Soldier Of Destiny: Slavery, Secession, And The Redemption Of Ulysses S. Grant, by John Reeves

This book is, at least so far, the best book by far that John Reeves has written. That said, it is not nearly the sort of book that it sets out to be. When one looks at the title of this book, one expects a book that praises Grant and that shows some hint of how it was that the Civil War led to greatness on his part. This is not what one gets. The book certainly has its virtues, and is by no means a bad or even a mediocre book, but it is a book that violates its readers expectations, and for that it certainly deserves caution on the part of anyone who wishes to read it. The author, if one reads his other books, has a grudge against grant and that axe to grind is in full evidence here. For some unknown reason, the author seems to think that in an age where Grant is (finally) being recognized as an honorable president and man and as a talented general with a strong grasp of strategy and logistics, that Grant needs more negative press and books that point out his weaker moment, including being dragged for his struggles against alcoholism. While I feel it is necessary to praise the author’s use of letters and other little-known sources to flesh out his account of Grant’s relationship with his relatives, the whole approach of the author reminds me of the scummy morality and perspective of contemporary journalism and makes me find the author pretty repellant and obviously too biased to be a truly reliable source.

This book is a bit more than 200 pages of material and is divided into three parts that take place between 1854, when loneliness and drink (apparently not even very much drink) led Grant to resign from the army in shame, and the beginning of 1864, when Grant was given the deserved position of Lieutenant General and Commander of the Union Armies. The first seven chapters look at the period between 1854 and 1860 where Grant tried to make a go of it after leaving the army, staring with his departure from Fort Humboldt (1), his concerns about his relationship with his distant wife in Missouri (2), the long and expensive trip home (3), Grant’s relationship with his father (4), his experience in living at White Haven with his in-laws (5), and his relationship with the enslaved people there (6), along with his struggles to make a go of it in St. Louis in business and politically appointed positions (7). This is followed by a second part that covers the period from 1860 to 1862 which includes Grant’s time in Galena (8), his appointment as colonel (9), the Battle of Belmont (10), Forts Henry and Donelson (11), the fame he got for demanding the unconditional surrender of the latter fort (12), and the disaster of Shiloh (13). The third part of the book then discusses the aftermath of Shiloh (14), the role of Jesse Grant and his associates in General Order No. 11–Grant’s infamous anti-Jew directive (15), Vicksburg (16), the freedom of the slaves of the Dent family (17), and Grant’s elevation after Chattanooga to Lt. General (18), at which the book abruptly ends where his book on the wilderness campaign kicks off.

This book represents what might be seen as the upper limits of a book by this author. He has all the help he needs in getting useful sources, has chosen a topic that is interesting to the wider public who reads Civil War histories, and yet his characteristic flaws remain. A decent if slimy book is the best that can be hoped for this sort of author, and at least this book is short, even if it ends abruptly. In previous works we saw the author trying to grind his axe into Grant’s back for being disrespectful of the overly political and less than entirely competent Eastern establishment generals of the Army of the Potomac, and in the butcher’s bill that resulted from forcing the Confederacy to fight without respite for months on end, which included the unfortunate death of one of the author’s relatives. Here the author takes glee in showing every possible bender that Grant engaged in like a vulture tabloid journalist, trying to cancel him by accusing him of extreme anti-Semitism (though, admittedly, he certainly did grow later on), and using his wife’s connections to the pro-slavery Dents to drag Grant for taking advantage of enslaved labor even as he demonstrated himself to be a genuine Northerner in his lack of interest and lack of ability in being able to exploit it to the extent of someone to the manor born. Seeing the way the author tears into Grant’s every foible and weakness at every turn, libeling him on nearly every page with faint praise or the hint of accusations even the author thinks to be false but still repeating them anyway makes me want to knock the author off of his high horse and then club him senseless so that he can stop libeling an honorable man in Grant. This is not how a book should be written about its subject.