In all revolutions, men and women emerge throughout nations to defy governments, and to bring about change across their country. Many direct their people to challenge what they believe to be an unjust regime. However sometimes those in charge lead, not for the good of their fellow countrymen and revolutionaries, but for their personal benefit they are able to receive through their abetment. One example of such was Major General Charles Lee, second in command of the Continental Army, who at first had been seen as a huge contributor to American Liberty. Though experienced in battle, Lee revealed to be not only a disagreeable and an uncooperative individual, but a traitor to the American people, when he believed all hope was lost.
It was once stated that, "there can be no greater error committed, than for the leaders of a revolution to select for military commanders, those whose tastes and habits are formed under an entirely different organization of things,"(Headley 157). General Lee, became the perfect example of this. Born in 1732 and raised in England, Lee was fourteen when he became part of his father's regiment, the 55th foot. In 1754, Lee joined the 44th regiment and went to America to fight in the French and Indian War. During the time he was there he befriended the Seneca Indians and was given the name Ounewaterika, or "boiling water," due to his temperament. By the age of 27, Lee had been promoted major of the 103rd regiment. However, in 1772, Lee left Britain, accusing George III of destroying the liberty of Englishmen, and journeyed to start a new life in America.
Arriving during the apex of protest, Lee quickly became interested in the affairs between America and Britain. Due to his popular opposition against the gov...
... middle of paper ...
...od/americanrevolutio1/p/American-Revolution-Major-General-Charles-Lee.htm>
Langguth, A.J. Patriots: The men Who Started the American Revolution. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1988. Print
Moore, George H. "Mr. Lee's Plan- March 29th 1777." The Treason of Charles Lee, Major General, Second in Command in the American Army of the Revolution. New York: Charles Scribner, 1860. Internet Archive: The Library of Congress. Web. December 15, 2013.
Nelson, Paul David. "Charles Lee." American National Biography Online. Oxford University Press, February 2000. Web. December 15, 2013.
Sheer, George F, and Hugh F. Rankin. Rebels and Redcoats. Cleveland: World Pub. Co, 1957. Print
Wheeler, Richard. Voices of 1776. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1972. Print.
Robert E. Lee was a man whose character caused him to be respected by the North and the South, before and after the war. People on both sides recognized Lee as an accomplished leader who valued personal relationships, bestowed honor on those around him, and displayed devout loyalty. It was said, “these bluecoats were saluting a gallant foe, but also one they wished had fought with them instead of against them” (Marrin 190). Lee exemplified a man of such character, causing him to be appreciated by both friends and enemies
...ct most of his military blunders came in the year 1776. But he always learned from his mistakes. McCullough also examines the mistakes the British made, that may have cost them the victory in the war. 1776 is truly eye opening. It takes a more human look at men like Washington and his generals, and is full of letters and stories written by actual soldiers from both the British and American armies. One of the things that I enjoyed about this book was the way McCullough manages to also show the way the British felt towards the Americans and their opinions and thoughts about the rebels. The book ended on a high note, with Washington's historic crossing of the Delaware River on Christmas night. It was the turning point of the war for the future president and his army, and it provided the first great victory for the young American county. The rest, as they say, is history.
General Lee knows that we have inexperienced men and aims at improving the quality of the troops. He upgrades the quality by tightening command and discipline, improving morale, and convincing the soldiers that the confederacy was in full command of the situation. Lee knew that we are lacking, and devised initiatives to nullify the Union’s superiority in manpower, armaments, and supply by destroying their prearranged plans.
Stokesbury, James L. A short History of the American Revolution. New York. William Morrow and Company, Inc. 1991.
The societal differences between the two men gave insight into how each perceived the future of the States. Lee believed that landowners played a key role in determining the success of the country. He believed that this socia...
Greene, J. P., & Pole, J. R. (Eds.). (2008). A Companion to the American Revolution (Vol. 17). John Wiley & Sons.
Mahoney, Harry Thayer, and Marjorie Locke Mahoney. Gallantry in action: a biographic dictionary of espionage in the American Revolutionary War. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1999.
5. Margiotta, Franklin D., Ed. “Brassey’s Encyclopedia of Military History and Biography”, Washington: Brassey’s, Inc. 1994
The essay, “Grant and Lee” written by Bruce Catton presented an exceptional portrait of two patriots serving under a different flag, but fighting the same war. The war tested the ideology of the two men; especially with Lee upholding the aristocracy of the South and Grant shouldering the North under his command. Furthermore, the Civil war served as the test for the nation to keep people from deteriorating since the founding of America in 1776 after the revolutionary war. The men share a common interest of serving their country even if they go against each other.
Ford, Richard. “Introduction” in : Yates, R., Revolutionary Road, (2001 edition), Methuen Publishing Ltd, London.
After the Confederate victory at Chancellorsville in May of 1863, General Robert E. Lee and his Army of Northern Virginia embarked on their 2nd invasion of the north. General Lee’s first campaign into the north resulted in the Confederate defeat at Antietam. The failure of Lee’s first northern campaign raises the question of his motives. The Confederate Army was...
As proclaimed in the “Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms,” we agreed that the British government had left the people with only two options, “unconditional submission to the tyranny of irritated ministers or resistance by force.” Thus, in the early months of the dreadfully long year of 1775, we began our resistance. As the war progressed, the Americans, the underdogs, shockingly began winning battles against the greatly superior mother country of England. Actually, as seen in the battle of Bunker Hill, not only were they winning, they were annihilating hundreds of their resilient opponents. Countless questions arose before and during the War of Independence. Problems like: social equality, slavery, women’s rights, and the struggle of land claims against Native Americans were suddenly being presented in new and influencing ways to our pristine leaders. Some historians believe that while the Revolutionary War was crucial for our independence, these causes were not affected; thus, the war was not truly a revolution. Still, being specified in the Background Essay, several see the war as more radical, claiming it produced major changes above and beyond our independence.
Gaines, Ann Graham. ""Helping to Build a Nation"" Ed. Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. Revolutionary War Leaders. Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2000. N. pag. American History Online. Web. 19 Dec. 2013.
Stokesbury, James L. A Short History of the American Revolution. New York: William Morrow and Company, 2001.
Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee are best known for their careers in leading the Confederate Army. Few people know anything about them beyond battles fought and wars lost. History is written by the victors, and the victors have essentially extinguished all perceived importance of these two fallen leaders. However, both were not only soldiers fighting for a lost cause, but also educators. Both taught many of those who would fight alongside and against them in the war that ripped the United States of America in half. While the two had similar backgrounds and military careers, their careers in education were vastly different.