forty presidents during a high school trip to the Texas State History Fair. During that drive to Austin we had to do something. …so those of us on the trip decided to learn the presidents’ names in order. Sad, really.
When I finished reading a dozen biographies of Lincoln a couple months ago I assumed I would be in for a slow spell until my encounter with Teddy Roosevelt sometime early in 2015. Fortunately, Grant and his biographers proved me very wrong!
Ulysses Grant’s life story is astonishingly fascinating. There are certainly stretches of his life which proved dull and uneventful – and sometimes spectacularly unsuccessful. But biographers tended not to linger on those moments and taken as a whole, Grant’s sixty-three years are almost inspirational.
Grant certainly seems to prove the adage that you can’t judge a book by its cover. He was that kid we all knew who sat in the back of class, paid little attention to the day’s lesson, never had much to say and would befriend almost anyone who would make even a modest effort to get to know him. Incredibly unpretentious and modest, no one could have foreseen that Grant was destined to become a spectacularly successful military leader…and president of the United States.
A cursory review of the ebb and flow of Grant’s presidential legacy over time reveals a remarkable evolution in opinion. After a enjoying an early period of spirited acclaim, Grant’s reputation suffered within a few decades of leaving office and did not recover until the last two decades of the twentieth century. Each of the Grant biographies I read was published during this recent period of re-evaluation and each, save the first, judged his reputation unfairly tarnished.
In addition, McFeely is well-known for his negative opinion of Grant. Although I could not detect it at the time without broader exposure to Grant, McFeely’s perspective of the general now seems flawed and unreasonably jaundiced. I can’t recall a single mention of praise or adoration toward Grant…but surely there must have been one somewhere.
Possibly more important to me than objectivity is writing style. After all, I’m seeking the best and most enjoyable presidential biographies; thoughtful and transparent bias can be tolerated. But McFeely’s writing style is anything but smooth and fluid. Important messages, except those key to his take-down of Grant, have to be teased from the text and when something could be said clearly, McFeely often seems to choose a more abstruse path. ( Full review here )
* Next was Geoffrey Perret’s 1997 “ Ulysses S. Grant: Soldier & President .” Often described as fatally riddled with factual errors, I found Perret’s survey of Grant’s life much more interesting than McFeely’s. Although the errors I spotted (or read about) are generally minor and of relatively little consequence to most readers, they would be acutely annoying to a professional historian.
But my issue with Perret’s book is that it seems too casual at times – and filled with excessive hyperbole. And in contrast to McFeely, who was reluctant to praise Grant, Perret is liberal with applause. But overall, the biography is captivating, a bit provocative and capable of holding my attention to the very end. ( Full review here )
* My third Grant biography was Brooks Simpson’s 2000 “ Ulysses S. Grant: Triumph Over Adversity, 1822-1865 .” This was the first in an anticipated two-volume series and covers Grant’s life only through the end of the Civil War. Simpson’s analysis is more sober and serious than Perret’s but more forgiving (and balanced) than McFeely’s. But because the second volume to this series has never appeared, Simpson’s coverage of Grant is restricted to his pre-presidency and is therefore incomplete. ( Full review here )
* My next biography was “ Grant ” by Jean Edward Smith. Published in 2001, this was the biography of Grant I had been waiting for. This book starts off with a bang – six or eight of the most thoughtful and potent introductory pages to a presidential biography I’ve seen – and rarely slows down from there.
For the first three-fourths of the book (until Grant’s presidency) I could not put this biography down. Smith’s narrative is fluid, colorful, captivating and insightful. The Mexican War comes to life in a way that even Zachary Taylor’s biographers could not match, and Smith’s review of Grant and the Civil War is excellent.
Only Grant’s presidential years slow the book’s pace (there’s little a biographer can do about this, I’m afraid) and the book ends far too abruptly. Given Jean Edward Smith’s excellent introduction, I’m surprised the book’s conclusion isn’t equally penetrating and revealing. But while reading this book I quickly knew I had found a favorite, and the imperfect ending did little to upset that view. ( Full review here )
* Fifth on my list was Josiah Bunting’s 2004 “ Ulysses S. Grant .” A member of The American Presidents Series , this biography is exactly what you would expect: short, straightforward and entirely comprehensible. Nearly every important message about Grant’s life is provided and nearly every crucial detail is included. Left behind, of course, is much of the nuance and flavor of Grant’s life – the granularity that makes his story really come to life.
Although geared toward an impatient reader and excellent for such a concise biography, I can’t help but believe that anyone who appreciates this book would find Jean Edward Smith’s biography even more compelling – despite the extra pages. But for readers committed to a balance of brevity and insight, Bunting’s biography of Grant succeeds remarkably well. ( Full review here )
* Finally, I read H.W. Brands’s 2012 “ The Man Who Saved the Union: Ulysses S. Grant in War and Peace .” As the sixth biography of Grant I had read in as many weeks I feared there was little new I could learn about Grant unless Brands uncovers something unique about Grant. He does not, and I felt as though I was re-reading much of what Bunting, Smith and Simpson had previously written.
What is different is Brands’s writing style, but not the substance of what is put on the page. Other than simply fulfilling a desire to write about Grant, I’m not sure of this biography’s raison d’être. In many respects, coming so late in the Grant renaissance and with little new to say, this seems just another sympathetic and thoughtful biography.
And although it lacks the fluidity and narrative charm of Jean Edward Smith’s biography, the drama of Perret’s and the brevity of Bunting’s, Brands’s biography of Grant is comprehensive, methodical, deliberate and objective. ( Full review here )
– – – – – – –
–>On my “Ulysses Grant follow-up list” (yes, it already exists) I am including Grant’s Memoirs as well as the three-volume Lewis/Catton series. Oh…and Ron Chernow’s upcoming biography of Grant as well!
[ Added April 2019 ]
* Two years after I completed my initial round of reading related to Ulysses Grant, Ronald White’s “ American Ulysses: A Life of Ulysses S. Grant ” was published. Between late March and early April 2019 I finally had an opportunity to read this highly-anticipated and well-regarded biography.
While I found “American Ulysses” to be good, it’s not quite great . White is the first biographer afforded access to the complete collection of “The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant” and yet there is relatively little which stands out as particularly new or revelatory.
Jean Edward Smith’s narrative is more colorful, engaging and insightful. Bunting’s biography packs more “punch” in far less space. And Brooks Simpson’s treatment of Grant’s pre-presidency probably provides the most detailed (if not exciting) exploration of Grant’s early life.
To his great credit, White includes an extensive collection of invaluable charts and diagrams in this biography, and his positive reassessment of Grant’s image is compelling. But the narrative is probably a better historical work than a literary one, and Grant’s personality is never fully dissected.
As a comprehensive, and certainly more-than-satisfactory, review of the life of Ulysses S. Grant this biography succeeds. But for anyone who has already navigated Grant’s life there is probably not enough new insight or analysis to make this a truly compelling read. ( Full review here )
[Added June 2020]
* Three years after I completed my initial journey through the best biographies of Grant, Ron Chernow’s “ Grant ” was published. By far the longest of the Grant biographies I’ve read, it is also one of the very best.
Some have argued that Chernow’s biography is late in the “rehabilitation” game for the 18th president and that nothing new is revealed. I am somewhat sympathetic with this argument; the dust jacket claims Grant’s life “has typically been misunderstood” but Chernow is hardly the first biographer to reveal the more nuanced Grant. And no bombshell revelations appear in this book.
But this biography provides a far more fulsome, vivid and nuanced portrait of Grant than the more concise reviews of his life found elsewhere and Chernow undertakes a more exhaustive and thoughtful exploration of Grant’s alleged alcoholism than I’ve seen.
Casual consumers of presidential history may be inclined to turn to shorter treatments of Grant’s life; in that case, Jean Edward Smith’s biography of Grant is an excellent alternative (and a fantastic choice in any case). But anyone with a keen interest in Ulysses Grant – or who revels in Ron Chernow’s literary fluency – will want to read this excellent biography. ( Full review here )
– – – – – – – – – – –
Best Biography of Ulysses S. Grant: tie between ————–> Jean Edward Smith’s “ Grant ” (2001) and ————–> Ron Chernow’s “ Grant ” (2017)
141 thoughts on “the best biographies of ulysses s. grant”.
August 4, 2023 at 2:25 pm
I thought the Smith biography far superior to the Chernow book. Although a Grant partisan when I read the McFeely biography (and an even stronger one today) I found his critical tone toward Grant to be fair; though if one compares Grant to nearly every other man who held the Presidency McFeely’s criticism seem ridiculous. Grant was one of perhaps three men elected President without requiring to be associated with a particular political party (the other two being Washington and Eisenhower, though Grant would have needed the Republican Party more than the other two, with Eisenhower having the freest hand to choose) and in comparison to nearly every other President Grant’s personal policy choices (except the Dominican Republic affair) where largely just and honorable while the policy areas where he was inclined to follow his advisors were no worse than those made by other Presidents who relied on such advice. Those actions were only made to seem worse because the Lost Cause and anti-Reconstruction contingent had to denigrate Grant the Man to justify their cruel and evil opinions.
December 4, 2023 at 3:10 pm
Question about the concluding sentence:
But anyone with a keen fascination in Ulysses S. Grant – or who revels in Ron Chernow’s literary fluency – will want to pass on this excellent biography.
Is that supposed to be “will NOT want to pass”?
December 4, 2023 at 3:13 pm
You are correct – thanks!
IMAGES
COMMENTS
Ulysses S. Grant - Civil War, Facts & Quotes
Ulysses S. Grant was an American military officer and politician who served as the 18th president of the United States from 1869 to 1877. He led the Union Army to victory in the American Civil War, supported civil rights and Reconstruction, and faced scandals and economic challenges in his second term.
Ulysses S. Grant was the 18th president of the United States (1869-77) and the commander of the Union armies during the American Civil War (1864-65). Learn about his early life, military career, political achievements, and legacy in this comprehensive article.
Ulysses S. Grant was born on April 27, 1822, in Point Pleasant, Ohio. He commanded the Union army during the Civil War and served as the 18th U.S. president from 1869 to 1877.
Ulysses S. Grant was the commander of the Union Army during the Civil War and the 18th President of the United States from 1869 to 1877. He was born in 1822 and died in 1885.
Ulysses S. Grant was a Union general during the Civil War and the eighteenth president of the United States from 1869 to 1877. Learn about his life, achievements, challenges, and legacy in this comprehensive biography.
Learn about the life and achievements of Ulysses S. Grant, from his West Point education to his Civil War victories to his presidency and memoirs. Find out how he fought for civil rights, dealt with corruption, and became a world traveler and writer.
Learn about the life and achievements of Ulysses S. Grant, the Civil War general and president who died of throat cancer in 1885. Explore his early struggles, military career, political legacy ...
Ulysses S. Grant was the Union general who led the United States to victory over the Confederate States of America during the American Civil War. He served as the 18th president of the United States from 1869 to 1877, facing challenges such as Reconstruction, foreign affairs, and writing his memoirs.
Ulysses S. Grant was born in Point Pleasant, Ohio, on April 27, 1822. He was a Civil War general, president, and author of the memoirs that earned him financial security.
Learn about the life and achievements of Ulysses S. Grant, the Union general who led the Civil War and the two-term President who faced challenges and controversies. Explore his early years, military career, presidency, and legacy through this concise biography.
Ulysses S. Grant was the 18th president of the United States, who led the country after the Civil War and faced many challenges and controversies. Learn about his life, achievements, failures, and legacy in this comprehensive article from Britannica.
Visit other websites about Grant, the Civil War and Reconstruction, and other presidential libraries. "Although a soldier by profession, I have never felt any sort of fondness for war, and I have never advocated it, except as a means of peace." Biography Read about Grant's life. Chronology See a detailed timeline of the major events of Grant ...
Learn about the life and achievements of Ulysses S. Grant, the Union general who led the campaign that defeated the Confederacy. Explore his military career, presidency, memoirs, and legacy in this Library of Congress exhibition.
Ulysses S. Grant was the 18th president of the United States from 1869 to 1877. He was a successful Union general in the Civil War and enforced Reconstruction, but faced scandals and foreign policy challenges.
Fresh off his victory as commander of the Union armies during the Civil War, Ulysses S. Grant (1822-1885) became President of the United States in March 1869. While his time in office wasn't ...
Learn about the life and career of Ulysses S. Grant, the most acclaimed Union general during the Civil War and the 18th president of the United States. Explore his military achievements, battles, casualties, and legacy in this comprehensive article.
Learn about the life and achievements of Ulysses S. Grant, the 18th President of the United States. He was a Civil War hero, a Radical Republican ally, and a victim of corruption and cancer.
Ulysses S. Grant replaced George B. McClellan as the commander of the Union Army in 1864 and defeated Robert E. Lee's Confederates. Learn about his strengths, such as tenacity, fearlessness and ...
Learn about the life and achievements of Ulysses S. Grant, the Union general-in-chief who fought in many Civil War battles, including Fort Henry, Fort Donelson, Vicksburg, Chattanooga, and Petersburg. Find out how he became president, wrote his memoirs, and died in 1885.
But overall, the biography is captivating, a bit provocative and capable of holding my attention to the very end. (Full review here) -. * My third Grant biography was Brooks Simpson's 2000 " Ulysses S. Grant: Triumph Over Adversity, 1822-1865.".
Ulysses S. Grant was the first born son of Jesse Root Grant and Hannah Simpson Grant. This article lends itself to the story of this future general's ancestry, birth, and early career in and out of the United States army from 1822 to 1861. Grant was born in Point Pleasant, Ohio and he was educated in both private and public schools or academies ...
Following a rich childhood on the American frontier, Ulysses S. Grant went on to be the leader not only of the Union Army, but of the United States itself. Learn more with this biography from American Experience: "U.S. Grant - Warrior."
Ulysses S. Grant (născut Hiram Ulysses Grant / ˈ h aɪ r ə m juː ˈ l ɪ s iː z /; n. 27 aprilie 1822, Point Pleasant (d), orașul Monroe (d), Ohio, SUA - d. 23 iulie 1885, Wilton (d), New York, SUA) a fost un ofițer militar și politician american care a fost cel de al 18-lea președinte al Statelor Unite între 1869 și 1877. În calitate de general comandant (d), el a ...
Ulysses S. Grant fu un generale e politico statunitense, comandante dell'Unione nella guerra di secessione americana e 18º presidente degli Stati Uniti. La sua biografia ripercorre la sua carriera militare, le sue battaglie, le sue riforme e le sue sfide politiche.
Grant was born in Chicago, as a grandson of President and General Ulysses S. Grant and educated in Austria, where his father was an American diplomat.He attended Columbia University until 1898 when he received an appointment to West Point.In July and August 1899, both Grant and Douglas MacArthur joined their first summer camp at West Point, and they were especially marked plebes for hazing by ...