hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Massachusetts in the Army and Navy during the war of 1861-1865, vol. 2 12 12 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 8 8 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 6. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 5 5 Browse Search
The Annals of the Civil War Written by Leading Participants North and South (ed. Alexander Kelly McClure) 4 4 Browse Search
Comte de Paris, History of the Civil War in America. Vol. 3. (ed. Henry Coppee , LL.D.) 3 3 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 4. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 3 3 Browse Search
Frederick H. Dyer, Compendium of the War of the Rebellion: Battles 3 3 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 6. (ed. Frank Moore) 2 2 Browse Search
Robert Underwood Johnson, Clarence Clough Buell, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. Volume 3. 2 2 Browse Search
Frederick H. Dyer, Compendium of the War of the Rebellion: Regimental Histories 2 2 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Your search returned 60 results in 40 document sections:

1 2 3 4
The Annals of the Civil War Written by Leading Participants North and South (ed. Alexander Kelly McClure), The campaign in Pennsylvania. (search)
es, held by General Meade with his corps commanders, General Sickles testified, before the Committee on the Conduct of the War, that the reason the Confederates were not followed up was on account of differences of opinion whether or not the Federals should themselves retreat, as it was by no means clear, in the judgment of the corps commanders, or of the general in command, whether they had won or not. It appears, from the official returns on file in the War Department, that on the 31st of May, 1863, the Army of Northern Virginia numbered: infantry, fifty-nine thousand four hundred and fifty-seven; cavalry, ten thousand two hundred and ninety-two; and artillery, four thousand seven hundred and two; of all arms, seventy-four thousand four hundred and fifty-one effectives. This was immediately before the invasion of Pennsylvania, and may be regarded as representing the maximum of General Lee's army in the Gettysburg campaign. On the 20th of July, 1863, after the return of General L
The Annals of the Civil War Written by Leading Participants North and South (ed. Alexander Kelly McClure), The battle of fleet Wood. (search)
rovince to know its strength. Three grand reviews were held in Culpepper — on the 22d of May, and on the 5th and 8th of June, 1863. At the first of these reviews there were present only the three brigades of Hampton, and the two Lees. Private memoranda, now in my possession, show about four thousand men, exclusive of pickets, in the saddle upon that day. Before the second review Stuart was joined by Robertson's North Carolina Brigade, and by W. E. Jones' Virginia Brigade, and on the 31st of May, 1863, the total effective of the cavalry division was reported as nine thousand five hundred and thirty-six. To rightly estimate the force with which Stuart fought the battle of the 9th of June, 1863, there must be deducted from this number the men absent on special duty-horse details --the entire brigade of Robertson, the Fourth Virginia Cavalry, and the Second South Carolina Cavalry. It must also be stated that of Fitz Lee's Brigade only four squadrons of sharpshooters were engaged, and
The Annals of the Civil War Written by Leading Participants North and South (ed. Alexander Kelly McClure), The mistakes of Gettysburg. (search)
, in commenting on this estimate, disagrees with it quite widely. The main point that he makes is to quote from Swinton's Army of the Potomac, the following paragraph (page 310): The number of infantry present for duty in Lee's army on the 31st of May, 1863, was precisely sixty-eight thousand three hundred and fifty-two. I learn from General Longstreet that, when the three corps were concentrated at Chambersburg, the morning report showed sixty-seven thousand bayonets, or above seventy thousanstimate that Mr. Swinton ascribes to me for the other arms of the service. If General Dawes had followed Swinton's narrative closely, he must have discovered that (page 365) he says: General Lee's aggregate force present for duty on the 31st of May, 1863, was sixty-eight thousand three hundred and fifty-two. These are the precise figures that he gives, on page 310, as the aggregate of the infantry alone. My information upon this subject was taken from General Lee's own lips. He estimated
Fitzhugh Lee, General Lee, Chapter 11: Chancellorsville. (search)
ns had returned under their distinguished commander. The cavalry had again been brought together, and was more numerous and effective than ever. At the end of May, Lee commanded a splendid army, numbering present for duty, by the returns of May 31, 1863, 54,356 infantry, 9,536 cavalry, and 4,460 artillery, or a total of 68,352, with over two hundred guns. Its efficiency, confidence, and morale made it worthy of being led by a great chief. The time for active operations to be resumed had hurt, and is so far good, but as to the truth of history I will not speak. May the great God have you all in his holy keeping and soon unite us again! On the 31st of May, two days before he began his campaign, he writes: Camp Fredericksburg, May 31, 1863.-General Hooker has been very daring the past week, and quite active. He has not said what he intends to do, but is giving out by his movements that he designs crossing the Rappahannock. I hope we may be able to frustrate his plans in part i
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 4. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Causes of the defeat of Gen. Lee's Army at the battle of Gettysburg-opinions of leading Confederate soldiers. (search)
as those that sustained the United States government had 19,000,000. Then reflect that the South had no navy; its ports were blockaded, and intercourse with the outside world interdicted. Under such circumstances it is remarkable that the South maintained itself so long as it did. ---- asserts that the Army of Northern Virginia when it invaded Pennsylvania was more powerful than it had ever been before. As a question of numbers, this is an error. The field returns of the army of the 31st May, 1863, show General Lee's total effectives to have been a few hundred over sixtyeight thousand (68,000). I have a copy of this return, which I made from the original now in the war office at Washington. He received no reinforcements, and this was the maximum of General Lee's strength in the Pennsylvania campaign. Ewell's corps had some fighting with Milroy in the Valley; the cavalry had considerable skirmishing east of the mountains before crossing the Potomac; made the circuit of the
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 4. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Second paper by Colonel Walter H. Taylor, of General Lee's staff. (search)
es held by General Meade with his corps commanders, General Sick-]es testified, before the Committee on the Conduct of the War, that the reason the Confederates were not followed up was on account of differences of opinion whether or not the Federals should themselves retreat, as it was by no means clear, in the judgment of the corps commanders, or of the General in command, whether they had won. or not. It appears from the official returns on file in the War Department, that on the 31st of May, 1863, the Army of Northern Virginia numbered: infantry, fifty-four thousand three hundred and fifty-six; cavalry, nine thousand five hundred and thirty-six; artillery, four thousand four hundred and sixty; of all arms, sixtyeight thousand three hundred and fifty-two effective. This was immediately before the invasion of Pennsylvania, and may be regarded as representing the maximum of General Lee's army in the Gettysburg campaign. On the 20th of July, 1863, after the return of General Lee t
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 4. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Leading Confederates on the battle of Gettysburg. (search)
- , in using the term more powerful, means that the numerical strength of the Army of Northern Virginia, on this occasion, was greater than ever before, he is wrong, as the subjoined statement of the strength of that army, taken from the official returns now on file in Washington, will show: Confederate.Federal. Seven days fight, 186280,000115,000 Fredericksburg, 186278,000110,000 Chancellorsville, 186357,000132,000 Gettysburg, 186362,000 Field return, Army of Northern Virginia, May 31, 1863: Infantry, 54,356; artillery, 4,460; cavalry, 9,563. Total, 68,352. From this total must be deducted Ewell's loss at Winchester, the details left on the south side of the Potomac to guard persons and property captured at Winchester, and also the loss in the cavalry. It must be borne in mind that the cavalry did not join General Lee at Gettysburg until late in the evening of July 2.112,000 Hooker telegraphs to Staunton, June 27, 1863: Strength of rank and file, 105,000; adding commis
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), A review of the First two days operations at Gettysburg and a reply to General Longstreet by General Fitz. Lee. (search)
1, page 279,) referring to Stuart's command, says: This cavalry force has hitherto prevented me from obtaining satisfactory information as to the whereabouts of the enemy; they had masked all their movements. General Hooker had reference to'the five brigades holding the country between his army and the marching column of General Lee-Jenkins being in front of the advanced corps (Ewell's) with Colonel White's battalion, in ad(lition to his own command. The cavalry corps, by the return of May 31st, 1863, numbered 9,536. According to a letter from Major McClellan, Stuart's A. A. G., this force was divided about as follows: Hampton, 1,200; Fitz. Lee, 2,000; W. H. F. Lee, 1,800; Jones, 3,500; Robertson, 1,000. It is proper to state that the figures above refer to the enlisted men present for duty. The total effective strength (inclusive of officers) numbered, according to Walter Taylor, at that date, 10,292. (I am satisfied, from a conversation with General Robertson, that McClellan ov
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Numerical strength of the armies at Gettysburg. (search)
ened that the basis of my estimate of the strength of General Lee's army at Gettysburg was the monthly report of the 31st May, 1863, and not a field return. I, therefore, took the total amount of the column headed effective total --viz., 68,352-as rrmy as taken from the field return of the 20th May, 1863, was greater than that taken from the monthly report of the 31st May, 1863, I began to suspect that the officers were not included in the estimate given. I at once made application to the War prompt reply to my request, I have been enabled to review my figures, and find that the estimate of strength on the 31st May, 1863, does not include the officers present for duty. At that date the effective strength of General Lee's army was as fohe error into which I have inadvertently fallen along with Mr. Swinton. Strength of the army of Northern Virginia, May 31st, 1863. commands.Present for Duty.Effective Total. Enlisted Men.Officers. First Army Corps: General Staff13 Anderson's
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Colonel Taylor's reply to the Count of Paris. (search)
number (officers and men) present for duty. These figures are further reduced by an allowance of 6,000 for straggling, and he estimates the effective strength of the Army of the Potomac at Gettysburg at 85,000 of all arms. In regard to the strength of the Army of Northern Virginia, as given in his paper, viz.: 66,600, 1 do not think he is much out of the way, although I do not agree with him in his reasoning. But his estimate is based upon the effective strength of that army on the 31st May, 1863, as given in my account ot the battle — that is, 68,852. As has already been publicly stated, those figures did not include the officers present for duty. The total effective at that date was 74,451. The Count would, therefore, carry this difference in his calculations, and thus increase his numbers to about 73,000-fully 6,000 in excess of our real strength. Although it is; past my comprehension why the Count should deduct 6,000 for straggling from the Army of the Potomac in a period
1 2 3 4