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
Robert Underwood Johnson, Clarence Clough Buell, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War: Volume 2. 773 5 Browse Search
Maj. Jed. Hotchkiss, Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 3, Virginia (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 581 1 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 9. (ed. Frank Moore) 468 2 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 457 5 Browse Search
Robert Underwood Johnson, Clarence Clough Buell, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. Volume 3. 450 6 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 4. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 400 4 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 6. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 388 2 Browse Search
Comte de Paris, History of the Civil War in America. Vol. 3. (ed. Henry Coppee , LL.D.) 344 2 Browse Search
Comte de Paris, History of the Civil War in America. Vol. 4. (ed. Henry Coppee , LL.D.) 319 1 Browse Search
General James Longstreet, From Manassas to Appomattox 312 12 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 James Longstreet or search for James Longstreet in all documents.

Your search returned 231 results in 8 document sections:

Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Leading Confederates on the battle of Gettysburg. (search)
of Pender's division, to report to Lieutenant-General Longstreet, as a support to his corps in the shoulders. Most affectionately yours, J. Longstreet. To A. B. Longstreet, Ll. D., Columbus, Ga fell back, and it being now nearly dark General Longstreet determined to await the arrival of PickeUniversity of Virginia, May 11, 1875. General James Longstreet: dear General: Your letter of the ad passed the head of my column, I asked General Longstreet's staff officer, Major Fairfax, if my dirch, at about 10 o'clock at night, I met General Longstreet and some of his staff coming from the diEwell, who had orders to co-operate with General Longstreet, and who was, of course, not aware of anadded to the narative at the point where General Longstreet argues against Colonel Taylor's assumptin can easily divine. The letter from General Longstreet, which accompanies these enclosures, dwe time while under that generous spirit. General Longstreet and other officers made their official r[21 more...]
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Our Gettysburg series. (search)
r 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, commandingions with Washington. 5th. The heroic but foolish attack of Pickett, on the 3rd, should never have been attempted. Longstreet seems to think that it was imposed upon him against his will by Lee. General Early says distinctly, in a paper published by the Southern Historical Society, that Longstreet deferred it so long that the Second corps could not co-operate with it as it would have done if the attack had taken place early in the morning. I hesitate very much between these two opinions. ar to him. This uneasiness during the days of the battle was contagious to the army, as will appear from the reports of Longstreet, Hood, Heth, and others, and as appeared also to me from the peep I had of the battle-field. What a difference from th
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)
ned 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 hiively 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 cccess. 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 quietlyhis 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 (LongstreLongstreet) in vain pointed out and remonstrated against. That any subject involving the possession and exercise of intellect should be clear to Longstreet and concealed froLongstreet and concealed from Lee is a startling proposition to those possessing knowledge of the two men. We have biblical authority for the story that the angel in the path was visible to the
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)
sive tactically defensive, as charged by General Longstreet, but such reported promise contains a ponk can be as clearly established as that General Longstreet did not, upon the 2nd of July, 1863, use on the right flank, that he had ordered General Longstreet to attack on that flank at sunrise next came so worried at the non-appearance of General Longstreet's troops, is it not a fair presumption the gallant engineer officer mentioned by General Longstreet, tells me that he read the paper in the e reached the bend of the road, I called General Longstreet's attention to the hill over which he wo the 1st, (nearly as far from the Federal as Longstreet was from the Confederate lines). It broke caout 28,000 men on the morning of the 2d, and Longstreet says he had, without Pickett, some 13,000 meifth crops, not getting up, until then. General Longstreet, by an early attack, would have undoubte had my ready sanction. The letter of General Longstreet of November 6th, which Colonel Walton pr[91 more...]
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Numerical strength of the armies at Gettysburg. (search)
f 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 Department for the information necessary to settle the matter, and having been kindly favored with a 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 follows: Longstreet's command, 29,171; A. P. Hill's command, 30,286; cavalry, 10,292; artillery, 4,702. Total effective of all arms, 74,451. And carrying out the same reasoning as that originally pursued, I would say that General Lee had at Gettysburg, including all the cavalry, 67,000 men — that is to say, 53,500 infantry, 9,000 cavalry, and 4,500 artillery. Of course this number was not available to him at any one time, as I have previously explained, but I prefer to adopt the greatest number as shown b
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Justice to General Magruder-letter from Rev. P. G. Robert. (search)
ce, without apparent reason. Presently the head of the column, at which rode Longstreet and Magruder, was counter-marched, after we had gone about a mile, and we turounter-march. He replied that there was a difference of opinion between Generals Longstreet and Magruder as to the road — Longstreet insisting that we were going wrLongstreet insisting that we were going wrong, Magruder that we were right, as his guide was a man who had fox-hunted over the country, and knew every foot of it. This quieted General Longstreet the first timGeneral Longstreet the first time, but he soon became again dissatisfied; and then General Magruder said that if our direction was changed General Longstreet must give the order, and he, of course, General Longstreet must give the order, and he, of course, would obey, although he knew we were right. Longstreet turned us back, and then we lost the valuable time in which we might have anticipated the enemy. If MagrudeLongstreet turned us back, and then we lost the valuable time in which we might have anticipated the enemy. If Magruder had been permitted to proceed, perhaps there might have been a different result, at least to our brigade (Cobb's), which suffered so severely that afternoon. One
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), General Longstreet's Second paper on Gettysburg. (search)
General Longstreet's Second paper on Gettysburg. We again depart from our general rule against copying articles which are published in other periodicals, in order that we may give General Longstreet the fullest opportunity of putting on record his views concerning Gettysburg. We published for the first time his official repo Lee's army on the 31st of May, 1863, was precisely 68,352. I learn from General Longstreet that when the three corps were concentrated at Chambersburg, the morning n of a family.. Truly and respectfully yours, . H. Taylor, A. A. G. To General Longstreet. Lexington, Va., March 9, 1866. My dear General: Your son Garland ly way in which we can hope that fragments of truth will reach posterity. Mrs. Longstreet will act as your amanuensis. I am very sorry that your arm improves so slwill eventually be restored to you. You must present my kindest regards to Mrs. Longstreet. I hope your home in New Orleans will be happy, and that your life, which
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 5. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Reply to General Longstreet's Second paper. (search)
tion in the New Orleans Republican, from General Longstreet, which has been referred to. That communlose of the first day's fight, when he said: Longstreet is a very good fighter when he gets in posit time while under that generous spirit. General Longstreet and other officers made their official rof the battle-and the account from which General Longstreet's critics get all their points against h whole credit for that battle was due to General Longstreet, and General Lee had very little to do w merely withstood the enemy's attacks, while Longstreet was getting ready; and the question comes ins their numbers, for the long hours it took Longstreet to get ready? It must be borne in mind that It may be observed here, that, while General Longstreet has given a letter from General Lee to hhat the battle would have been gained if General Longstreet had obeyed the orders given him, and had which is marvellous. The idea is, that, if Longstreet's columns had gone to the attack at sunrise,[66 more...]