What do you think?
Rate this book
The Man Who Saved the Union: Ulysses Grant in War and Peace
From the two-time Pulitzer Prize finalist, bestselling historian, and author of Our First Civil War —a masterful biography of the Civil War general and two-term president who saved the Union twice, on the battlefield and in the White House. • “[A] splendidly written biography ... Brands does justice to one of America’s most underrated presidents.” — Dallas Morning News
Ulysses Grant emerges in this masterful biography as a genius in battle and a driven president to a divided country, who remained fearlessly on the side of right. He was a beloved commander in the field who made the sacrifices necessary to win the war, even in the face of criticism. He worked valiantly to protect the rights of freed men in the South. He allowed the American Indians to shape their own fate even as the realities of Manifest Destiny meant the end of their way of life. In this sweeping and majestic narrative, bestselling author H.W. Brands now reconsiders Grant's legacy and provides an intimate portrait of a heroic man who saved the Union on the battlefield and consolidated that victory as a resolute and principled political leader.
Look for H.W. Brands's other THE FIRST AMERICAN (Benjamin Franklin), ANDREW JACKSON, TRAITOR TO HIS CLASS (Franklin Roosevelt) and REAGAN.
Ulysses Grant emerges in this masterful biography as a genius in battle and a driven president to a divided country, who remained fearlessly on the side of right. He was a beloved commander in the field who made the sacrifices necessary to win the war, even in the face of criticism. He worked valiantly to protect the rights of freed men in the South. He allowed the American Indians to shape their own fate even as the realities of Manifest Destiny meant the end of their way of life. In this sweeping and majestic narrative, bestselling author H.W. Brands now reconsiders Grant's legacy and provides an intimate portrait of a heroic man who saved the Union on the battlefield and consolidated that victory as a resolute and principled political leader.
Look for H.W. Brands's other THE FIRST AMERICAN (Benjamin Franklin), ANDREW JACKSON, TRAITOR TO HIS CLASS (Franklin Roosevelt) and REAGAN.
637 pages, Paperback
First published October 2, 2012
298 people are currently reading
6785 people want to read
About the author
H.W. Brands
103 books1,163 followersH.W. Brands is an acclaimed American historian and author of over thirty books on U.S. history, including Pulitzer Prize finalists The First American and Traitor to His Class. He holds the Jack S. Blanton Sr. Chair in History at the University of Texas at Austin, where he earned his PhD. Originally trained in mathematics, Brands turned to history as a way to pursue his passion for writing. His biographical works on figures like Franklin, Jackson, Grant, and both Roosevelts have earned critical and popular praise for their readability and depth. Raised in Oregon and educated at Stanford, Reed College, and Portland State, he began his teaching career in high schools before entering academia. He later taught at Texas A&M and Vanderbilt before returning to UT Austin. Brands challenges conventional reverence for the Founding Fathers, advocating for a more progressive and evolving view of American democracy. In addition to academic works, his commentary has featured in major documentaries. His books, published internationally and translated into multiple languages, examine U.S. political, economic, and cultural development with compelling narrative force. Beyond academia, he is a public intellectual contributing to national conversations on history and governance.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 398 reviews
October 17, 2019
“A lackluster clerk from Galena, Illinois, a failure in everything except marriage and war…”
- From the introduction to U.S. Grant, in Ken Burns’ The Civil War
“Grant was an uncommon fellow – the most modest, the most disinterested, and the most honest man I ever knew, with a temper that nothing could disturb, and a judgment that was judicial in its comprehensiveness and wisdom…Not a great man, except morally; not an original or brilliant man, but sincere, thoughtful, deep, and gifted with courage that never faltered; when the time came to risk all, he went in like a simple-hearted, unaffected, unpretending hero, whom no ill omens could deject and no triumph unduly exalt.”
- Charles Dana, Recollections of the Civil War
It’s finally happening. Over 150 years since Lee surrendered at Appomattox Courthouse, the Union is finally starting to win the Civil War.
There’s always an exception to any rule. The exception to the rule that “history is written by the winners” is the American Civil War. Almost from the moment the last wisp of gun smoke drifted away, pro-Southern writers and historians, kept from battlefield victory, contented themselves with mitigating those losses by reframing the story.
They were incredibly successful. As H.W. Brands points out in The Man Who Saved the Union, even Grant saw the trend in its earliest stages:
The South was helped by the immense talents of such famous Civil War bards as Douglas Southall Freeman and Shelby Foote, who helped entrench the “Lost Cause” in history books. We’re not talking fringe history, either. To a large extent, pro-Southern interpretations have taken mainstream hold. You can’t discuss the Civil War today without someone bringing up “State’s rights”. If you think of great Civil War generalship, the names that pop instantly into mind are Lee and Jackson. When you think of Sherman, you imagine a torchbearer indiscriminately burning huge swaths of Georgia and South Carolina.
But lately the pendulum of history has started to swing back the other way. The Rebel flag came down from the South Carolina statehouse. New Orleans removed a statue of Jefferson Davis.
Also, in case you’ve missed it, we are in the midst of a Grantaissance!
The same Lost Cause publishing corps that lifted Bob Lee to near godlike status spent decades denigrating the man who vanquished him: Ulysses S. Grant. “Grant the Butcher” he was called. “Grant the Drunk.” Not so much a soldier but a blunt object. An unthinking slug who kept throwing away the lives of his troops until poor Lee nearly drowned in it. And for a kicker, he was a terrible president, too.
For the past few years, Grant’s reputation has been getting a facelift – or better yet, a beard trim. This book continues a trend, though in subtle fashion.
Brands is not a polemicist. He does not care to argue a point. Indeed, in 637 pages of text, there are perhaps two pages containing anything resembling commentary. No, like most of Brands’ work, this is a straight down-the-middle biographical work. It is utterly competent, rather unadorned, informative, and pleasant to read. The title, though, says it all. Grant did what Lincoln could not do alone. Grant did what McDowell, McClellan, Burnside, Hooker, and Pope all failed mightily to achieve. Grant rose from utter obscurity to lead one of the great armies to ever wage war – and yet he has been consistently underestimated by historians. The Man Who Saved the Union is one of a series of recent volumes that have started to reclaim’s Grant’s rightful place.
Brands’ biography is mostly concerned with Grant the General, and Grant the President. Accordingly, Grant’s early years are dispensed with almost as a formality. His childhood, his time at West Point, his service in the Mexican-American War, and his interwar business failures, are all covered in less than 100 pages. When you are trying to cover a life in a single volume, you obviously must make some tough edits. However, as a fan of Robert Caro (who uses Lyndon Johnson’s upbringing to masterful effect in The Years of Lyndon Johnson), I wished more had been made of these formative decades. In fact, I wish more time had been spent on Grant's personal life overall. I really enjoyed this, but I wanted a bit more. There is an extra level to certain biographies that this does not quite achieve. (I stand by my rating. It’s a five-star book, but a soft five).
The bulk of The Man Who Saved the Union covers Grant’s Civil War service. Somehow, through a combination of talent, luck, and the breaks that come with the fortunes of war, Grant went from training Illinois volunteers to ultimately becoming the General-in-Chief. He did this by leveraging his early victories at Fort Henry and Fort Donelson into a reputation as a fighter, a man Lincoln could count on to take the battle to the enemy, even as George McClellan called for yet another round of reinforcements.
Charles Dana, who’d been sent by Edwin Stanton to spy on Grant, didn't see him as a military genius. Yet as Brands shows, Grant had an incredible grasp on the strategic situation. He saw the vital points, and he went after them tenaciously. He thought outside the box, whether it was an attempt to build a canal to besiege Vicksburg, or tunneling under the Petersburg entrenchments. Grant won in the West, moved East, and won there too, no small feat considering he fought in Lee’s own backyard. The disaster at Cold Harbor is well known; less known, and less celebrated, is the way he detached the Army of the Potomac from Lee’s front, and slipped around his flank, nearly capturing Petersburg in one movement.
Brands’ narrative is very straightforward. He does not allow for a lot of tangents. On the matter of Grant’s drinking, for instance, he has come to the conclusion that the rumors were mostly that, rumors. There is not a lot of discussion on the issue. On this, and other topics, you mostly have to be satisfied (or not) with Brands’ judgments.
Grant did not fare as well as President. Brands does not attempt a wholesale revision of his success as chief executive. Rather, he is content to place it in proper context, to see the good and the bad. With limited space, Brands again has to pick and choose his points of emphasis. As the author of a hefty book on American capitalism in the mid-19th century, it is not surprising that he spends a lot of time on Grant’s economic policies, especially his hard money response to the Panic of 1873. As a result, Grant’s dealings with the Indians are covered in only a cursory manner. (Though Brands manages to draw a connection between Grant’s hard money policy – that is, backing all paper money with gold – and Custer’s expedition into the Black Hills).
Grant’s was a scandal-ridden administration. Personally incorruptible, Grant allowed himself to be surrounded by all-too-corruptible men. Even so, when Grant left office, he was immensely popular. Many thought me might run for, and win, a third term. (He allowed himself to be placed in the running in 1880; the nomination went to Garfield).
In one of his rare moments of opining, Brands makes the case that Grant was the first president with any interest in civil rights. That’s one of the things that makes him so appealing to me. He did not always succeed as a politician, but more often than not, his heart was in the right place.
Grant was honored and gloried in his time. When he died, even his enemies paid their respects. He was a man of decency and integrity and something else, something unknowable, that allowed him to keep going, keep fighting, even with the knowledge that his every order, mistaken or not, would be paid for in hundreds and thousands of lives. Somewhere along the way, this monumental figure started to erode. This book helps to restore Grant’s position as a world-historical figure and an original American hero.
- From the introduction to U.S. Grant, in Ken Burns’ The Civil War
“Grant was an uncommon fellow – the most modest, the most disinterested, and the most honest man I ever knew, with a temper that nothing could disturb, and a judgment that was judicial in its comprehensiveness and wisdom…Not a great man, except morally; not an original or brilliant man, but sincere, thoughtful, deep, and gifted with courage that never faltered; when the time came to risk all, he went in like a simple-hearted, unaffected, unpretending hero, whom no ill omens could deject and no triumph unduly exalt.”
- Charles Dana, Recollections of the Civil War
It’s finally happening. Over 150 years since Lee surrendered at Appomattox Courthouse, the Union is finally starting to win the Civil War.
There’s always an exception to any rule. The exception to the rule that “history is written by the winners” is the American Civil War. Almost from the moment the last wisp of gun smoke drifted away, pro-Southern writers and historians, kept from battlefield victory, contented themselves with mitigating those losses by reframing the story.
They were incredibly successful. As H.W. Brands points out in The Man Who Saved the Union, even Grant saw the trend in its earliest stages:
Grant thought the South was getting the better of the war writing. “Everything that our armies did was wrong, could have been done so much better,” he paraphrased the commentary of the war. “Everything that our opponents did was perfect. Lee was a demigod, Jackson was a demigod, while our generals were brutal butchers…The Southern generals were models of chivalry and valor; our generals were venal, incompetent, coarse…”
The South was helped by the immense talents of such famous Civil War bards as Douglas Southall Freeman and Shelby Foote, who helped entrench the “Lost Cause” in history books. We’re not talking fringe history, either. To a large extent, pro-Southern interpretations have taken mainstream hold. You can’t discuss the Civil War today without someone bringing up “State’s rights”. If you think of great Civil War generalship, the names that pop instantly into mind are Lee and Jackson. When you think of Sherman, you imagine a torchbearer indiscriminately burning huge swaths of Georgia and South Carolina.
But lately the pendulum of history has started to swing back the other way. The Rebel flag came down from the South Carolina statehouse. New Orleans removed a statue of Jefferson Davis.
Also, in case you’ve missed it, we are in the midst of a Grantaissance!
The same Lost Cause publishing corps that lifted Bob Lee to near godlike status spent decades denigrating the man who vanquished him: Ulysses S. Grant. “Grant the Butcher” he was called. “Grant the Drunk.” Not so much a soldier but a blunt object. An unthinking slug who kept throwing away the lives of his troops until poor Lee nearly drowned in it. And for a kicker, he was a terrible president, too.
For the past few years, Grant’s reputation has been getting a facelift – or better yet, a beard trim. This book continues a trend, though in subtle fashion.
Brands is not a polemicist. He does not care to argue a point. Indeed, in 637 pages of text, there are perhaps two pages containing anything resembling commentary. No, like most of Brands’ work, this is a straight down-the-middle biographical work. It is utterly competent, rather unadorned, informative, and pleasant to read. The title, though, says it all. Grant did what Lincoln could not do alone. Grant did what McDowell, McClellan, Burnside, Hooker, and Pope all failed mightily to achieve. Grant rose from utter obscurity to lead one of the great armies to ever wage war – and yet he has been consistently underestimated by historians. The Man Who Saved the Union is one of a series of recent volumes that have started to reclaim’s Grant’s rightful place.
Brands’ biography is mostly concerned with Grant the General, and Grant the President. Accordingly, Grant’s early years are dispensed with almost as a formality. His childhood, his time at West Point, his service in the Mexican-American War, and his interwar business failures, are all covered in less than 100 pages. When you are trying to cover a life in a single volume, you obviously must make some tough edits. However, as a fan of Robert Caro (who uses Lyndon Johnson’s upbringing to masterful effect in The Years of Lyndon Johnson), I wished more had been made of these formative decades. In fact, I wish more time had been spent on Grant's personal life overall. I really enjoyed this, but I wanted a bit more. There is an extra level to certain biographies that this does not quite achieve. (I stand by my rating. It’s a five-star book, but a soft five).
The bulk of The Man Who Saved the Union covers Grant’s Civil War service. Somehow, through a combination of talent, luck, and the breaks that come with the fortunes of war, Grant went from training Illinois volunteers to ultimately becoming the General-in-Chief. He did this by leveraging his early victories at Fort Henry and Fort Donelson into a reputation as a fighter, a man Lincoln could count on to take the battle to the enemy, even as George McClellan called for yet another round of reinforcements.
Charles Dana, who’d been sent by Edwin Stanton to spy on Grant, didn't see him as a military genius. Yet as Brands shows, Grant had an incredible grasp on the strategic situation. He saw the vital points, and he went after them tenaciously. He thought outside the box, whether it was an attempt to build a canal to besiege Vicksburg, or tunneling under the Petersburg entrenchments. Grant won in the West, moved East, and won there too, no small feat considering he fought in Lee’s own backyard. The disaster at Cold Harbor is well known; less known, and less celebrated, is the way he detached the Army of the Potomac from Lee’s front, and slipped around his flank, nearly capturing Petersburg in one movement.
Brands’ narrative is very straightforward. He does not allow for a lot of tangents. On the matter of Grant’s drinking, for instance, he has come to the conclusion that the rumors were mostly that, rumors. There is not a lot of discussion on the issue. On this, and other topics, you mostly have to be satisfied (or not) with Brands’ judgments.
Grant did not fare as well as President. Brands does not attempt a wholesale revision of his success as chief executive. Rather, he is content to place it in proper context, to see the good and the bad. With limited space, Brands again has to pick and choose his points of emphasis. As the author of a hefty book on American capitalism in the mid-19th century, it is not surprising that he spends a lot of time on Grant’s economic policies, especially his hard money response to the Panic of 1873. As a result, Grant’s dealings with the Indians are covered in only a cursory manner. (Though Brands manages to draw a connection between Grant’s hard money policy – that is, backing all paper money with gold – and Custer’s expedition into the Black Hills).
Grant’s was a scandal-ridden administration. Personally incorruptible, Grant allowed himself to be surrounded by all-too-corruptible men. Even so, when Grant left office, he was immensely popular. Many thought me might run for, and win, a third term. (He allowed himself to be placed in the running in 1880; the nomination went to Garfield).
In one of his rare moments of opining, Brands makes the case that Grant was the first president with any interest in civil rights. That’s one of the things that makes him so appealing to me. He did not always succeed as a politician, but more often than not, his heart was in the right place.
Grant was honored and gloried in his time. When he died, even his enemies paid their respects. He was a man of decency and integrity and something else, something unknowable, that allowed him to keep going, keep fighting, even with the knowledge that his every order, mistaken or not, would be paid for in hundreds and thousands of lives. Somewhere along the way, this monumental figure started to erode. This book helps to restore Grant’s position as a world-historical figure and an original American hero.
March 1, 2022
“I hope to remain a solider as long as I live.” (4.5 stars)
This is my first book from historian H.W. Brands. It won’t be my last.
With THE MAN WHO SAVED THE UNION, ULYSSES GRANT IN WAR AND PEACE Mr. Brands has written a text that weaves a lot of primary sources in a coherent and thoughtful manner to create a fuller picture of a certain time and place. Especially striking in this book are several primary sources that detail the Battle of Gettysburg. And Grant had nothing to do with that battle, but the bit of text that focuses on this moment helps create that fuller picture I was alluding to.
The structure of the text will focus on some aspect of Grant’s life, and then shift briefly to someone/thing else. It creates that fuller perspective, placing individual events/choices in a larger context. Although this book is about Grant, it is also an illuminating work on the period 1840-1890 in America.
I had to chuckle when I read the following that General Sherman wrote in the 1860s, “There is a power in our land, irresponsible, corrupt and malicious, ‘the press’, which has created the intense feelings of hostility that have arrayed the two parts of our country against each other, which must be curbed and brought within the limits of reason and law before we can have peace in America.” I remember when the media hyperventilated when President Trump said some of them were the “enemy of the people” (they often are) and yet it seems that lying and agitation are just part of their long tradition. I love reading history and finding that my total disregard for the media is well founded in the past.
Other points of interest included:
Arguments about executive vs. legislative power. When one senator thunders that, “The President should obey and enforce the laws, leaving to the people the duty of correcting any errors committed by their representatives in Congress” one has to wonder if that question will ever be settled.
The examination of Grant’s poorly worded Order #11 from his Civil War days is intriguing. Those ill formed words come back to haunt him when he runs for president. However, unlike nowadays, Grant’s sincere explanation of the mistake was enough for a public not looking to humiliate people for their past missteps.
I loved Grant’s first inaugural address. He was a very good (and underestimated) writer. Lincoln’s influence is evident in these closing lines, “In conclusion I ask patient forbearance one toward another throughout the land, and a determined effort on the part of every citizen to do his share toward cementing a happy union; and I ask the prayers of the nation to Almighty God in behalf of this consummation.”
The section of the text that focused on Grant’s post-presidential world travels is a highlight. He made several prescient predictions about international affairs, including a very accurate assessment of China’s future rise and ambitions. Pretty astounding considering he pegged in the 1880s, what folks were still dismissing in the early 2000s.
Some quotes from the text:
• “…That things are seen plainer after the events have occurred.”
• “These terrible battles are very good things to read about for persons who lose no friends, but I am decidedly in favor of having as little of it as possible.”
• “Two commanders on the same field are always one too many.”
• “It is men who wait to be selected, and not those who seek, from whom we may always expect the most efficient service.”
• “I do not believe our Creator ever placed different races of men on this earth with the view of having the stronger exert all its energies in exterminating the weaker.”
• “He could reflect that his adult life had coincided with the Union’s long crises, and though he was not a boastful man, he took pride in his role-first as general, than as president-in bringing the Union through its crises intact.”
I really enjoyed this book, and I think one of its main strengths is the fact that it has depth, without getting bogged down. That is a fine line to walk, and Mr. Brands navigates it astutely.
I end this review with Brand’s succinct summation of its contents, “By the end of his public life the Union was more secure than at any previous time in the history of the nation. And no one had done more to produce that result than he.” With this book, Mr. Brand’s makes a very compelling case that President Grant did just that.
This is my first book from historian H.W. Brands. It won’t be my last.
With THE MAN WHO SAVED THE UNION, ULYSSES GRANT IN WAR AND PEACE Mr. Brands has written a text that weaves a lot of primary sources in a coherent and thoughtful manner to create a fuller picture of a certain time and place. Especially striking in this book are several primary sources that detail the Battle of Gettysburg. And Grant had nothing to do with that battle, but the bit of text that focuses on this moment helps create that fuller picture I was alluding to.
The structure of the text will focus on some aspect of Grant’s life, and then shift briefly to someone/thing else. It creates that fuller perspective, placing individual events/choices in a larger context. Although this book is about Grant, it is also an illuminating work on the period 1840-1890 in America.
I had to chuckle when I read the following that General Sherman wrote in the 1860s, “There is a power in our land, irresponsible, corrupt and malicious, ‘the press’, which has created the intense feelings of hostility that have arrayed the two parts of our country against each other, which must be curbed and brought within the limits of reason and law before we can have peace in America.” I remember when the media hyperventilated when President Trump said some of them were the “enemy of the people” (they often are) and yet it seems that lying and agitation are just part of their long tradition. I love reading history and finding that my total disregard for the media is well founded in the past.
Other points of interest included:
Arguments about executive vs. legislative power. When one senator thunders that, “The President should obey and enforce the laws, leaving to the people the duty of correcting any errors committed by their representatives in Congress” one has to wonder if that question will ever be settled.
The examination of Grant’s poorly worded Order #11 from his Civil War days is intriguing. Those ill formed words come back to haunt him when he runs for president. However, unlike nowadays, Grant’s sincere explanation of the mistake was enough for a public not looking to humiliate people for their past missteps.
I loved Grant’s first inaugural address. He was a very good (and underestimated) writer. Lincoln’s influence is evident in these closing lines, “In conclusion I ask patient forbearance one toward another throughout the land, and a determined effort on the part of every citizen to do his share toward cementing a happy union; and I ask the prayers of the nation to Almighty God in behalf of this consummation.”
The section of the text that focused on Grant’s post-presidential world travels is a highlight. He made several prescient predictions about international affairs, including a very accurate assessment of China’s future rise and ambitions. Pretty astounding considering he pegged in the 1880s, what folks were still dismissing in the early 2000s.
Some quotes from the text:
• “…That things are seen plainer after the events have occurred.”
• “These terrible battles are very good things to read about for persons who lose no friends, but I am decidedly in favor of having as little of it as possible.”
• “Two commanders on the same field are always one too many.”
• “It is men who wait to be selected, and not those who seek, from whom we may always expect the most efficient service.”
• “I do not believe our Creator ever placed different races of men on this earth with the view of having the stronger exert all its energies in exterminating the weaker.”
• “He could reflect that his adult life had coincided with the Union’s long crises, and though he was not a boastful man, he took pride in his role-first as general, than as president-in bringing the Union through its crises intact.”
I really enjoyed this book, and I think one of its main strengths is the fact that it has depth, without getting bogged down. That is a fine line to walk, and Mr. Brands navigates it astutely.
I end this review with Brand’s succinct summation of its contents, “By the end of his public life the Union was more secure than at any previous time in the history of the nation. And no one had done more to produce that result than he.” With this book, Mr. Brand’s makes a very compelling case that President Grant did just that.
June 16, 2014
Book seventeen of my Presidential Challenge.
Prior to reading this book, I had only heard negative things about President/General Grant: He was a drunk, he ran a corrupt administration, he messed up Reconstruction, he liked to kick puppies (okay, I made up that last one but I wouldn't have been surprised).
Obviously, H.W. Brands wanted to use this book to make a case for Grant, and I've got to admit, he did a real good job of it. Okay, elephant in the room, was he a drunk? Yep, that's a big yep without even thinking about it. But that's not the question you should be asking. Did his drinking have any negative effect on his decision-making ability or his leadership. NO! There is no evidence that it did. By all accounts, he was a functional alcoholic and hey, it was the Civil War! That was a stressful time! I'd have been a drunk too.
Was he corrupt? No, but there certainly were many scandals under his watch. However, I chalk this up to him being too trusting and naive in thinking that he could trust his subordinates. He especially damaged his legacy when he testified on behalf of one of them who was clearly guilty. Grant could just never bring himself to think the worst of anyone.
Did he mess up Reconstruction? Nope. Short of Lincoln himself, I don't think there would have been anyone who would have done a better job bringing the South back into the fold. Sure, he had to use Federal troops to bring a few Southern states back in line, but if the state government was going to keep allowing former slaves to be persecuted, what choice did he have?
Most of this misinformation about Grant was started after his Presidency by spiteful Southerners who needed someone to blame and were ready to selectively remember the Civil War and its' aftermath.
Fittingly, the President that Grant reminds me the most of is Washington. Both men didn't want to be involved with politics and were uncomfortable with the political party system. Both were strong leaders who assumed that those working with them were good men. Washington lucked out because he was almost universally right in that assumption. Grant, not so much. If Grant hadn't been President during such trying times, I think he'd be remembered as one of the greats.
Grant was truly given a thankless job, made all the more so by histories re-write of his legacy. Our nation owes him a great debt.
Prior to reading this book, I had only heard negative things about President/General Grant: He was a drunk, he ran a corrupt administration, he messed up Reconstruction, he liked to kick puppies (okay, I made up that last one but I wouldn't have been surprised).
Obviously, H.W. Brands wanted to use this book to make a case for Grant, and I've got to admit, he did a real good job of it. Okay, elephant in the room, was he a drunk? Yep, that's a big yep without even thinking about it. But that's not the question you should be asking. Did his drinking have any negative effect on his decision-making ability or his leadership. NO! There is no evidence that it did. By all accounts, he was a functional alcoholic and hey, it was the Civil War! That was a stressful time! I'd have been a drunk too.
Was he corrupt? No, but there certainly were many scandals under his watch. However, I chalk this up to him being too trusting and naive in thinking that he could trust his subordinates. He especially damaged his legacy when he testified on behalf of one of them who was clearly guilty. Grant could just never bring himself to think the worst of anyone.
Did he mess up Reconstruction? Nope. Short of Lincoln himself, I don't think there would have been anyone who would have done a better job bringing the South back into the fold. Sure, he had to use Federal troops to bring a few Southern states back in line, but if the state government was going to keep allowing former slaves to be persecuted, what choice did he have?
Most of this misinformation about Grant was started after his Presidency by spiteful Southerners who needed someone to blame and were ready to selectively remember the Civil War and its' aftermath.
Fittingly, the President that Grant reminds me the most of is Washington. Both men didn't want to be involved with politics and were uncomfortable with the political party system. Both were strong leaders who assumed that those working with them were good men. Washington lucked out because he was almost universally right in that assumption. Grant, not so much. If Grant hadn't been President during such trying times, I think he'd be remembered as one of the greats.
Grant was truly given a thankless job, made all the more so by histories re-write of his legacy. Our nation owes him a great debt.
March 11, 2022
It has been quite a while since I have read any books on the American Civil War, or American history; my focus has been on European history. I was having a hard time finding a book to read and to stay focused on, and then I was going through my book collection looking to find something to read. As I was looking, I saw that I had this book, and I felt compelled to read it, and I did. As I started reading it, I felt imbued in it’s content, and I also felt a rekindling for my love of civil war history. As I was reading this, I decided to watch Gods and Generals, Gettysburg, Lincoln, and the 1980’s series North and South (with Patrick Swayze in it); all of this has made me want to go back and study the civil war again.
Reading this book, I was really looking forward to learning about Grant’s campaigns during the civil war above all else. I have several books that focus solely on this, but I realized this was a biography, so it was going to cover more than just this. I never felt hesitation about reading this, because I felt the writing was so well done, and since American history is something I am so familiar with, it wasn’t a dry read whatsoever. I give it lots of praise for the writing, and the information.
My conclusions from this book make me have a newfound respect for Grant. For the longest time, I sort of overlooked him, and I have to say that was due to my lack of research. After reading this biography, I find that he was not just a great soldier, but a great man, and statesman. He started out in life with a military career of distinguishment, but like some, he had his faults, suffered with alcoholism for a time, left the army, and had a series of failed ventures. This man redeemed himself during the civil war, from Belmont to Appomattox he seemed to shine brighter with each new battle he faced. From obscurity, he became the nations hero, and was awarded by congress the position of Commanding General of the U.S. Army. Eventually, despite his dislike of politics, and his desire to remain in the army, he becomes president. Grant’s presidency is often overlooked, but there were several things he did that were important: He managed to smoothen relations with the British, and in doing so, he laid the groundwork for the future Anglo-American alliance that prevailed during both World Wars. He tried to work with the Native Americans in a peaceful way, instead of bloodshed, and yet no one mentions this. He also tried his hardest to fight for the newly freed African Americans, making sure they received civil rights, and were treated equally. Grant’s presidency did have it’s problems, but Grant had good intentions while in office. This is the overall perception I received from this book.
I definitely recommend this book to anyone who’s interested, and like always, I will keep on reading, and writing reviews.
Reading this book, I was really looking forward to learning about Grant’s campaigns during the civil war above all else. I have several books that focus solely on this, but I realized this was a biography, so it was going to cover more than just this. I never felt hesitation about reading this, because I felt the writing was so well done, and since American history is something I am so familiar with, it wasn’t a dry read whatsoever. I give it lots of praise for the writing, and the information.
My conclusions from this book make me have a newfound respect for Grant. For the longest time, I sort of overlooked him, and I have to say that was due to my lack of research. After reading this biography, I find that he was not just a great soldier, but a great man, and statesman. He started out in life with a military career of distinguishment, but like some, he had his faults, suffered with alcoholism for a time, left the army, and had a series of failed ventures. This man redeemed himself during the civil war, from Belmont to Appomattox he seemed to shine brighter with each new battle he faced. From obscurity, he became the nations hero, and was awarded by congress the position of Commanding General of the U.S. Army. Eventually, despite his dislike of politics, and his desire to remain in the army, he becomes president. Grant’s presidency is often overlooked, but there were several things he did that were important: He managed to smoothen relations with the British, and in doing so, he laid the groundwork for the future Anglo-American alliance that prevailed during both World Wars. He tried to work with the Native Americans in a peaceful way, instead of bloodshed, and yet no one mentions this. He also tried his hardest to fight for the newly freed African Americans, making sure they received civil rights, and were treated equally. Grant’s presidency did have it’s problems, but Grant had good intentions while in office. This is the overall perception I received from this book.
I definitely recommend this book to anyone who’s interested, and like always, I will keep on reading, and writing reviews.
December 1, 2012
Recently, I read a biography of Ulysses S. Grant authored by Jean Edward Smith. The end result was quite good. There was a nuanced analysis of the problems with ethics by some of his Administration while he was President. This work, too, does a fine job of giving us a view of U. S. Grant's life. Some preliminary comments.
Those with some familiarity with Grant will not necessarily find new revelations here. However, one will get a solid treatment of his life and his contributions.
His early life is covered better elsewhere, but the discussion of his military career and his presidency is well done. One gets a sense of how his personality and experience shaped his remarkable career in the Civil War. A man who was seen as a failure in "the old army" became one of the best fighting generals in the Civil War. While others were overcautious (e.f., Don Carlos Buell, George McClellan, Henry Halleck in his one embarrassing field command), Grant was aggressive, early on capturing the attention of President Lincoln. This volume gives a sense of his tactical and strategic thinking and his understanding of what needed to be done to win the war against the Confederate States of America.
The discussion of his role as head of the military while Andrew Johnson served as President is quite nicely done, as is the depiction of his role in trying to safeguard the newly freed slaves. The almost inevitable move from military commander to president is described well. The explication of the ups and downs of his presidency is handled well. He is not portrayed as blameless for the problems, but we do see that he stood up to forces opposed to him, whether in the economic realm, the civil rights realm, the world of the American Indian, and so on. He surely was not as successful as president as he would have liked; he probably was not as bad as many still believe.
And then his post-presidential career and his desperate race against death to provide for his family, with Mark Twain as a key supporter for him.
All in all, a very solid biography, although one will not be overwhelmed by many new insights into his life and times.
Those with some familiarity with Grant will not necessarily find new revelations here. However, one will get a solid treatment of his life and his contributions.
His early life is covered better elsewhere, but the discussion of his military career and his presidency is well done. One gets a sense of how his personality and experience shaped his remarkable career in the Civil War. A man who was seen as a failure in "the old army" became one of the best fighting generals in the Civil War. While others were overcautious (e.f., Don Carlos Buell, George McClellan, Henry Halleck in his one embarrassing field command), Grant was aggressive, early on capturing the attention of President Lincoln. This volume gives a sense of his tactical and strategic thinking and his understanding of what needed to be done to win the war against the Confederate States of America.
The discussion of his role as head of the military while Andrew Johnson served as President is quite nicely done, as is the depiction of his role in trying to safeguard the newly freed slaves. The almost inevitable move from military commander to president is described well. The explication of the ups and downs of his presidency is handled well. He is not portrayed as blameless for the problems, but we do see that he stood up to forces opposed to him, whether in the economic realm, the civil rights realm, the world of the American Indian, and so on. He surely was not as successful as president as he would have liked; he probably was not as bad as many still believe.
And then his post-presidential career and his desperate race against death to provide for his family, with Mark Twain as a key supporter for him.
All in all, a very solid biography, although one will not be overwhelmed by many new insights into his life and times.
May 5, 2013
H.W. Brands has written a both a very readable and very favorable biography of one the most important military figures in our countries history. Dr Brands looks a US Grants life from his boyhood in Ohio through to his death from cancer in New York, with obvious emphasis on his Civil War record and post Civil War career.
In his coverage of the Civil War, Dr Brands concentrates on the personalities and overall strategy of the war, rather than tactics of the battles. He does not shed much new light on the period of Grants life, but to someone not familiar with this part aspect of Grant it is a very good premier.
For me his take on Grant’s post war career is more informative. He discusses Grants foreign policy. The attempts to settle the CSS Alabama claims with Britain and the relationship with Britain in general, the attempt to annex what is now the Dominican Republic (at their request) and the insurrection in Cuba. He also looks at Grant’s domestic policy in respect to Civil Rights for the freed slaves, battles with the KKK, his Indian Policy (peace if at all possible, but with the recognition that White pressure might not allow for peace). He does gloss over the various scandals that plagued Grant’s presidency. In fact Dr. Brands seems to soft pedal most anything negative about Grant. He also looks at the politics of the reconstruction, the almost dysfunctional congress (sound familiar). He presents Grant as a man who hated politics, but when his country called, he went. While not saying Grant was one of the great presidents, he does seem to say he wasn’t as bad as most historians make him out to be.
All in all a very enjoyable and excellent read. 4 ½ stars
In his coverage of the Civil War, Dr Brands concentrates on the personalities and overall strategy of the war, rather than tactics of the battles. He does not shed much new light on the period of Grants life, but to someone not familiar with this part aspect of Grant it is a very good premier.
For me his take on Grant’s post war career is more informative. He discusses Grants foreign policy. The attempts to settle the CSS Alabama claims with Britain and the relationship with Britain in general, the attempt to annex what is now the Dominican Republic (at their request) and the insurrection in Cuba. He also looks at Grant’s domestic policy in respect to Civil Rights for the freed slaves, battles with the KKK, his Indian Policy (peace if at all possible, but with the recognition that White pressure might not allow for peace). He does gloss over the various scandals that plagued Grant’s presidency. In fact Dr. Brands seems to soft pedal most anything negative about Grant. He also looks at the politics of the reconstruction, the almost dysfunctional congress (sound familiar). He presents Grant as a man who hated politics, but when his country called, he went. While not saying Grant was one of the great presidents, he does seem to say he wasn’t as bad as most historians make him out to be.
All in all a very enjoyable and excellent read. 4 ½ stars
April 14, 2016
I knew very little about Ulysses S Grant before reading this book. I knew he was the main general on the Union side during the Civil War and that he later became president, but I seemed to recall that he wasn't a particularly good president. In a way The Man Who Saved the Union is working against that popular misconception to burnish Grant's somewhat tarnished legacy.
H.W. Brands is known for his sweeping presidential biographies - he penned the Wilson biography in the Times Books ambitious American Presidents series - and with The Man Who Saved the Union he doesn't disappoint. We start, as all biographies must, in the beginning. Born Hiram Ulysses Grant, called Ulys by his family, Grant is a pretty common frontier kid. A wiz on horseback and always with an eye out for business. That enthusiasm for business, however, didn't extend to his father's tannery business. It was a lifelong antipathy and one that led to some animosity between father and son; animosity that only the presidency appears to have dispelled. Some interesting trivia about Grant: The "S" doesn't stand for anything; it was the result of a clerical error when he enrolled at West Point. The same clerical error also erased his given name while promoting Ulysses to his first name, hence U.S. Grant. The patriotic ring of it proved too tempting for the august military academy and the name stuck.
After West Point, Grant spent a fair amount of time in the army, participating in the Mexican-American war, and later on the Pacific coast during the gold rush. Eventually, he resigned his commission following allegations that he was drinking too much. By this point he'd married and fathered two kids. He returned to them and made a go of it in farming and various industries, but the child who had always sought a business angle proved to be a lousy businessman. Almost every attempt Grant made at business in his life floundered. He was born for war, though, and the Civil War offered him a chance to return to the only profession he'd ever been good at. The presidency followed, then an illustrious life as a beloved private citizen who counted Samuel Clemens among his friends and colleagues. Grant's final years found him swindled in business and dancing on the gilded edge of penury while fiendishly scribbling his memoirs in a final attempt to secure his family's financial security. As in war and politics, he ultimately succeeded in literature as well.
A good chunk of the book is dedicated to Grant's efforts during the war. It's a good read for those interested in the subject, but I was more interested in what happened after the war. Luckily, Brands delivered. Reconstruction and the presidency years were wonderfully articulated, and despite the fact that I knew of none of the political machinations of the era Brands did a great job of guiding me through. I never felt lost or overwhelmed. I was also fascinated to see how presidential campaigns have changed since the mid-19th century. Grant didn't give a single stump speech until he campaigned on behalf of James Garfield well after his own (Grant's) presidency has ended, nor did he ever announce his own candidacy. It was considered beneath the dignity of the office to pursue it much back then. Or, maybe, as" the man who saved the Union," Grant just didn't need to campaign much.
I read the Kindle edition, which didn't include any images. That was a real missed opportunity here, and it almost tempted me to buy the hardcover (another great argument for selling physical and digital editions as a bundle like the record industry does, but I digress). Other than that, I really liked reading this on a reader. It's a big book and lugging that around would've been a pain. Sure would look nice on my shelf, though.
Overall, I highly recommend this book for fans of political biographies and Civil War buffs. In Brands' hands, Grant's legacy is secured. I now know our 18th president was a great general, a powerful political force who's positive contribution to reconstruction shouldn't be overlooked, and a man who's honor was beyond reproach. Now if only I could find a good biography of one of our worst presidents: James Buchanan. I've been curious about him for years. Anybody have any suggestions?
If you liked this, make sure to follow me on Goodreads for more reviews!
H.W. Brands is known for his sweeping presidential biographies - he penned the Wilson biography in the Times Books ambitious American Presidents series - and with The Man Who Saved the Union he doesn't disappoint. We start, as all biographies must, in the beginning. Born Hiram Ulysses Grant, called Ulys by his family, Grant is a pretty common frontier kid. A wiz on horseback and always with an eye out for business. That enthusiasm for business, however, didn't extend to his father's tannery business. It was a lifelong antipathy and one that led to some animosity between father and son; animosity that only the presidency appears to have dispelled. Some interesting trivia about Grant: The "S" doesn't stand for anything; it was the result of a clerical error when he enrolled at West Point. The same clerical error also erased his given name while promoting Ulysses to his first name, hence U.S. Grant. The patriotic ring of it proved too tempting for the august military academy and the name stuck.
After West Point, Grant spent a fair amount of time in the army, participating in the Mexican-American war, and later on the Pacific coast during the gold rush. Eventually, he resigned his commission following allegations that he was drinking too much. By this point he'd married and fathered two kids. He returned to them and made a go of it in farming and various industries, but the child who had always sought a business angle proved to be a lousy businessman. Almost every attempt Grant made at business in his life floundered. He was born for war, though, and the Civil War offered him a chance to return to the only profession he'd ever been good at. The presidency followed, then an illustrious life as a beloved private citizen who counted Samuel Clemens among his friends and colleagues. Grant's final years found him swindled in business and dancing on the gilded edge of penury while fiendishly scribbling his memoirs in a final attempt to secure his family's financial security. As in war and politics, he ultimately succeeded in literature as well.
A good chunk of the book is dedicated to Grant's efforts during the war. It's a good read for those interested in the subject, but I was more interested in what happened after the war. Luckily, Brands delivered. Reconstruction and the presidency years were wonderfully articulated, and despite the fact that I knew of none of the political machinations of the era Brands did a great job of guiding me through. I never felt lost or overwhelmed. I was also fascinated to see how presidential campaigns have changed since the mid-19th century. Grant didn't give a single stump speech until he campaigned on behalf of James Garfield well after his own (Grant's) presidency has ended, nor did he ever announce his own candidacy. It was considered beneath the dignity of the office to pursue it much back then. Or, maybe, as" the man who saved the Union," Grant just didn't need to campaign much.
I read the Kindle edition, which didn't include any images. That was a real missed opportunity here, and it almost tempted me to buy the hardcover (another great argument for selling physical and digital editions as a bundle like the record industry does, but I digress). Other than that, I really liked reading this on a reader. It's a big book and lugging that around would've been a pain. Sure would look nice on my shelf, though.
Overall, I highly recommend this book for fans of political biographies and Civil War buffs. In Brands' hands, Grant's legacy is secured. I now know our 18th president was a great general, a powerful political force who's positive contribution to reconstruction shouldn't be overlooked, and a man who's honor was beyond reproach. Now if only I could find a good biography of one of our worst presidents: James Buchanan. I've been curious about him for years. Anybody have any suggestions?
If you liked this, make sure to follow me on Goodreads for more reviews!
August 18, 2012
It is typical in times of war and crisis that people, like Ulysses Grant, destined for a life in obscurity, suddenly rise up out of nowhere, take the lead and save their country. Brilliant in battle, compassionate in victory, loved by his soldiers, respected by his enemies, Grant became the great American hero. No wonder he was pushed to become president. He didn't like politics, but he accepted it as a call of duty.
In the footsteps of President Lincoln, he became the man who restored the Union, with respect for the rights of all citizens, irrespective of their race.
This is a very interesting book that gives full insight into the economic, political, military, and daily aspects of America in the 19th century.
In the footsteps of President Lincoln, he became the man who restored the Union, with respect for the rights of all citizens, irrespective of their race.
This is a very interesting book that gives full insight into the economic, political, military, and daily aspects of America in the 19th century.
December 22, 2013
The Man Who Saved the Union portrays Ulysses S. Grant as a great leader not only of the civil war but also of the fight for civil rights. Grant’s character was shaped by integrity, confidence and persistence. These traits propelled him to success in the war and to recognition as a national hero. Scandals and the first U. S. industrial age depression exposed his limitations as president; however he continued to be held in high regard. After his death revisionist historians sullied his reputation, but Brand gives us good reasons to respect Grant and his accomplishments.
Integrity was Grant’s cornerstone. He was always himself, simple and humble and appreciative of those same qualities in others. Thus in his area of competence as a general he developed close relationships that served him well with people he could trust such as Sherman and Sheridan. Unfortunately in the unfamiliar areas of politics and finance his lack of sophistication was taken advantage of. But when Grant realized his trust was misplaced he acknowledged it unlike so many politicians who instinctively cover-up. Confidence was another key to his achievements. He could make a decision and stick with it, concentrate on implementing it and not waste time second guessing it. At the front in battle he was calm and collected and his sureness infected his men inspiring them to victory. Persistence and attention to detail made him a formidable competitor. He avoided rash decisions and took the time to properly prepare. His victories at Vicksburg and Lookout Mountain demonstrated these qualities. As president he stood up for what he believed in even when it wasn’t popular.
Grant was determined to protect what he had fought for and thus became a leader for civil rights. Sadly, much of his work in securing the rights of blacks in the South was later undermined by the Supreme Court and more expedient administrations. But without Grant there may have been little to build on for the future of equal rights. The South could have quickly reverted to practices of indentured servitude little different from slavery. He used federal troops in the South to take on the Ku Klux Klan and similar groups to protect the bitterly won rights of the former slaves. He recognized that the war had ultimately been about slavery and not simply states’ rights, a position that attempted to avoid the fundamental moral issue. He also stood up for fair treatment of the Indians, although after gold discoveries in the West there was little he could do to prevent their demise.
Brand’s writing reflects the man he writes about. Nothing fancy, just a simple presentation of what happened. His focus on Grant’s sense of fairness and justice for all makes the book uplifting. The Man Who Saved the Union is well worth reading in a time when we see the same political battles and realize that equal protection and due process under the law is still an unfinished goal. Today as in Grant’s day only continued vigilance keeps the 14th amendment rights that were won at such a high cost from being compromised. We would be very fortunate to have more leaders in the mold of U. S. Grant.
Integrity was Grant’s cornerstone. He was always himself, simple and humble and appreciative of those same qualities in others. Thus in his area of competence as a general he developed close relationships that served him well with people he could trust such as Sherman and Sheridan. Unfortunately in the unfamiliar areas of politics and finance his lack of sophistication was taken advantage of. But when Grant realized his trust was misplaced he acknowledged it unlike so many politicians who instinctively cover-up. Confidence was another key to his achievements. He could make a decision and stick with it, concentrate on implementing it and not waste time second guessing it. At the front in battle he was calm and collected and his sureness infected his men inspiring them to victory. Persistence and attention to detail made him a formidable competitor. He avoided rash decisions and took the time to properly prepare. His victories at Vicksburg and Lookout Mountain demonstrated these qualities. As president he stood up for what he believed in even when it wasn’t popular.
Grant was determined to protect what he had fought for and thus became a leader for civil rights. Sadly, much of his work in securing the rights of blacks in the South was later undermined by the Supreme Court and more expedient administrations. But without Grant there may have been little to build on for the future of equal rights. The South could have quickly reverted to practices of indentured servitude little different from slavery. He used federal troops in the South to take on the Ku Klux Klan and similar groups to protect the bitterly won rights of the former slaves. He recognized that the war had ultimately been about slavery and not simply states’ rights, a position that attempted to avoid the fundamental moral issue. He also stood up for fair treatment of the Indians, although after gold discoveries in the West there was little he could do to prevent their demise.
Brand’s writing reflects the man he writes about. Nothing fancy, just a simple presentation of what happened. His focus on Grant’s sense of fairness and justice for all makes the book uplifting. The Man Who Saved the Union is well worth reading in a time when we see the same political battles and realize that equal protection and due process under the law is still an unfinished goal. Today as in Grant’s day only continued vigilance keeps the 14th amendment rights that were won at such a high cost from being compromised. We would be very fortunate to have more leaders in the mold of U. S. Grant.
March 2, 2015
This is a sizable time investment, but worth it.
I knew Grant's battle record, but American history classes, even in college, generally wash away with the decades after the Civil War as: "Johnson was terrible, Reconstruction was a disaster, the KKK were rampant, there were economic crises, and Garfield was shot. Here's some stuff about the Gilded Age, and oh, along comes Teddy Roosevelt."
What we're taught is not very thorough. This was not exactly the high point of American history. That said, because it gave us the 13th-15th Amendments, it's critical, because it took a fledgling nation and made it an adolescent that would someday grow up to be a 20-something in desperate need of therapy. And possibly SSRIs, to push the metaphor further.
More than just about Grant, this is a good look at the history of the time through the lens of a good but flawed man who had to deal with Washington politics (in his own party and out) and intrigues, and who managed to do so for two terms. That, in and of itself, is an incredible accomplishment. For a man whose knees knocked before he was required to give speeches, managed to hold it all together through Reconstruction which was, by anyone's standards (and anyone's point of view), a complete clusterf*ck, as well as a few scandals.
Perhaps Brands is kinder than other authors might be; I don't know. This feels like a paean in many ways, but an engaging one. In this book, Grant was an awesome abolitionist who worked harder for freedmen than anyone else in Washington (that could very well be true); Grant was an awesome advocate for Native peoples (a harder case to make, but doable); Grant was so noble he only became president because it was handed to him on a plate (pretty much; also, he didn't know how to do anything else but soldier, so why not?). He was a good man and he was very much loved wherever he went (except the South).
But. In the absence of footnotes and decent annotations (however impractical it would be for the publisher, as long as this is), I did come away feeling there was cherry picking of facts...but it's not like I could easily tell. The text was in need of a heavier editorial hand. And so if I could, I'd give this 4.5 stars.
(I also had the repeated confusion of not recognizing major military figures when their first names were used instead of their ranks, but that's not the author's fault.)
I knew Grant's battle record, but American history classes, even in college, generally wash away with the decades after the Civil War as: "Johnson was terrible, Reconstruction was a disaster, the KKK were rampant, there were economic crises, and Garfield was shot. Here's some stuff about the Gilded Age, and oh, along comes Teddy Roosevelt."
What we're taught is not very thorough. This was not exactly the high point of American history. That said, because it gave us the 13th-15th Amendments, it's critical, because it took a fledgling nation and made it an adolescent that would someday grow up to be a 20-something in desperate need of therapy. And possibly SSRIs, to push the metaphor further.
More than just about Grant, this is a good look at the history of the time through the lens of a good but flawed man who had to deal with Washington politics (in his own party and out) and intrigues, and who managed to do so for two terms. That, in and of itself, is an incredible accomplishment. For a man whose knees knocked before he was required to give speeches, managed to hold it all together through Reconstruction which was, by anyone's standards (and anyone's point of view), a complete clusterf*ck, as well as a few scandals.
Perhaps Brands is kinder than other authors might be; I don't know. This feels like a paean in many ways, but an engaging one. In this book, Grant was an awesome abolitionist who worked harder for freedmen than anyone else in Washington (that could very well be true); Grant was an awesome advocate for Native peoples (a harder case to make, but doable); Grant was so noble he only became president because it was handed to him on a plate (pretty much; also, he didn't know how to do anything else but soldier, so why not?). He was a good man and he was very much loved wherever he went (except the South).
But. In the absence of footnotes and decent annotations (however impractical it would be for the publisher, as long as this is), I did come away feeling there was cherry picking of facts...but it's not like I could easily tell. The text was in need of a heavier editorial hand. And so if I could, I'd give this 4.5 stars.
(I also had the repeated confusion of not recognizing major military figures when their first names were used instead of their ranks, but that's not the author's fault.)
February 4, 2025
A wonderful biography on Ulysses S. Grant.
H. W. Brands is a trusted historian who obviously loves and cares about American history.
There are two great strengths to this book.
(1) Brands constantly keeps the reader informed of the greater historical context happening around Grant and his life.
(2) Brands uses many first person quotes from a variety of people to help tell the story of Grant.
This biography left me longing to know more of Grant. While Grant by no means was a perfect man (no one is), he was a man of conviction and a great leader.
H. W. Brands is a trusted historian who obviously loves and cares about American history.
There are two great strengths to this book.
(1) Brands constantly keeps the reader informed of the greater historical context happening around Grant and his life.
(2) Brands uses many first person quotes from a variety of people to help tell the story of Grant.
This biography left me longing to know more of Grant. While Grant by no means was a perfect man (no one is), he was a man of conviction and a great leader.
December 14, 2014
I read Grant's autobiography some time ago. In spite of its great reviews I was disappointed. The autobiography is quite detailed in its recounting of Grant's Civil War experiences and campaigns while Brand's biography is a survey of Grant's entire life. While the fans of military history will no doubt revel in the autobiography the book I was looking for was written by Prof. Brand and is about Grant the man and is well worth reading.
July 9, 2013
A rich and evenhanded biography of Grant. Brands provides little interpretation or analysis here, letting things speak for themselves. I didn’t find this to be a major problem, however. The book is well-written and engaging, and reads more like a work of narrative history than biography.
The biography was refreshing for me. Many biographies of American military figures are too often characterized by either hero worship or merciless criticism. The foremost example is Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, unquestionably a great commander but one whose mistakes and human failings were glossed over for generations. Lee's daring victories against the odds were romanticized by hero-worshipping biographers who cast him as the ideal gentleman-soldier and the symbol of the Lost Cause (even though Lee also had the capacity for amazing foolishness on the battlefield, such as Picket’s Charge at Gettysburg. Meanwhile, tradition portrayed Lee's adversary, Ulysses S. Grant, as a besotted butcher who won the Civil War by unimaginative reliance on superior manpower and whose tenure as president was characterized by bumbling and corruption. Thankfully, Brands does not take these myths into account.
The best part of the book for me was the discussion of Grant’s military career, which was very insightful and takes up a large chunk of the book. The reader gets a sense of how his experiences and personality shaped Grant’s generalship. Brands argues that what made him a succesfull general was his strong sense of moral conviction and especially his willingness to take responsibility for his decisions.
There are about 150 pages or so devoted to Grant's eight years as President. I came away wondering why Grant is so often ranked as a poor president in view of his many accomplishments. Brand does not write in a way that advocates or campaigns for a more favorable view of Grant's presidency. Rather, he presents the facts completely and silently leaves it to the reader to make any assessment. Grant's accomplishments are many: the 15th Amendment to the Constitution (the right to vote regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude); the Civil Rights Act of 1875 (mandating equality in hotels, restaurants, transportation facilities, etc); the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871; and so on. Grant is depicted as having valiantly supported the rights and vigorously having pursued the protection of southern blacks because he believes it is the right thing to do. This is different than the many other Republicans who support these actions because they fear losing their majorities at the Federal level if the Southern states are returned to white rule. Brands does a great job showing the irony in how radical Republicans (Senators Schurz and Sumner, for example) opposed many of Grant's actions in spite of his efforts to support the freed slaves.
During his presidency, Grant was a stout defender of civil rights for newly freed blacks and resolute in his defense of using federal power to combat the violence visited upon them by southern whites. In economic issues, Grant was as resolute in his defense of hard money and in pursuing currency stability even in the face of a rather long economic downturn. One could argue that the black man never had a better federal friend than US Grant until the presidency of Lyndon Johnson. In fact, this story provides a glimpse of how former slaves could have enjoyed a much shortened period of second-class citizenship and a much faster rise in fortune had the policies Grant put in place and enforced not been allowed to wither and ultimately be abandoned shortly after his terms in office concluded. Telling is how his use of the army in both Louisiana and South Carolina helped quell Klan inspired violence when applied. Sadly, his successors', Congresses' and the northern people's tiring of dealing with the southern issue and the caring for the freedman's rights and safety allowed the bright promise of federal protection of civil rights to wither for almost a century.
In all, a superb book.
The biography was refreshing for me. Many biographies of American military figures are too often characterized by either hero worship or merciless criticism. The foremost example is Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, unquestionably a great commander but one whose mistakes and human failings were glossed over for generations. Lee's daring victories against the odds were romanticized by hero-worshipping biographers who cast him as the ideal gentleman-soldier and the symbol of the Lost Cause (even though Lee also had the capacity for amazing foolishness on the battlefield, such as Picket’s Charge at Gettysburg. Meanwhile, tradition portrayed Lee's adversary, Ulysses S. Grant, as a besotted butcher who won the Civil War by unimaginative reliance on superior manpower and whose tenure as president was characterized by bumbling and corruption. Thankfully, Brands does not take these myths into account.
The best part of the book for me was the discussion of Grant’s military career, which was very insightful and takes up a large chunk of the book. The reader gets a sense of how his experiences and personality shaped Grant’s generalship. Brands argues that what made him a succesfull general was his strong sense of moral conviction and especially his willingness to take responsibility for his decisions.
There are about 150 pages or so devoted to Grant's eight years as President. I came away wondering why Grant is so often ranked as a poor president in view of his many accomplishments. Brand does not write in a way that advocates or campaigns for a more favorable view of Grant's presidency. Rather, he presents the facts completely and silently leaves it to the reader to make any assessment. Grant's accomplishments are many: the 15th Amendment to the Constitution (the right to vote regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude); the Civil Rights Act of 1875 (mandating equality in hotels, restaurants, transportation facilities, etc); the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871; and so on. Grant is depicted as having valiantly supported the rights and vigorously having pursued the protection of southern blacks because he believes it is the right thing to do. This is different than the many other Republicans who support these actions because they fear losing their majorities at the Federal level if the Southern states are returned to white rule. Brands does a great job showing the irony in how radical Republicans (Senators Schurz and Sumner, for example) opposed many of Grant's actions in spite of his efforts to support the freed slaves.
During his presidency, Grant was a stout defender of civil rights for newly freed blacks and resolute in his defense of using federal power to combat the violence visited upon them by southern whites. In economic issues, Grant was as resolute in his defense of hard money and in pursuing currency stability even in the face of a rather long economic downturn. One could argue that the black man never had a better federal friend than US Grant until the presidency of Lyndon Johnson. In fact, this story provides a glimpse of how former slaves could have enjoyed a much shortened period of second-class citizenship and a much faster rise in fortune had the policies Grant put in place and enforced not been allowed to wither and ultimately be abandoned shortly after his terms in office concluded. Telling is how his use of the army in both Louisiana and South Carolina helped quell Klan inspired violence when applied. Sadly, his successors', Congresses' and the northern people's tiring of dealing with the southern issue and the caring for the freedman's rights and safety allowed the bright promise of federal protection of civil rights to wither for almost a century.
In all, a superb book.
September 26, 2014
http://bestpresidentialbios.com/2014/...
“The Man Who Saved the Union: Ulysses S. Grant in War and Peace” is H.W. Brands’s 2012 biography of the eighteenth president. Brands is a professor at the University of Texas and a prolific author. He has written nearly thirty books on a wide range of historical topics including biographies of Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt and Aaron Burr. He is currently working on “Reagan: A Life” which is due to be published in mid-2015.
Brands’s biography is the sixth – and the newest – of the Grant biographies I’ve read. This is a solid, if not always exciting, analysis of Grant and it provides a well-balanced view of Grant’s life (though ultimately with an eye toward redemption of his legacy).
During the book’s earliest chapters Brands allows Grant to do most of the talking. Much of this early text consists of Grant’s own words (from his letters and Memoirs in particular) with Brands’s thoughts filling in the gaps. Although initially interesting, I began to wish this tendency would become the exception rather than the rule – a wish eventually granted.
One of the best aspects of this biography is that Brands consistently provides excellent historical context. Never does the reader feel locked in on just Grant but always remains aware of the bigger picture. Of all of Grant biographers, Brands seems to do this the best.
Brands’s biography also provides some of the best coverage of Grant’s presidency I’ve seen. Relative to his military service, Grant’s two terms in the White House are comparatively dull and almost…tedious. But with America recovering from the Civil War and engaged in the arduous task of Reconstruction, this is an important period and Brands does it justice.
Often dispatched quickly by biographers – yet arguably more interesting than his political service – is Grant’s post-presidency. This encompasses his 2½ year around-the-world trip and the drafting and publication of his Memoirs. Brands covers this period quite well.
Readers acquainted with Brands as an author will probably find his writing style familiar. He is straightforward and rarely flashy; his words are deliberate and direct. But his narrative lacks the charm of McCullough, the captivating battlefield drama of Perret and the all-around appeal and insight of Jean Edward Smith.
Military campaigns are well-described but lack something I’ve experienced from other biographies – the sense you are actually there rather than reading about it decades later. Grant’s participation in the Mexican and Civil wars is detailed but somewhat antiseptic. Incremental color provided by other biographers brought battles more vividly to life, but also better connected one moment to the next.
Finally, there seems to be little scholastically or interpretively new in Brands’s biography. Grant’s life has been well-reviewed over the past two decades so it is not surprising that little new material is revealed. And while Brands treads no new ground, he is just the latest in a long string of biographers to “rejuvenate” Grant’s previously tarnished reputation.
Overall, Brands’s biography of Grant is very good, but not quite great. It is a steady, methodical, deliberate and comprehensive biography that is rarely thrilling but seldom dull. Someone already acquainted with Grant’s life may find no reason to dive into this book. But for someone new to the life of Ulysses S. Grant, this is a solid (but not perfect) choice.
Overall rating: 4 stars
“The Man Who Saved the Union: Ulysses S. Grant in War and Peace” is H.W. Brands’s 2012 biography of the eighteenth president. Brands is a professor at the University of Texas and a prolific author. He has written nearly thirty books on a wide range of historical topics including biographies of Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt and Aaron Burr. He is currently working on “Reagan: A Life” which is due to be published in mid-2015.
Brands’s biography is the sixth – and the newest – of the Grant biographies I’ve read. This is a solid, if not always exciting, analysis of Grant and it provides a well-balanced view of Grant’s life (though ultimately with an eye toward redemption of his legacy).
During the book’s earliest chapters Brands allows Grant to do most of the talking. Much of this early text consists of Grant’s own words (from his letters and Memoirs in particular) with Brands’s thoughts filling in the gaps. Although initially interesting, I began to wish this tendency would become the exception rather than the rule – a wish eventually granted.
One of the best aspects of this biography is that Brands consistently provides excellent historical context. Never does the reader feel locked in on just Grant but always remains aware of the bigger picture. Of all of Grant biographers, Brands seems to do this the best.
Brands’s biography also provides some of the best coverage of Grant’s presidency I’ve seen. Relative to his military service, Grant’s two terms in the White House are comparatively dull and almost…tedious. But with America recovering from the Civil War and engaged in the arduous task of Reconstruction, this is an important period and Brands does it justice.
Often dispatched quickly by biographers – yet arguably more interesting than his political service – is Grant’s post-presidency. This encompasses his 2½ year around-the-world trip and the drafting and publication of his Memoirs. Brands covers this period quite well.
Readers acquainted with Brands as an author will probably find his writing style familiar. He is straightforward and rarely flashy; his words are deliberate and direct. But his narrative lacks the charm of McCullough, the captivating battlefield drama of Perret and the all-around appeal and insight of Jean Edward Smith.
Military campaigns are well-described but lack something I’ve experienced from other biographies – the sense you are actually there rather than reading about it decades later. Grant’s participation in the Mexican and Civil wars is detailed but somewhat antiseptic. Incremental color provided by other biographers brought battles more vividly to life, but also better connected one moment to the next.
Finally, there seems to be little scholastically or interpretively new in Brands’s biography. Grant’s life has been well-reviewed over the past two decades so it is not surprising that little new material is revealed. And while Brands treads no new ground, he is just the latest in a long string of biographers to “rejuvenate” Grant’s previously tarnished reputation.
Overall, Brands’s biography of Grant is very good, but not quite great. It is a steady, methodical, deliberate and comprehensive biography that is rarely thrilling but seldom dull. Someone already acquainted with Grant’s life may find no reason to dive into this book. But for someone new to the life of Ulysses S. Grant, this is a solid (but not perfect) choice.
Overall rating: 4 stars
August 3, 2016
This is a very readable and informative biography of one of our greatest presidents. Ulysses S. Grant accomplished two things that earned a nation's gratitude: he saved the Union by winning The Civil War; and he saved the country by winning the peace. The book is divided into three parts, a prologue setting the scene and then Grant at War (The Rage of Achilles) and finally Grant as president (And Give the Peace). Brands is very adept in the war sections to tell Grant's story while filling in the larger picture of politics and war in other parts of the nation. I particularly enjoyed the third part of the book as I knew little of Grant's presidency other than the conventional wisdom that scandal dogged him throughout his two terms. Brands gives a lucid analysis of Grant as president, amply demonstrating that, although Grant had what we might call "personnel problems," he was a sober and judicious chief executive. Many of Grant's challenges have an exceedingly familiar ring. When an overextended market for railroad. financing collapsed , financiers appealed to Grant to save them. As Brands relates the story, it is one our current and previous presidents could relate to:
Grant. was a vigorous defender of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments sending federal troops into southern states to protect both former slaves and those who would work with them against emerging threats such as the Ku Klux Klan and The White League. His defense of the civil rights of all Americans was constant and assured; his failures were exacerbated by a non-compliant Congress and unreconstructed southern prejudices.
“All assistance of the government seems to go to people who do not need it but who avail themselves of the present depressed state of the stock market to buy dividend paying securities, thus absorbing all assistance without meeting the real wants of the country at large,” he said. The speculators and bankers would have to look to themselves. “This will necessarily go on until balances are settled in all former stock gambling operations either by settlements or the breaking of operators. Money will then begin to resume channels of legitimate trade.”
Grant. was a vigorous defender of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments sending federal troops into southern states to protect both former slaves and those who would work with them against emerging threats such as the Ku Klux Klan and The White League. His defense of the civil rights of all Americans was constant and assured; his failures were exacerbated by a non-compliant Congress and unreconstructed southern prejudices.
March 10, 2019
This is a long book. Could say that the first chapters are about the character and leadership style of President Grant. The strict formation but also relaxed and understanding. The rest gives you the feeling that the "negro" question and the civil war never ended. The secession of Lee created the paramilitary KKK that continue to rule the South. Only nowadays we can say that question is somehow solved and answered but the opinions were really of almost religious nature. President Grant won a war, won the war against corruption and got some wins over KKK so he was very much an American patriot. Despite the fact that he saw the invasion of Mexico as an illegal act, despite that, he followed orders. A good book, a bit long but rather classic on modern politics and ideas behind the creation of a nation.
December 16, 2013
Very good one-volume biography of Ulysses S. Grant. Not quite up to the standards of those produced by Brooks Simpson and Jean Edward Smith...but not far behind. Vastly superior to the error riddled work by Geoffrey Perret or the technically competent, but interpretively flawed biography of Grant by William McFeely.
Brands demonstrates again that U.S. Grant is perhaps the most underrated figure in American history. His reputation trashed through the efforts of "lost cause" historians and their enablers in academia and the media - an attempt to whitewash their culpability in perpetuating slavery by elevating their rebellion as a noble "lost cause" - Grant's reputation is finally being restored to its proper place.
This book continues the trend.
With the exception of only Lincoln himself, Grant is the man most responsible for saving the Union, and probably the man most responsible for keeping the country together after the Civil War.
Brands takes a positive view of his performance during the Civil War, leaving little doubt he believes Grant to be among the greatest military figures of the war, and perhaps the greatest in our history.
He also takes a sympathetic view of Grant's time as President, putting his two terms into the context of the times and the challenges he faced as he tried to shepherd the restoration of the Union. Grant's efforts on behalf of former African slaves is the high point of his Presidency. It would not be an exaggeration to characterize Grant as the first "civil rights" President. His efforts on behalf of Native Americans and his work preventing unscrupulous men from cornering the gold market are also highlights.
On the other hand, Brands does not shy away from criticizing Grant where it is warranted including his issuance of General Order #11, his naivete in remaining loyal to subordinates that were clearly corrupt, and his lack of imagination during the the depression that marked the final years of his Presidency.
This book is not perfect. It ends very abruptly, with little exploration of the reasons for the decline in Grant's reputation after his death (admittedly there are other books that explore this topic quite well). At the time of his death Grant was far and away the most popular figure in the United States, so some discussion of how he got from there to the caricature of him that gained prevalence later would have provided a more fitting coda. Also, I was disappointed at how little exploration there was of how a man who was selling firewood on the corner of his home town to make ends meet in 1861, rose so quickly to the pinnacle of power. What was it about Grant's personality that made that rise possible? So much of his inter war career is characterized by disappointment and sadness which is described well here. But as soon as Grant's fortunes turn, that aspect of his story is dropped. Sources may be hard to come by, and I usually disdain psycho-history, but in this case an attempt would have been worth it.
Overall...highly recommended!
Brands demonstrates again that U.S. Grant is perhaps the most underrated figure in American history. His reputation trashed through the efforts of "lost cause" historians and their enablers in academia and the media - an attempt to whitewash their culpability in perpetuating slavery by elevating their rebellion as a noble "lost cause" - Grant's reputation is finally being restored to its proper place.
This book continues the trend.
With the exception of only Lincoln himself, Grant is the man most responsible for saving the Union, and probably the man most responsible for keeping the country together after the Civil War.
Brands takes a positive view of his performance during the Civil War, leaving little doubt he believes Grant to be among the greatest military figures of the war, and perhaps the greatest in our history.
He also takes a sympathetic view of Grant's time as President, putting his two terms into the context of the times and the challenges he faced as he tried to shepherd the restoration of the Union. Grant's efforts on behalf of former African slaves is the high point of his Presidency. It would not be an exaggeration to characterize Grant as the first "civil rights" President. His efforts on behalf of Native Americans and his work preventing unscrupulous men from cornering the gold market are also highlights.
On the other hand, Brands does not shy away from criticizing Grant where it is warranted including his issuance of General Order #11, his naivete in remaining loyal to subordinates that were clearly corrupt, and his lack of imagination during the the depression that marked the final years of his Presidency.
This book is not perfect. It ends very abruptly, with little exploration of the reasons for the decline in Grant's reputation after his death (admittedly there are other books that explore this topic quite well). At the time of his death Grant was far and away the most popular figure in the United States, so some discussion of how he got from there to the caricature of him that gained prevalence later would have provided a more fitting coda. Also, I was disappointed at how little exploration there was of how a man who was selling firewood on the corner of his home town to make ends meet in 1861, rose so quickly to the pinnacle of power. What was it about Grant's personality that made that rise possible? So much of his inter war career is characterized by disappointment and sadness which is described well here. But as soon as Grant's fortunes turn, that aspect of his story is dropped. Sources may be hard to come by, and I usually disdain psycho-history, but in this case an attempt would have been worth it.
Overall...highly recommended!
November 20, 2015
In 1996 American historians ranked Grant the fourth worst president, 38th out of 42. Now he is ranked 28th out of 44, a huge increase in regard and the most dramatic presidential opinion turn around ever. The Man Who Saved the Union, by H. W. Brands, helps us understand why. The short version is that the defeated South won the opinion debate after the Civil War. Why? Because they still cared, could not get over being defeated, and saw U.S. Grant (and his arch-partner W. T. Sherman) as a man beneath contempt. How? By a century long myth-making effort called “The Lost Cause.”
Brands does an excellent job, as usual, of laying out the life of his subject and making the important events, character, and motivations clear. Grant had huge challenges and for the most part he met them. This book should help restore his reputation even further as Grant’s actions during Reconstruction become more widely known and understood. Following perhaps the worst President ever, Andrew Johnson, in the shadow of Lincoln, and facing a defeated but unbowed South, Grant had a challenge the magnitude of which few Presidents have faced. Making matters worse was the lack of true power on the ground; the government back in those days was tiny and largely incapable of managing day-to-day matters in the United States. The continuing crisis of Reconstruction strained the government to its limits. Ultimately the powers of counter-Reconstruction won, but Grant did a remarkable job with what he had to work with.
Then there was 1873. The country went into a financial panic and long depression. Again, the levers to counter this situation were largely nonexistent–Grant did the best he could.
The American Civil War takes up roughly half of the book and reads like a novel. Grant’s role in the war centers the narrative, but Brands has written an excellent overview of the entire War, its politics, strategy, and battles. Once the war ends the tone of the book changes, momentum flags, and it takes a little effort to get reengaged. I am glad I did. The longer story of Grant’s presidency is fascinating and his scandals, so focused on by the Lost Cause folks, pale in comparison to his accomplishments.
I have no doubt that Brands’ Grant is and will remain the standard biography of General and President Grant for at least a generation (that’s how long the earlier biography by McFeely was the standard). We will see.
Brands does an excellent job, as usual, of laying out the life of his subject and making the important events, character, and motivations clear. Grant had huge challenges and for the most part he met them. This book should help restore his reputation even further as Grant’s actions during Reconstruction become more widely known and understood. Following perhaps the worst President ever, Andrew Johnson, in the shadow of Lincoln, and facing a defeated but unbowed South, Grant had a challenge the magnitude of which few Presidents have faced. Making matters worse was the lack of true power on the ground; the government back in those days was tiny and largely incapable of managing day-to-day matters in the United States. The continuing crisis of Reconstruction strained the government to its limits. Ultimately the powers of counter-Reconstruction won, but Grant did a remarkable job with what he had to work with.
Then there was 1873. The country went into a financial panic and long depression. Again, the levers to counter this situation were largely nonexistent–Grant did the best he could.
The American Civil War takes up roughly half of the book and reads like a novel. Grant’s role in the war centers the narrative, but Brands has written an excellent overview of the entire War, its politics, strategy, and battles. Once the war ends the tone of the book changes, momentum flags, and it takes a little effort to get reengaged. I am glad I did. The longer story of Grant’s presidency is fascinating and his scandals, so focused on by the Lost Cause folks, pale in comparison to his accomplishments.
I have no doubt that Brands’ Grant is and will remain the standard biography of General and President Grant for at least a generation (that’s how long the earlier biography by McFeely was the standard). We will see.
November 5, 2017
Excellent one volume review of Grant's contribution to our country's history. The 3-volume set (Lloyd Lewis/Bruce Catton)remains the standard for Grant's life through the end of the Civil War but if you want a one volume work Brands' effort is a tad better than Jean Edward Smith's. The bugger has always been Grant's presidency - though it has to be admitted that governing the post Civil War States was hugely difficult. Racism and class warfare fired up immediately. Amazing how reading the history of 1866-1877 is like reading today's news. Unlike today's popinjays who proclaim themselves Great Men Grant truly was a Great Man. A man who could lead an army from horseback. (This in my estimation is no small matter.) A man whose bravery, commitment and integrity could not and cannot be besmirched by 150 years of calumny spewed forth by depraved racists who think their lily white ass the end and be-all of creation. (Damn but this country has advanced so little from Reconstruction.) Some interesting Brands observations: Brands makes note of the division of the old Republican Party into the "Conscience Republicans" and the "Capitalist Republicans" - exactly what we are witnessing today. The other surprise was Grant's being captive of the "confidence fairy" - I did not know that or didn't recognize the fact - but it's understandable - the odd thing is during the Civil War years we went off the Gold Standard in favor of Greenbacks - wonder what would have happened had we abandoned tight money way back then - but then again there was no Federal Reserve and criminals ran the country (so unlike today - lol). Hunt's last chapter (indeed the last 2 pages) offer one hell of a summation to the Greatness that was Grant. Slavery - Secession - WAR. Those who would have it that: the Civil War was only about States Rights vs. Saving the Union w/o admitting the root cause of the Secession - are playing the rest of us for fools. The original Constitution with its institutionalized Slavery was a deeply flawed document. As a nation we are still paying the price.
December 23, 2012
“The Man Who Saved the Union, Ulysses Grant in War and Peace” by H.W. Brands, published by Doubleday Books.
Category – Biography
Although this book is a biography of Ulysses Grant, I found it to be one of the best books I have read on the Civil War. H.W. Brands gives a stunning overall view of the war without going into details about each individual battle. Brands gives a concise view of the major battles and their results.
As a biography, the book puts a totally different perspective on Grant than what one normally reads about the man. Although Grant would be considered a failure, outside of the military, one cannot deny the man for his attempts in his business ventures, which mostly failed but not due to lack of effort on his part. Grant was a man for his time as both the leader of the Union Army and as President of the United States. He relished his role as a military leader but distained politics. He, very reluctantly, took the office of President and excelled in his two terms as President. Grant may have been the only person that could forge a bonding between the North and the South and the slave and free man. While doing this he was able to champion the rights of the Native Americans. In all cases, Grant made suggestions and tried to lead the different factions to a responsible conclusion.
I was most impressed with a statement that Grant made in 1878 that remains true to this day, “The fact is we are the most progressive, freest, and richest people on earth but don’t know or appreciate it”. How about that for savvy?
A wonderful read that incorporates biography with an excellent overview of the Civil War. A biography that should give the reader a totally different read on Ulysses Grant.
Category – Biography
Although this book is a biography of Ulysses Grant, I found it to be one of the best books I have read on the Civil War. H.W. Brands gives a stunning overall view of the war without going into details about each individual battle. Brands gives a concise view of the major battles and their results.
As a biography, the book puts a totally different perspective on Grant than what one normally reads about the man. Although Grant would be considered a failure, outside of the military, one cannot deny the man for his attempts in his business ventures, which mostly failed but not due to lack of effort on his part. Grant was a man for his time as both the leader of the Union Army and as President of the United States. He relished his role as a military leader but distained politics. He, very reluctantly, took the office of President and excelled in his two terms as President. Grant may have been the only person that could forge a bonding between the North and the South and the slave and free man. While doing this he was able to champion the rights of the Native Americans. In all cases, Grant made suggestions and tried to lead the different factions to a responsible conclusion.
I was most impressed with a statement that Grant made in 1878 that remains true to this day, “The fact is we are the most progressive, freest, and richest people on earth but don’t know or appreciate it”. How about that for savvy?
A wonderful read that incorporates biography with an excellent overview of the Civil War. A biography that should give the reader a totally different read on Ulysses Grant.
November 3, 2012
H. W. Brands , "The Man Who Saved the Union" is more than a biography of General and President U.S. Grant. The book details the political, economic, and social environment during Grant's time in public life. Mr. Brands allows the reader to understand Grant's actions during the Civil War and during his Presidency. He details both Grant's triumphs and failures; all major events receive attention. The biography is compelling, well written, and full of quotes which add flavor to the narrative.
As the title suggests, U.S. Grant truly saved the Union. As Brands relates, U.S. Grant did not seek election as President nor did he seek reelection. However, Grant felt duty required him to ensure the gains earned by four years of war were not over turned during reconstruction. The author follows U.S. and Julia Grant on their world tour, which demonstrated his popularity throughout the world. Upon the Grants return home, they found his popularity had not diminished. In fact, General/President Grant remained popular through his illness and death, which was followed day by day in the newspapers. In more recent years, Grant has been dismissed by historians as a failure as President. His military successes are also discounted. During the sesquicentennial of the Civil War and with publication of W. H. Brand's book, perhaps Grant's reputation will be restored to its rightful place.
As the title suggests, U.S. Grant truly saved the Union. As Brands relates, U.S. Grant did not seek election as President nor did he seek reelection. However, Grant felt duty required him to ensure the gains earned by four years of war were not over turned during reconstruction. The author follows U.S. and Julia Grant on their world tour, which demonstrated his popularity throughout the world. Upon the Grants return home, they found his popularity had not diminished. In fact, General/President Grant remained popular through his illness and death, which was followed day by day in the newspapers. In more recent years, Grant has been dismissed by historians as a failure as President. His military successes are also discounted. During the sesquicentennial of the Civil War and with publication of W. H. Brand's book, perhaps Grant's reputation will be restored to its rightful place.
December 26, 2012
Reading the life of 'The Man Who Saved The Union' is one of the best things I ever did. There are a lot of perceptions of Ulysses Grant that I have heard over the years ranging from his drinking to the careless loss of life in battles he had commanded and all the way down to his corrupt presidency. While there is some truth in all of these, it was great to read for the first time a book devoted to him and understand him much better. He opposed the Mexican-American war and yet served bravely in it. He was a devoted husband and brilliant general. He apart from any Union officers in the Civil War was able to see and act decisively and with skill and bravely, just see his march to isolate Vicksburg in 1862-63.
There is a lot to say about Grant and I think this is a great biography. I have read a few books by H.W. Brands and can recommend him as a historian and an author. If you are looking to understand the Civil war from Grant's perspective, as well as his decisive role in post-war US politics, look no further, this is the book for you.
There is a lot to say about Grant and I think this is a great biography. I have read a few books by H.W. Brands and can recommend him as a historian and an author. If you are looking to understand the Civil war from Grant's perspective, as well as his decisive role in post-war US politics, look no further, this is the book for you.
June 20, 2014
This is a great, well researched book about Ulysses Grant. One of the best presidents the U.S. had, who was marginalized by later literature for propaganda reasons that were pretty much forgotten 100 years ago. However his name was never taken out of the mud, and modern history text books still parrot the propaganda.
He took over the U.S. at a time when people in the South were shooting people that voted for Republicans. And he had to handle it. He had to deal with 2 factions fighting for control of the Republican party, the Liberals that fought to free the slaves, and the pro business capitalists (which ultimately won making the Republicans what they are today). And yes republicans back in the 1800s actually called themselves liberals, sorry history revisionists, but there are quotes made by Republicans of that time, and they call themselves that terrible evil word.
It's amazing how media propaganda can redefine words, into being bad.
He took over the U.S. at a time when people in the South were shooting people that voted for Republicans. And he had to handle it. He had to deal with 2 factions fighting for control of the Republican party, the Liberals that fought to free the slaves, and the pro business capitalists (which ultimately won making the Republicans what they are today). And yes republicans back in the 1800s actually called themselves liberals, sorry history revisionists, but there are quotes made by Republicans of that time, and they call themselves that terrible evil word.
It's amazing how media propaganda can redefine words, into being bad.
February 6, 2022
I’ve read a handful of Brands’ history books and biographies now, and I think I’ve figured out his style. It’s “longform Wikipedia article.” He tends to be thorough, but in an effort at objectivity (which doesn’t work-if you read his books from a lens that is at all critical, they’re very clearly leaving a lot out-the Reagan bio particularly comes to mind here), has a pretty bland style.
While readable, I don’t think I’m going to be seeking out any Brands books in the future.
While readable, I don’t think I’m going to be seeking out any Brands books in the future.
August 19, 2020
As all the best historians do, H.W. Brands paints Ulysses Grant in a more Three Dimensional light than most of our memories would offer. If you'd asked me before reading 600+ pages what I thought of this man, I'd say: pretty solid general, who had the benefit of facing a depleted Confederacy and broken politics, who was also an alcoholic which ruined his career (that final thought in particular is B.S.).
After reading, I'm confident that not only is this man among the historical great Republicans, but his influence on this country as a President, not only general, is very underrated.
What I enjoyed about Grant's story is that it's primarily a story of growth, change, and redemption. Although he had a lot of privilege (and his wife's wealth to fall back on), one cannot discount the incredible turn of events his life took. Some leaders are born to lead. Others are caught up in the gears of history, like this person, and thus forced to lead. It's pretty clear that not only did he save the Union once, but at least once more in office, quelling (for a time) the KKK and Southern Democrat insurrection.
Not a perfect leader, notably the gold scandals, the bearish economies he oversaw, and inconsistencies with intervening to protect southern blacks, to be sure. But a nearly perfect general.
It was said at the time that had Grant ran for a 3rd term, whether continuously or otherwise, he'd win in a landslide. It seems like the contemporary popularity of this figure was plummeted since the beginning of the 20th Century (during his final days, Americans were putting him up there with Washington).
In a sad, perhaps fitting end, the old Republican party left the Lincoln-Grant corner and sold out to J.P. Morgan and Wall Street, and did nothing to quell the Southern Democrats amnesia about what the whole thing was about.
P.S. - while this book is about U.S. Grant, its sections on both Abraham Lincoln and William Sherman were incredibly interesting. Lincoln really does appear to be a humble man, a folks conversationalist, etc. As horrible as the Civil War was, he knew deep down that its cause was for something greater than just "preserving the Union." (at the beginning of the war he publicly professed no interest in freeing all slaves, but throughout, he realized what the real mission of this crusade was).
Sherman shows up as a very modern military leader, whose quotes and writings are straight from a Hollywood script.
P.S.S. - the whole "Grant is an alcoholic" thing is so odd. It came from a handful of heavy bouts of drinking in his earlier age, and was propagated by some of his political opponents. I found no mention of heavy drinking in Grant's life as a statesman.
After reading, I'm confident that not only is this man among the historical great Republicans, but his influence on this country as a President, not only general, is very underrated.
What I enjoyed about Grant's story is that it's primarily a story of growth, change, and redemption. Although he had a lot of privilege (and his wife's wealth to fall back on), one cannot discount the incredible turn of events his life took. Some leaders are born to lead. Others are caught up in the gears of history, like this person, and thus forced to lead. It's pretty clear that not only did he save the Union once, but at least once more in office, quelling (for a time) the KKK and Southern Democrat insurrection.
Not a perfect leader, notably the gold scandals, the bearish economies he oversaw, and inconsistencies with intervening to protect southern blacks, to be sure. But a nearly perfect general.
It was said at the time that had Grant ran for a 3rd term, whether continuously or otherwise, he'd win in a landslide. It seems like the contemporary popularity of this figure was plummeted since the beginning of the 20th Century (during his final days, Americans were putting him up there with Washington).
In a sad, perhaps fitting end, the old Republican party left the Lincoln-Grant corner and sold out to J.P. Morgan and Wall Street, and did nothing to quell the Southern Democrats amnesia about what the whole thing was about.
P.S. - while this book is about U.S. Grant, its sections on both Abraham Lincoln and William Sherman were incredibly interesting. Lincoln really does appear to be a humble man, a folks conversationalist, etc. As horrible as the Civil War was, he knew deep down that its cause was for something greater than just "preserving the Union." (at the beginning of the war he publicly professed no interest in freeing all slaves, but throughout, he realized what the real mission of this crusade was).
Sherman shows up as a very modern military leader, whose quotes and writings are straight from a Hollywood script.
P.S.S. - the whole "Grant is an alcoholic" thing is so odd. It came from a handful of heavy bouts of drinking in his earlier age, and was propagated by some of his political opponents. I found no mention of heavy drinking in Grant's life as a statesman.
November 17, 2023
This was a fascinating book about a fascinating person. I was familiar with some generalities about Grant but nothing like the detail offered here. I appreciated the coverage of his full life (and how he changed/adapted over time) all the way through the trajectory of soldier, somewhat aimless civilian, general, national hero, and president.
The best part was the amazing assembly of personal correspondence that gave insight into his opinions beyond what he would have said publicly. The exchanges between Grant and Sherman in particular were incredible as they commiserated about their experiences, discussed broad "future of the country" issues, and even joked and/or made facetious statements to try to get through dark times. It makes me sad to think that this kind of record (actual paper documents) isn't going to exist for historical figures after the digital age.
In retrospect it is hard to believe, but Grant (and Sherman, his trusted right-hand man during the civil war) were among the first in leadership in the Union to understand the true nature of the civil war and what had to be done to win it. To oversimplify, it had nothing to do with gaining territory or consolidating strength, and everything to do with ending the confederacy's capacity to fight in the field. They faced a lot of struggles to impress this on the public, politicians, and other leaders, and this lead to a lot of introspection that came through especially in correspondence.
Grant's time as president wasn't nearly as exciting; it largely had to do with his transition from someone who quietly considered input before making a concise authoritative decision to someone who had to work to keep many people happy at the same time. He embraced it over time, but the public conflicts unfairly tarnished his legacy to some degree. I was impressed to learn that (in the context of his time) Grant did more than I realized in support of native american and african american rights. His efforts were often overwhelmed by forced beyond his control, though.
It's still hard to interpret Grant's rumored drinking problem, but for obvious reasons this was not in the public record as much as his civil war exploits or presidential efforts. The author took a sympathetic view but I think it was fair.
In summary this was an amazingly researched, in depth, insightful, and (inevitably) long book.
(I'm way behind on reviews and kind of guessing at when I finished this. It definitely took a while though.)
The best part was the amazing assembly of personal correspondence that gave insight into his opinions beyond what he would have said publicly. The exchanges between Grant and Sherman in particular were incredible as they commiserated about their experiences, discussed broad "future of the country" issues, and even joked and/or made facetious statements to try to get through dark times. It makes me sad to think that this kind of record (actual paper documents) isn't going to exist for historical figures after the digital age.
In retrospect it is hard to believe, but Grant (and Sherman, his trusted right-hand man during the civil war) were among the first in leadership in the Union to understand the true nature of the civil war and what had to be done to win it. To oversimplify, it had nothing to do with gaining territory or consolidating strength, and everything to do with ending the confederacy's capacity to fight in the field. They faced a lot of struggles to impress this on the public, politicians, and other leaders, and this lead to a lot of introspection that came through especially in correspondence.
Grant's time as president wasn't nearly as exciting; it largely had to do with his transition from someone who quietly considered input before making a concise authoritative decision to someone who had to work to keep many people happy at the same time. He embraced it over time, but the public conflicts unfairly tarnished his legacy to some degree. I was impressed to learn that (in the context of his time) Grant did more than I realized in support of native american and african american rights. His efforts were often overwhelmed by forced beyond his control, though.
It's still hard to interpret Grant's rumored drinking problem, but for obvious reasons this was not in the public record as much as his civil war exploits or presidential efforts. The author took a sympathetic view but I think it was fair.
In summary this was an amazingly researched, in depth, insightful, and (inevitably) long book.
(I'm way behind on reviews and kind of guessing at when I finished this. It definitely took a while though.)
August 18, 2025
This is my first history book on the Civil War. It’s first I’ve read of Ulysses S. Grant. I really enjoyed this book! The books consists of three sections: Early Life, Civil War, Post-War/Presidency. I flew through the first two sections. The third sections was a bit of a bog and it quickly gained speed. (I’m not sure if the “bog” was me slowing down on a 637 page book, or if post Civil War just wasn’t as exciting.)
Mr Brands tells it in linear fashion with straight-forward writing. Really no complaints with this book. It is what you see. A biography of Ulysses S. Grant, well told. It helped me put order to the historical happenings that I had heard about. The order of the battles. Details on how they were fought and their impacts.
The details of Grant’s Presidency show his greatness, and also his failings. (More like the failings of the people he trusted too much.). It really showed Grant as one of our more extraordinary Presidents. He almost was a three-term President! If cancer had not struck hm down, history might, and probably would, have been very different.
Ok, one complaint …. There is a map at the beginning of the book. It is very, very basic. It only shows the Civil War battles that Grant was directly involved in. (The states aren’t even labeled.). A bit more detail would have been helpful. Show also the major cities that are mentioned and important to the narrative. Understanding ow close a battle was to a major city is insightful. Show Sherman’s March to the Sea! Truly understanding how far Sherman traveled and how fast he traveled is really important to the ending of the Civil War. What he did was incredible! I ended up penciling in a lot of details to help me understand the progress of the Civil War.
Now I want to read Grant’s memoirs, Sherman’s memoirs, and Ron Chernow’s biography of Grant. (My TBR just got bigger!)
Again, very enjoyable. Highly recommend.
Mr Brands tells it in linear fashion with straight-forward writing. Really no complaints with this book. It is what you see. A biography of Ulysses S. Grant, well told. It helped me put order to the historical happenings that I had heard about. The order of the battles. Details on how they were fought and their impacts.
The details of Grant’s Presidency show his greatness, and also his failings. (More like the failings of the people he trusted too much.). It really showed Grant as one of our more extraordinary Presidents. He almost was a three-term President! If cancer had not struck hm down, history might, and probably would, have been very different.
Ok, one complaint …. There is a map at the beginning of the book. It is very, very basic. It only shows the Civil War battles that Grant was directly involved in. (The states aren’t even labeled.). A bit more detail would have been helpful. Show also the major cities that are mentioned and important to the narrative. Understanding ow close a battle was to a major city is insightful. Show Sherman’s March to the Sea! Truly understanding how far Sherman traveled and how fast he traveled is really important to the ending of the Civil War. What he did was incredible! I ended up penciling in a lot of details to help me understand the progress of the Civil War.
Now I want to read Grant’s memoirs, Sherman’s memoirs, and Ron Chernow’s biography of Grant. (My TBR just got bigger!)
Again, very enjoyable. Highly recommend.
December 22, 2017
This was my first H. W. Brands read and it certainly won't be my last. It took a while to get used to his writing style which includes far more quotes from primary sources that I am used to. At first it made the text seem chopped up, but before half way through the book I got the hang of it. This is a book I definitely wouldn't mind revisiting sometime in the future.
November 18, 2020
HW Brands writes with skill, depth, and accessibility. Grant stands as one of the most under appreciated presidents in American history. Brands’ approach is honest and without bias. Real people walk through time and Brands breathes life into them on the page.
July 18, 2023
I learned SO MUCH not only about Grant’s life, but about the Mexican war, in which many West Point officers fought, then later in the civil war fought for either the north or south. Also the events leading up to the civil war, the battles of the civil war, then Grant’s presidency and reconstruction, the harassment and “legal” discrimination of blacks in the south. Crazy stuff.
Grant’s reputation as a drunkard was vastly skewed and overblown, he was a lightweight and didn’t handle alcohol well, had a couple of instances when he did get drunk but, hey, who among us…?
Fascinating book, I’ve now ordered his voluminous memoirs, which Mark Twain published and which set up his family for financial security, from the library.
Grant’s reputation as a drunkard was vastly skewed and overblown, he was a lightweight and didn’t handle alcohol well, had a couple of instances when he did get drunk but, hey, who among us…?
Fascinating book, I’ve now ordered his voluminous memoirs, which Mark Twain published and which set up his family for financial security, from the library.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 398 reviews