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
Edward Porter Alexander, Military memoirs of a Confederate: a critical narrative 347 7 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 37. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 317 55 Browse Search
The Annals of the Civil War Written by Leading Participants North and South (ed. Alexander Kelly McClure) 268 46 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government 147 23 Browse Search
Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume II. 145 9 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 141 29 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 5. (ed. Frank Moore) 140 16 Browse Search
Robert Lewis Dabney, Life and Commands of Lieutenand- General Thomas J. Jackson 134 58 Browse Search
Edward Alfred Pollard, The lost cause; a new Southern history of the War of the Confederates ... Drawn from official sources and approved by the most distinguished Confederate leaders. 129 13 Browse Search
George H. Gordon, From Brook Farm to Cedar Mountain 123 5 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). You can also browse the collection for Ewell or search for Ewell in all documents.

Your search returned 85 results in 7 document sections:

Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Leading Confederates on the battle of Gettysburg. (search)
tructions. On being notified, however, by General Ewell, that his whole command would move on the t to mine, in front of the Federal centre, and Ewell was on our extreme left. My corps, with Pickes from being launched either against myself or Ewell, it seemed that we might possibly dislodge the failure to attack at sunrise was the cause of Ewell's line being broken at the time I did attack. ning the attack with Ewell's corps. They left Ewell with this definite order: that he was to hold ould not be expected to fail to seek it. As to Ewell's failure to prosecute the advantage won on tha similar order on the night of the 1st). General Ewell made me ride with him from point to point emy's position General Lee came himself to General Ewell's lines. In sending the message to Generae not completed as soon as was expected. General Ewell, who had orders to co-operate with Generalthe 31st is received. I have expressed to Generals Ewell and Hill your wishes, and am doing all tha[45 more...]
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Our Gettysburg series. (search)
Count of Paris, and have published in our papers without note or comment of our own. Besides these we have published at different times the official reports of Generals R. E. Lee, Longstreet, A. P. Hill, J. E. B. Stuart, Rodes, R. H. Anderson, Brigadier-General J. B. Robertson, Colonel W. W. White, commanding Anderson's brigade, Brigadier-General H. L. Benning, Brigadier-Gereral J. B. Kershaw, Colonel E. P. Alexander, and Brigadier-General J. H. Lane. The reports of Generals Early, and Ewell had been previously published in the Southern Magazine, and the report of General W. N. Pendleton, Chief of Artillery, Army Nothern Virginia, which is crowded out of this number, will be published hereafter. These letters and official reports, and the other papers which we have published have made a series which has excited wide interest and attention, and called forth warm expressions as to their value and importance. The Count of Paris says, in a recent letter concerning these papers
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Advance sheets of Reminiscences of secession, war, and reconstruction, by Lieutenant-General Richard Taylor. (search)
e's attack was postponed until the afternoon of the following day in consequence of the absence of Longstreet's corps. Federal official reports show that some of Meade's corps reached him on the second day several hours after sunrise, and one or two late in the afternoon. It is positively asserted by many officers present, and of high rank and character, that Longstreet, on the first day, was nearer to Lee than Meade's reinforcing corps to this commander, and even nearer than a division of Ewell's corps, which reached the ground in time to share in the first day's success. Now, it nowhere appears in Lee's report of Gettysburg that he ordered Longstreet to him or blamed him for tardiness; but his report admits errors, and quietly takes the responsibility for them on his own broad shoulders. A recent article in the public press, signed by General Longstreet, ascribes the failure at Gettysburg to Lee's mistakes, which he (Longstreet) in vain pointed out and remonstrated against. Tha
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)
s to the door and cast them at the feet of General Ewell, the gallant commander of the Second corps-Jenkins being in front of the advanced corps (Ewell's) with Colonel White's battalion, in ad(litiore at Gettysburg. Did such failure arise from Ewell and Hill not pushing their success on the 1st f his chief, all responsibility was taken from Ewell in not ordering the troops forwardit was assumned of were made. The official reports of Generals Ewell, Early, and Pendleton, written soon after ief. General Early, a division-commander in Ewell's corps, in a recent paper on Gettysburg, giveeneral Lee held on the evening of the 1st with Ewell, Rodes, and himself, in which General Lee seemt would not be best to make the main attack in Ewell's front said, Well, if I attack from my right,th, were three brigades of Johnson's division, Ewell's corps. One of his brigades, Walker's, was iernoon of June 13th the Second corps, Lieutenant-General Ewell commanding, which had a day or two be[9 more...]
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), General Longstreet's Second paper on Gettysburg. (search)
e directing brigade of support under General Wilcox, and was rendered hopeless by the failure of Ewell's corps to cooperate, its line of battle having been broken through the advice of General Early,o attack us, as he certainly intended doing; sixth, when I attacked the enemy's left, on the 2d, Ewell should have moved at once against his right and Hill should have threatened his centre, and thuso have won the day. The only amendment that would have ensued, or even promised victory, was for Ewell to have marched in upon the enemy's right when it was guarded by a single brigade, run over theidvanced to battle, or made to even threaten battle. The work was left entirely with my men. General Ewell dates his co-operative move at dusk. General Meade says it was at 8 o'clock. In any event, different battle. It is equally out of sense to say that if my attack had been made at'sunrise, Ewell would have given me the co-operation that he failed to give in the afternoon when the attack rea
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Reply to General Longstreet's Second paper. (search)
is hardly possible that any one acquainted with General Lee's exalted character will accept such statements as true. It is evident that allusion is here made to the language used by General Lee, as given by me, in the conference had with Generals Ewell, Rodes, and myself, after the close of the first day's fight, when he said: Longstreet is a very good fighter when he gets in position and gets everything ready, but he is so slow. It will be seen, from a letter given by General Fitz Lee, inemonstrances, and that he reiterated it at daylight next morning. All the presumptions from these statements and circumstances are in favor of the correctness of General Pendleton's statement, and when connected with General Lee's declaration to Ewell, Rodes, and myself, at the close of the first, it becomes absurd for General Longstreet to say that he has sustained all his facts and opinions by the most particular proofs. It is very evident, beyond all reasonable doubt, that General Lee indi
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Steuart's brigade at the battle of Gettysburg.--a narrative by Rev. Randolph H. McKim, D. D., late First Lieutenant and Aide-de-camp, Confederate army. (search)
sing, in his Pictorial history of the civil war,) gives the following account of this night conflict: Johnson moved under cover of the woods and deepening twilight, and expected an easy conquest by which a way would be opened for the remainder of Ewell's corps to the National rear; but he found a formidable antagonist in Greene's brigade. The assault was made with great vigor, but for more than two hours Greene, assisted by a part of Wadsworth's command, fought the assailants, strewing the woo works were held by the men who captured them from 9 P. M., July 2d, to 10 A. M., July 3d, and by none others. During the last hour of their occupation (10 to 11) the right of the works was held by the brigade of General Daniel. Then came General Ewell's order to assume the offensive and assail the crest of Culp's Hill, on our right. My diary says that both General Steuart and General Daniel, who now came up with his brigade to support the movement, strongly disapproved of making the assau