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
George H. Gordon, From Brook Farm to Cedar Mountain 27 1 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 4. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 26 2 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 11. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 26 8 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 12. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 18 6 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 8. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 16 4 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 31. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 13 3 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 13. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 10 2 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 6. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 10 2 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 7. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 10 4 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 34. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 8 0 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 4. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). You can also browse the collection for William Allan or search for William Allan in all documents.

Your search returned 14 results in 3 document sections:

Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 4. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Gen. Lee's strength and losses at Gettysburg. (search)
Gen. Lee's strength and losses at Gettysburg. By Col. William Allan. [The following is in reply to a letter of the Secretary, enclosing a letter received from a distinguished foreign critic commenting on Col. Allan's review of Bates' Gettysburg.Col. Allan's review of Bates' Gettysburg. As the letter of our foreign correspondent was a private one we suppress his name, though we do not think proper to withhold Col. Allan's able and conclusive reply.] McDoNOUGH School, April 24th, 1877. my dear Dr.: I regret that a press of engaCol. Allan's able and conclusive reply.] McDoNOUGH School, April 24th, 1877. my dear Dr.: I regret that a press of engagements has prevented an earlier reply to your kind letter, enclosing that of in regard to Bates' Gettysburg. I hasten to express my acknowledgments to your correspondent for pointing out an error, into which I was led by the fact that Lieut.-Genthe latter point. Hoping will carefully examine the original sources of information in regard to the matters treated by Dr. Bates, whose book may be conscientiously, but is certainly not carefully compiled, I am, most truly yours, W. Allan.
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)
he opinions of these officers upon this subject, from which, with the official reports in my possession, I would of course draw and write my own conclusions. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, Fitzhugh Lee. Letter from Colonel William Allan, of Ewell's staff. McDoNOUGH School, Owings' Mill, Baltimore county, Md., April 26th, 1877. Rev. J. W. Jones, D. D. My dear Sir: The questions asked in the letter ofof January 21st, 1877, in regard to Gettysburg, are more or less 4th. Had Longstreet and Hill attacked early on the third, as was first designed, while Ewell was engaged. 5th. Had Ewell and Hill made one prompt and determined effort in support of Pickett at the proper moment. Very truly yours, W. Allan. Memorandum by Colonel Walter H. Taylor, of General Lee's staff. ---- shares the opinion that the Confederate cause was not a lost cause from the beginning, and seeks with great care to find out why it did not succeed. The solution
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 4. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Leading Confederates on the battle of Gettysburg. (search)
other name, and possibly another result — who knows? Colonel Allan says: The Confederates would probably have been e was, therefore, remiss in the discharge of his duty. Colonel Allan's language would make this implication equally applicabfternoon should rest exclusively on Ewell's shoulders. Colonel Allan's criticism, therefore, to that extent, is more impartied my memory. I will now notice some statements by Colonels Allan and Taylor in regard to the fighting on the 2d, The fobeaten back before Rodes was ready to support him. Colonel Allan should have been a little more circumspect in his statept that he calls it a simultaneous demonstration. Now, Colonel Allan ought to know that neither Rodes, Johnson, nor myself, attack too long, as would seem to be the inference from Colonel Allan's remark. My understanding at the time was that, aftersions were not made to act in concert applicable to us. Colonel Allan should have recollected that he was writing for the use