Human nature and the social orderCooley, Charles Horton
Science
Human nature and the social order
Cooley, Charles Horton
Individualism; Social psychology; Sociology
General Grant was a man whose personal presence had none of the splendor
of Prince Bismarck, and who even appeared insignificant to the
undiscerning. It is related that when he went to take command of his
first regiment soon after the outbreak of the Civil War, the officer
whom he was to succeed paid no attention to him at first, and would not
believe that he was Grant until he showed his papers. An early
acquaintance said of him, “He hadn’t the push of a business man.” “He
was always a gentleman, and everybody loved him, for he was so gentle
and considerate; but we didn’t see what he could do in the world.”[84]
Yet over the finer sort of men he exercised a great ascendency, and no
commander was more willingly obeyed by his subordinates, or inspired
more general confidence. In his way he manifested the essential traits
of decision, self-confidence, and tact in great measure. He never
appeared dubious, nervous, or unsettled; and though he often talked over
his plans with trusted officers, he only once, I believe, summoned a
council of war, and then rejected its decision. He was nearly or quite
alone in his faith in the plan by which Vicksburg was taken, and it is
well known that General Sherman, convinced that it would fail, addressed
him a formal remonstrance, which Grant quietly put in his pocket and
later returned to its author. “His pride in his own mature opinion,”
says General Schofield, “was very great; in that he was as far as
possible from being a modest man. This absolute confidence in his own
judgment upon any subject he had mastered, and the moral courage to take
upon himself alone the highest responsibility, and to demand full
authority and freedom to act according to his own judgment, without
interference from anybody, added to his accurate estimate of his own
ability, and his clear perception of the necessity for undivided
authority and responsibility in the conduct of military operations, and
in all that concerns the efficiency of armies in time of war,
constituted the foundation of that very great character.”[85] He was
also a man of great tact and insight. He always felt the personal
situation; divining the character and aims of his antagonists, and
making his own officers feel that he understood them and appreciated
whatever in them was worthy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account