What do you think?
Rate this book
The Generals
Lee: A Life of Virtue
Traitor. Divider. Defender of slavery. This damningportrayal of Robert E. Lee has persisted through 150 years of history books.And yet it has no basis in fact. In the spirit of bold restoration, A Life of Virtue reveals the true Lee-passionate patriot,caring son, devoted husband, doting father, don't-tread-on-me Virginian,Godfearing Christian. Weaving forgotten facts and revelations (Lee considered slaverya moral outrage) with striking personal details (for years he carried hisweakened mother to and from her carriage), biographer John Perry crafts acompelling treatment of the virtuous warrior who endured withering oppositionand sacrificed all to stand for Constitutional freedoms.
234 pages, Hardcover
First published September 7, 2010
14 people are currently reading
77 people want to read
About the author
John Perry
20 books21 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
John Perry has coauthored books with John MacArthur, Richard Land, Mike Huckabee, among others and written historical books about Charles Colson, the Scopes Monkey Trials, and more. He is a two-time Gold Medallion Award finalist and lives in Nashville, Tennessee.
John Perry has coauthored books with John MacArthur, Richard Land, Mike Huckabee, among others and written historical books about Charles Colson, the Scopes Monkey Trials, and more. He is a two-time Gold Medallion Award finalist and lives in Nashville, Tennessee.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
September 4, 2017
Robert E. Lee possessed many wonderful qualities. He was dutiful, hard working, honest, intelligent, courageous, kind, a good father and the best soldier in America. In Lee: A Life of Virtue, John Perry focuses on these qualities to argue that Lee was one of the best of men, but, I just can't quite get over the fact that despite all these qualities he was a traitor to his country who fought for the preservation of slavery.
Perry would say, "Well, in Lee's eyes he owed his primary duty to Virginia," to which I answer: so what, in Julius Rosenberg's mind he owed his allegiance to the Soviet Union. Lee fought to destroy the Union. He led armies to kill American soldiers. These are the bare facts.
Perry also tries to drive home the idea that Lee HATED slavey. Basically, he would have us believe that Frederick Douglass may have been the biggest opponent to slavery in the country, but Lee was a close second. This is nonsense. Lee may have freed any slaves that fell into his ownership through inheritance and he was against the institution in a theoretical sense. But he had slaves in his house his whole life, doing the dirty work. They may have been owned by his wife's family, but it seems like someone who truly was opposed to slavery would not allow it in his house. That's like trying to claim you're an opponent of prostitution while allowing your brother in law to run a brothel in your basement. And he may have been fighting for the state of Virginia, but the practical effect of this was the protection of slavery.
Now, I'm not going to judge Lee by the standards of my day, and slavery was still fairly common around the world in the mid 1800s, but he was behind the curve. My heroes are ahead of their time, not behind it. He may have had many virtues, but real heroes use their qualities to fight for good causes.
Still, I have to give Perry points for presenting his case well, and drawing his complex subject so clearly. This is a nice little biography of one of America's greatest generals.
Perry would say, "Well, in Lee's eyes he owed his primary duty to Virginia," to which I answer: so what, in Julius Rosenberg's mind he owed his allegiance to the Soviet Union. Lee fought to destroy the Union. He led armies to kill American soldiers. These are the bare facts.
Perry also tries to drive home the idea that Lee HATED slavey. Basically, he would have us believe that Frederick Douglass may have been the biggest opponent to slavery in the country, but Lee was a close second. This is nonsense. Lee may have freed any slaves that fell into his ownership through inheritance and he was against the institution in a theoretical sense. But he had slaves in his house his whole life, doing the dirty work. They may have been owned by his wife's family, but it seems like someone who truly was opposed to slavery would not allow it in his house. That's like trying to claim you're an opponent of prostitution while allowing your brother in law to run a brothel in your basement. And he may have been fighting for the state of Virginia, but the practical effect of this was the protection of slavery.
Now, I'm not going to judge Lee by the standards of my day, and slavery was still fairly common around the world in the mid 1800s, but he was behind the curve. My heroes are ahead of their time, not behind it. He may have had many virtues, but real heroes use their qualities to fight for good causes.
Still, I have to give Perry points for presenting his case well, and drawing his complex subject so clearly. This is a nice little biography of one of America's greatest generals.
June 6, 2015
Great Leader
February 3, 2014
When people write biographies, their finished work will normally take on one of two different voices. That is, the author will either clearly end up sympathizing with the cause of his subject, or deriding the cause of his subject. To be sure, many authors do try to be fair, and not take a side, but, Man being fallible, the author usually fails. Sometimes, this adds flavor to the biography by way of the passion of the author for the subject. At other times, however, it becomes a serious detriment to the work.
Thomas Nelson Publishers is releasing a book series called *The Generals*, whose subject matter is quite obviously clear. ;) In the latest edition, *Lee: A Life of Virtue*, about the Confederate Supreme Commander during the American Civil War, the author writes what should be a brilliant biography, but then falls into numerous pitfalls for which the book greatly suffers.
The author, John Perry, sets out to argue that Lee is vastly misunderstood. He was, in fact, a sincere Christian who hated slavery and prayed for a gradual end to the institution, was actually opposed to the secessionist movement, and only fought for his native state’s honor, not some grandiose political ideology. Indeed, the closest he came to some idealistic notion was state’s rights.
To begin, the author tries to delve into what factors and influences impacted on Robert E. Lee as he grew up from a small boy to the man that he came to be. A case is made by Perry that Lee was the purposeful antithesis of his absent and irresponsible father. His father left the family when Lee was still a child. The father had left debtor’s prison after several “get-rich quick” schemes failed, and he was severely in debt. When Mr. Lee was ready to finally come home and fulfill his responsibilities to his family again, he died en route.
From this, young Robert Lee learned to put duty above all else in his life. His family came first in most things, but before even that, his duty to his job, his country, and later, his God, came first. In a way, this had to do with his family. His father had spent so much time trying to make himself rich and not simply being responsible, that he really failed his family. The belief in stability and responsibility as the best avenue to helping serve and protect his family was a lifelong ethic for Lee.
Lee cared for his disabled mother, and later on, his disabled wife. Even when he was distant from his family because of his military life, he constantly provided for them what he did not ever have. He provided a close and attentive (even if only by way of letters at times) father, a responsible financial overseer, and a good example of virtue and a high work ethic.
Throughout his career, Lee was recognized and praised for his leadership ability, and immense intellect. The mind that could construct the engineering feats requested of him for most of his career, was also able to strategize methods for fighting and scouting in the Mexican-American War, as well as almost leading the Confederates to victory in a war they should have lost quite quickly.
Perry makes as part of his main theme of the book Lee’s transformation from a public (though perhaps not private) Christian to a committed Christian. It was a gradual process, and when it did happen, it was sort of an epiphany, but a quiet one. Like C. S. Lewis, on his way to the zoo one day, and many other Christians, the quiet conversions are sometimes the hardest to describe. One cannot be sure for certain when it happened. They can know when they prayed to make sure, or some such, or wrote it down, in other words when it was completed to their knowledge, but not the *exact* moment that it occurred.
Whenever it did occur, Lee was a strong Christian thereafter who took to all loss and hardship as the grace and mercy of a Loving, Holy, and Omnipotent God Who looks out for what is best for his children.
All of this made for one of the most powerful biographies that I had quite honestly ever read, other than C. S. Lewis’s *Surprised by Joy*. Then, we moved on to the subject of the Civil War, and the book went irrevocably off-target.
This is because the author does not just defend Lee’s actions, or try to enable the reader to understand the mindset of the general and other southerners. He actually seems to forget General Robert Lee at times, in his almost polemical attack on the evil North invading the peaceful South. Do not get me wrong, I have no problem with someone writing a defense of the South, because even though I may disagree with many of arguments, they are not without some merit. The problem is that the actual purpose of the book, *a biographical defense of Lee*, was pushed to the back-burner for the political historiography of the conflict.
As I stated before, the author’s view on the issue seeping in is inevitable, but that is all that should have happened. Instead, we have the purposeful pushing aside of the biography’s actual focus, and that drastically hurt the book, in my view. I suddenly found myself having gone from rapidly reading a fun, engaging, and informative biography, to struggling through a polemic that in some spots appeared almost as a diatribe against the North.
Near the end of the book, Perry got back to the point, and spoke of how Lee handled the surrender, the rebuilding of the South such that he could influence, and his final years of life. The book ended well enough to save it from a complete waste of time, and make it a tolerable read.
There was one part of the book that was actually a legitimate contrast of characters during the Civil War, in this case between Lincoln and Grant on one side, and Lee on the other. Though a bit overdone, to be sure, it *is* historically accurate, and shows a side to Lee that had the author focused on showing without the uncalled-for polemics, would have made the book’s arguments nicely.
Lincoln, partly out of a desire to be re-elected to keep the war going to victory, wanted the rebels crushed, and didn’t care how many soldiers died for this to happen. General U. S. Grant didn’t want to lose his job, and was actually more ambitious than Lincoln, and thus reckless of his men’s lives. Other generals under his command had to come to him and intercede to convince him to back off from the veritable bloodbath that he was about to initiate with some of his more grandiose schemes for sudden victory over the South. Instead, he was convinced to engage in a strategy of smaller attacks in a campaign of attrition and disruption of supply lines to starve the South into surrender. The fact that he almost went with what his generals viewed as using his troops as cannon fodderth, is disturbing.
On the Confederate side, Jefferson Davis wanted to initiate guerrilla warfare (terrorism) to drive the northern “occupiers” out of the South. Lee realized that they could not win the conventional war, and that Davis’s plan would only lead to more bloodshed and death all around. Others in the South wanted to fight to the last man in a now hopeless cause. Lee would have none of it. For the good of his men, he convinced Davis of the futility of fighting onward, and surrendered to Grant. This piece of history is accurate, and is one of the great admirable traits of Lee.
Lee had always refused better accommodations and suffered with his men every deprivation that they suffered, and willingly gave up the cause for their sakes. Unlike so many politicians and high-ranking officers and NCO’s (Non-Commissioned Officers) throughout history even up until today, he thought highly of his men. They were not just cannon fodder, but real, living, breathing, valuable humans created by God. War was horrible, but to devalue the men under his command would make it even more horrible yet. In this resolve and caring for his men, General Lee showed the best traits of leadership.
I still cannot recommend the book highly for its earlier-noted polemical nature during the section which dealt with the Civil War, and the fact that the violence was also, I might add, unnecessarily graphic in description. However, for those who want to learn about the man often vilified by history, and how his faith lead him, even in defeat, to being the best leader of his age, I can certainly encourage you to give the book a try.
-----
I received this biography of General Robert E. Lee for free from Thomas Nelson publishers via their BookSneeze program. I am obligated to read it and give a review on my blog and on a commercial web site such as Amazon.com. Thomas Nelson emphasizes their desire for honest reviews, whether positive or negative, in order to help them create a better product. The opinions above are my honest viewpoint. I want to thank Thomas Nelson for allowing me to review this book, and thank you all for reading this.
Thomas Nelson Publishers is releasing a book series called *The Generals*, whose subject matter is quite obviously clear. ;) In the latest edition, *Lee: A Life of Virtue*, about the Confederate Supreme Commander during the American Civil War, the author writes what should be a brilliant biography, but then falls into numerous pitfalls for which the book greatly suffers.
The author, John Perry, sets out to argue that Lee is vastly misunderstood. He was, in fact, a sincere Christian who hated slavery and prayed for a gradual end to the institution, was actually opposed to the secessionist movement, and only fought for his native state’s honor, not some grandiose political ideology. Indeed, the closest he came to some idealistic notion was state’s rights.
To begin, the author tries to delve into what factors and influences impacted on Robert E. Lee as he grew up from a small boy to the man that he came to be. A case is made by Perry that Lee was the purposeful antithesis of his absent and irresponsible father. His father left the family when Lee was still a child. The father had left debtor’s prison after several “get-rich quick” schemes failed, and he was severely in debt. When Mr. Lee was ready to finally come home and fulfill his responsibilities to his family again, he died en route.
From this, young Robert Lee learned to put duty above all else in his life. His family came first in most things, but before even that, his duty to his job, his country, and later, his God, came first. In a way, this had to do with his family. His father had spent so much time trying to make himself rich and not simply being responsible, that he really failed his family. The belief in stability and responsibility as the best avenue to helping serve and protect his family was a lifelong ethic for Lee.
Lee cared for his disabled mother, and later on, his disabled wife. Even when he was distant from his family because of his military life, he constantly provided for them what he did not ever have. He provided a close and attentive (even if only by way of letters at times) father, a responsible financial overseer, and a good example of virtue and a high work ethic.
Throughout his career, Lee was recognized and praised for his leadership ability, and immense intellect. The mind that could construct the engineering feats requested of him for most of his career, was also able to strategize methods for fighting and scouting in the Mexican-American War, as well as almost leading the Confederates to victory in a war they should have lost quite quickly.
Perry makes as part of his main theme of the book Lee’s transformation from a public (though perhaps not private) Christian to a committed Christian. It was a gradual process, and when it did happen, it was sort of an epiphany, but a quiet one. Like C. S. Lewis, on his way to the zoo one day, and many other Christians, the quiet conversions are sometimes the hardest to describe. One cannot be sure for certain when it happened. They can know when they prayed to make sure, or some such, or wrote it down, in other words when it was completed to their knowledge, but not the *exact* moment that it occurred.
Whenever it did occur, Lee was a strong Christian thereafter who took to all loss and hardship as the grace and mercy of a Loving, Holy, and Omnipotent God Who looks out for what is best for his children.
All of this made for one of the most powerful biographies that I had quite honestly ever read, other than C. S. Lewis’s *Surprised by Joy*. Then, we moved on to the subject of the Civil War, and the book went irrevocably off-target.
This is because the author does not just defend Lee’s actions, or try to enable the reader to understand the mindset of the general and other southerners. He actually seems to forget General Robert Lee at times, in his almost polemical attack on the evil North invading the peaceful South. Do not get me wrong, I have no problem with someone writing a defense of the South, because even though I may disagree with many of arguments, they are not without some merit. The problem is that the actual purpose of the book, *a biographical defense of Lee*, was pushed to the back-burner for the political historiography of the conflict.
As I stated before, the author’s view on the issue seeping in is inevitable, but that is all that should have happened. Instead, we have the purposeful pushing aside of the biography’s actual focus, and that drastically hurt the book, in my view. I suddenly found myself having gone from rapidly reading a fun, engaging, and informative biography, to struggling through a polemic that in some spots appeared almost as a diatribe against the North.
Near the end of the book, Perry got back to the point, and spoke of how Lee handled the surrender, the rebuilding of the South such that he could influence, and his final years of life. The book ended well enough to save it from a complete waste of time, and make it a tolerable read.
There was one part of the book that was actually a legitimate contrast of characters during the Civil War, in this case between Lincoln and Grant on one side, and Lee on the other. Though a bit overdone, to be sure, it *is* historically accurate, and shows a side to Lee that had the author focused on showing without the uncalled-for polemics, would have made the book’s arguments nicely.
Lincoln, partly out of a desire to be re-elected to keep the war going to victory, wanted the rebels crushed, and didn’t care how many soldiers died for this to happen. General U. S. Grant didn’t want to lose his job, and was actually more ambitious than Lincoln, and thus reckless of his men’s lives. Other generals under his command had to come to him and intercede to convince him to back off from the veritable bloodbath that he was about to initiate with some of his more grandiose schemes for sudden victory over the South. Instead, he was convinced to engage in a strategy of smaller attacks in a campaign of attrition and disruption of supply lines to starve the South into surrender. The fact that he almost went with what his generals viewed as using his troops as cannon fodderth, is disturbing.
On the Confederate side, Jefferson Davis wanted to initiate guerrilla warfare (terrorism) to drive the northern “occupiers” out of the South. Lee realized that they could not win the conventional war, and that Davis’s plan would only lead to more bloodshed and death all around. Others in the South wanted to fight to the last man in a now hopeless cause. Lee would have none of it. For the good of his men, he convinced Davis of the futility of fighting onward, and surrendered to Grant. This piece of history is accurate, and is one of the great admirable traits of Lee.
Lee had always refused better accommodations and suffered with his men every deprivation that they suffered, and willingly gave up the cause for their sakes. Unlike so many politicians and high-ranking officers and NCO’s (Non-Commissioned Officers) throughout history even up until today, he thought highly of his men. They were not just cannon fodder, but real, living, breathing, valuable humans created by God. War was horrible, but to devalue the men under his command would make it even more horrible yet. In this resolve and caring for his men, General Lee showed the best traits of leadership.
I still cannot recommend the book highly for its earlier-noted polemical nature during the section which dealt with the Civil War, and the fact that the violence was also, I might add, unnecessarily graphic in description. However, for those who want to learn about the man often vilified by history, and how his faith lead him, even in defeat, to being the best leader of his age, I can certainly encourage you to give the book a try.
-----
I received this biography of General Robert E. Lee for free from Thomas Nelson publishers via their BookSneeze program. I am obligated to read it and give a review on my blog and on a commercial web site such as Amazon.com. Thomas Nelson emphasizes their desire for honest reviews, whether positive or negative, in order to help them create a better product. The opinions above are my honest viewpoint. I want to thank Thomas Nelson for allowing me to review this book, and thank you all for reading this.
December 20, 2010
My knowledge of the battles of the Civil War came mostly from Gone With The Wind and movies like Shenandoah before I read this book, I'm sorry to say. I certainly didn't know much about Robert E. Lee! Lee by John Perry is an excellent summary of the great man's life.
Well-written and engaging, it is enjoyable but sad reading. Lee's reputation apparently suffered a lot during his lifetime and afterwards. He was accused of being a traitor to his own country and fighting in defence of slavery. Neither of these myths is true and Perry certainly manages to restore the heroic general's reputation.
Robert E. Lee came from a distinguished Virginian family that arrived 200 years before America was established. He had a hard childhood because his father, also a war hero, left when he was only young and his mother was ill. The young boy used to have to carry her to and from his carriage.
Lee was an excellent student at Westpoint and soon got promoted. However, as he was an engineer his work often involved hard labour such as fixing up forts. He distinguished himself in the war against Mexico. When the Civil War finally came, Lee joined the Virginian side because he didn't want to fight against men from his own state. (Unfortunately, half of the State joined the Union side to his great sorrow). He also believed that the abolition of slavery should be gradual.
The great general almost did the impossible in the Civil War even though the Confederacy was out-numbered and out-gunned by the Union side. They had more modern weapons and more money as well as more people. Unfortunately, Lee made the mistake of deferring to his commanders instead of trusting his own judgement. If he had trusted his own plans, the South may have won.
Perry's analysis of Lee's character is excellent and moving. He uses extracts from Lee's letters and diaries to good effect in the book. He also writes just as much about Lee's personal life - his marriage to a great-granddaughter of Washington - as he does about his heroism. Perry emphasizes the important role of faith in Lee's life and how this helped him in his many dark moments.
The only problem with Lee, A Life of Virtue is that it seems a little bit too admiring. However, there is certainly much to admire in the life of this great general of the Confederacy.
I received this book free from the publisher through the BookSneeze.com book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 : “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”
Well-written and engaging, it is enjoyable but sad reading. Lee's reputation apparently suffered a lot during his lifetime and afterwards. He was accused of being a traitor to his own country and fighting in defence of slavery. Neither of these myths is true and Perry certainly manages to restore the heroic general's reputation.
Robert E. Lee came from a distinguished Virginian family that arrived 200 years before America was established. He had a hard childhood because his father, also a war hero, left when he was only young and his mother was ill. The young boy used to have to carry her to and from his carriage.
Lee was an excellent student at Westpoint and soon got promoted. However, as he was an engineer his work often involved hard labour such as fixing up forts. He distinguished himself in the war against Mexico. When the Civil War finally came, Lee joined the Virginian side because he didn't want to fight against men from his own state. (Unfortunately, half of the State joined the Union side to his great sorrow). He also believed that the abolition of slavery should be gradual.
The great general almost did the impossible in the Civil War even though the Confederacy was out-numbered and out-gunned by the Union side. They had more modern weapons and more money as well as more people. Unfortunately, Lee made the mistake of deferring to his commanders instead of trusting his own judgement. If he had trusted his own plans, the South may have won.
Perry's analysis of Lee's character is excellent and moving. He uses extracts from Lee's letters and diaries to good effect in the book. He also writes just as much about Lee's personal life - his marriage to a great-granddaughter of Washington - as he does about his heroism. Perry emphasizes the important role of faith in Lee's life and how this helped him in his many dark moments.
The only problem with Lee, A Life of Virtue is that it seems a little bit too admiring. However, there is certainly much to admire in the life of this great general of the Confederacy.
I received this book free from the publisher through the BookSneeze.com book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 : “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”
November 27, 2013
A solid biography, but not without its problems
First, a bit about this reviewer and Civil War books. This is my 80th Civil War book. Robert E. Lee figures prominently in almost every one of them. I consider him to be the finest general that served on either side in that war and that is high praise indeed because many generals rose to the top and did distinguished themselves in that war. If Lee is the finest general in that war, he is the greatest American officer of the 19th century and one can make the argument that he may have been the best ever (assuming one overlooks the fact that he fought against the federal government, which I am).
No one did so much with so little against an opponent that was better fed, had better and more numerous weapons and outnumbered him in every battle. He fought with principle and with respect for his enemies (who he refused to call his enemies - he called the Union forces "those people.")
All of that being said, even I cannot approach the standard of hero worship that John Perry creates in the introduction of this book. Perry cites as one of his primary sources the Douglas Southall Freeman biography R. E. Lee. Freeman was the primary advocate of a revisionist movement of historians popularly called the Lost Cause movement. It emphasizes the noble character of the southern generals, de-emphasizes the importance of slavery as a cause of the Civil War and justifies secession as a legitimate response to agressive Northern attacks on the Southern way of life and economy. I would consider this biography to be Lost Cause "lite".
For example, Perry makes a big deal of the fact that Lee never personally owned a slave (ironically, U.S. Grant did at one point own a slave). He also notes that Lee condemned slavery. That is true, but he did not need to personally own a slave - his wife and her family owned more than one hundred slaves and at least one traveled with the family whenever they followed him in his army postings. Condemning slavery while benefitting from it is a difficult position to defend (ask any devotee of Jefferson).
Clearly,...
Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2010/...
First, a bit about this reviewer and Civil War books. This is my 80th Civil War book. Robert E. Lee figures prominently in almost every one of them. I consider him to be the finest general that served on either side in that war and that is high praise indeed because many generals rose to the top and did distinguished themselves in that war. If Lee is the finest general in that war, he is the greatest American officer of the 19th century and one can make the argument that he may have been the best ever (assuming one overlooks the fact that he fought against the federal government, which I am).
No one did so much with so little against an opponent that was better fed, had better and more numerous weapons and outnumbered him in every battle. He fought with principle and with respect for his enemies (who he refused to call his enemies - he called the Union forces "those people.")
All of that being said, even I cannot approach the standard of hero worship that John Perry creates in the introduction of this book. Perry cites as one of his primary sources the Douglas Southall Freeman biography R. E. Lee. Freeman was the primary advocate of a revisionist movement of historians popularly called the Lost Cause movement. It emphasizes the noble character of the southern generals, de-emphasizes the importance of slavery as a cause of the Civil War and justifies secession as a legitimate response to agressive Northern attacks on the Southern way of life and economy. I would consider this biography to be Lost Cause "lite".
For example, Perry makes a big deal of the fact that Lee never personally owned a slave (ironically, U.S. Grant did at one point own a slave). He also notes that Lee condemned slavery. That is true, but he did not need to personally own a slave - his wife and her family owned more than one hundred slaves and at least one traveled with the family whenever they followed him in his army postings. Condemning slavery while benefitting from it is a difficult position to defend (ask any devotee of Jefferson).
Clearly,...
Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2010/...
September 6, 2010
Portrait of Gen. Robert E. Lee, officer of the...Image via WikipediaFor most of us, little is know about the Generals of the Civil War; Generals like Robert E. Lee; except for the fact that he surrendered to General Grant at the end of that bitter conflict. John Perry in his book, Lee - A Life Of Virtue brings the man to the forefront and not just the General. His family life, his motivations, his deepest desires and regrets are all exposed to those who wish to know more about this man who helped to shape the nation we are today.
If you are thinking Ahh Lee the general who fought for slavery; you would be wrong in that. Lee himself was against slavery and thought it an abomination. His reason for serving as a General in this conflict was States rights to govern themselves. Not unlike many thoughts today. He felt honor bound to defend his home state of Virginia.
General Robert E. Lee was a man well respected by those in the North and South both before and after the war's end. A man devoted to God, Family, Country, and State who walked tall in confidence and stature. There is so much more I could say here, but my hope is that you will pick up a copy of Lee-A Life of Virtue by John Perry and get to know this man yourself. I highly recommend it! I'm truly thankful that I got a chance to review this book from Booksneeze. It's one I'll keep in our Library and share with the family. I definitely give it 5 stars!
If you are thinking Ahh Lee the general who fought for slavery; you would be wrong in that. Lee himself was against slavery and thought it an abomination. His reason for serving as a General in this conflict was States rights to govern themselves. Not unlike many thoughts today. He felt honor bound to defend his home state of Virginia.
General Robert E. Lee was a man well respected by those in the North and South both before and after the war's end. A man devoted to God, Family, Country, and State who walked tall in confidence and stature. There is so much more I could say here, but my hope is that you will pick up a copy of Lee-A Life of Virtue by John Perry and get to know this man yourself. I highly recommend it! I'm truly thankful that I got a chance to review this book from Booksneeze. It's one I'll keep in our Library and share with the family. I definitely give it 5 stars!
December 20, 2015
Missed the big issue
I enjoyed the book, and loved the little details like how he was given George Washington's kit to take to the war in Mexico. But there was no treatment of the critical issue: can a man, admittedly the greatest field general in American history, be truly great when he fought for an abhorrent cause? The book emphasizes that for Lee, the issue was state's rights...but the right the southern states were asserting was the right to own slaves! One cannot consider Lee without weighing that question.
I enjoyed the book, and loved the little details like how he was given George Washington's kit to take to the war in Mexico. But there was no treatment of the critical issue: can a man, admittedly the greatest field general in American history, be truly great when he fought for an abhorrent cause? The book emphasizes that for Lee, the issue was state's rights...but the right the southern states were asserting was the right to own slaves! One cannot consider Lee without weighing that question.
April 25, 2012
I have always admired Robert E Lee, I am a bigger fan after reading the book. I think Lee was right that everything happens is God's just will, if the South had won the Civil War, The united states would never have become a world power or able to defend the world in world war 1 and 2. The insight into Lee personality and leadership was priceless, it showed how it kept him able to inspire men to follow him, but it also showed how it cost him at Gettysburg!. Great read.
February 24, 2016
Enjoyable book of the person of Lee. The side you never hear. I learned a lot about the man and having believed, for a long time, he stood for the wrong things I now know some unknown truths about him. A man that lived a life anyone could be proud of. The most surprising thing I learned was he thought slavery was an injustice! Good man.
March 16, 2014
A wonderful book about the life of Robert E. Lee. The author shows how Lee's faith on the Lord Jesus played out in his life. This is a easy read book but one that will help the reader understand the faith that Lee had.
June 26, 2014
As someone who is just getting into reading historical books, and is also just a high school student, Lee: A Life of Virtue was easy to read while still retaining an academic stature. This book was perfect for someone who is starting to dabble in the depths of history.
October 28, 2010
Read my review here: http://jeffrandleman.net/2010/09/11/lee/
August 1, 2016
More about Lee the man than the General. Family man, God fearing Christian, believed slavery to be a moral outrage. A great general and leader but a better man.
July 31, 2012
Good, but brief.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews