hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
R. E. Lee 226 0 Browse Search
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) 214 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 186 0 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 181 5 Browse Search
U. S. Grant 163 1 Browse Search
Robert E. Lee 106 10 Browse Search
S. B. Buckner 102 2 Browse Search
George B. McClellan 97 1 Browse Search
Longstreet 95 47 Browse Search
George E. Pickett 88 2 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 24. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 148 total hits in 38 results.

1 2 3 4
Seminary Ridge (Pennsylvania, United States) (search for this): chapter 1.5
y and at that date is about 4:35 o'clock A. M. General McLaws, in speaking of the movements of his division on that occasion, says: My division camped at Willoughby Run, about four miles from Gettysburg, on the night of July 1st, about 12 o'clock, perhaps it was later. While there I received an order to move on at 4 A. M. of 2d; but that order was countermanded, and I was directed to move early. Not long after sunrise I moved forward, and before 8 A. M. the head of my division reached Seminary Ridge, where General Lee was in person. But I propose to put General Longstreet himself in evidence to contradict the statement just now quoted from his book. I have now in my possession an autograph letter from him, written from New Orleans on the 20th April, 1875, in which he wrote: It occurs to me that if General Lee had any such idea as an attack at sunrise you must surely be advised of it. Right sure am I that such an order was never delivered to me, and it is not possible for me to bel
Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania, United States) (search for this): chapter 1.5
that General Johnston, as a soldier, was his superior. Be it remembered, too, that this letter from General Longstreet to General Lee was written after the Gettysburg campaign, and the glowing words of admiration and affection employed in giving expression to the recognition of the fact that all the glory of his command was directly due to the ability of his commander are utterly irreconcilable with many statements alleged to have been made by General Longstreet touching the invasion of Pennsylvania by General Lee in 1863. General Longstreet could not claim to have entertained the views and sentiments now attributed to him when he penned the letter of September 12, 1863, without branding himself as a disingenuous flatterer and time-server. When he discussed with General Lee the line of action most advisable to be pursued in the fall of 1863, although rather more disposed to favor the reinforcement of our army in the West for aggressive movements, while the Army of Northern Virginia
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) (search for this): chapter 1.5
his latter assertion? General Longstreet had served under General Johnston up to the battle of Seven Pines, and after that under General Lee; he had been in position to form his own estimate of the ability of each of these great commanders, and no doubt had his own views of their relative merit; but I do not believe that he ever during the war said one word to justify the conclusion of the London Telegraph. Read what General Longstreet wrote to General Lee on the eve of his departure for Tennessee in the fall of 1863. Under date of September 12th he wrote: If I did not think our move a necessary one, my regrets at leaving you would be distressing to me as it seems to be with the officers and men of my command. Believing it to be necessary, I hope to accept it and my other personal inconveniences cheerfully and hopefully. All that we have to be proud of has been accomplished under your eye and under your orders. Our affections for you are stronger, if it is possible for them t
Knoxville (Tennessee, United States) (search for this): chapter 1.5
ntertain now concerning the Gettysburg campaign, it is impossible to understand the suggestion made so soon thereafter as to a repetition of the invasion of the country beyond the Potomac. In speaking of General Longstreet's operations about Knoxville in November, 1863, the London Telegraph refers to the mistake then made by him when, from a misconception, he stopped the assaulting column, which he now knows would infallibly have carried Knoxville by storm. Clearly the reviewer here chargesKnoxville by storm. Clearly the reviewer here charges General Longstreet, by implication at least with the lack of that aggressive and, perhaps, audacious quality, which he subsequently condemns in General Lee. The recognition of this lack of aggressiveness or boldness in General Longstreet is, perhaps, the key to the statement of the Telegraph that General Johnston, who excelled in defensive tactics, was, in the estimation of General Longstreet, superior as a soldier to General Lee, and prepares us for that disapproval on the part of General L
Willoughby Run (Pennsylvania, United States) (search for this): chapter 1.5
his book, page 362, General Longstreet says: The stars were shining brightly on the morning of the 2d, when I reported at General Lee's headquarters and asked for orders. After a time Generals McLaws and Hood, with their staffs, rode up, and at sunrise their commands filed off the road to the right and rested. Sunrise in that locality and at that date is about 4:35 o'clock A. M. General McLaws, in speaking of the movements of his division on that occasion, says: My division camped at Willoughby Run, about four miles from Gettysburg, on the night of July 1st, about 12 o'clock, perhaps it was later. While there I received an order to move on at 4 A. M. of 2d; but that order was countermanded, and I was directed to move early. Not long after sunrise I moved forward, and before 8 A. M. the head of my division reached Seminary Ridge, where General Lee was in person. But I propose to put General Longstreet himself in evidence to contradict the statement just now quoted from his book.
Appomattox (Virginia, United States) (search for this): chapter 1.5
Lee and Longstreet. [from the Richmond times, June 14, 1896.] Editor of the Times: Sir,—I have read the review of General Longstreet's book, From Manassas to Appomattox, by the London Daily Telegraph, with much interest. We naturally feel anxious about the conclusions of the impartial and unbiased foreign student of history concerning the events of the war between the States, and especially as to his estimate of the leaders on the Southern side. This review, however, apppears to me to have been suggested by some one nearer home; and, as I read between the lines, I fancy that I hear the partisan here prompting the reviewer over there. Who on the other side of the Atlantic could claim to be so well informed of public sentiment in Virginia during the eventful years of 1862 and 1863 as to be able to assert that controversy raged high in Richmond between the followers of Lee and Johnston as to their relative merit, which is a great exaggeration, or to say that Longstreet wa
Burnside (search for this): chapter 1.5
e, which the Telegraph discovers in his book, and to which it gives expression as follows: Yet, we think all readers of this book will admit that, considering the inequality of strength brought into the field by the two belligerents, and of the vast superiority of the North, General Lee was far too fond of fighting. Many extracts might be made from it to show that such is the undoubted opinion of its author. Perhaps so. Unquestionably this opinion was shared by Generals McClellan, Pope, Burnside, Hooker, Meade, and Grant, of the Federal Army of the Potomac. Now, there is the gist of the London telegraph's version of General Longstreet's criticism of General Lee. Our old chief was too fond of fighting. Well, who else is there in the Army of Northern Virginia who cannot pardon him for that weakness in consideration of the very brilliant results that almost invariably attended his exhibitions of pugnacity? In war it is said that nothing succeeds like success. In General Lee's c
George B. McClellan (search for this): chapter 1.5
pursued by General Lee, which the Telegraph discovers in his book, and to which it gives expression as follows: Yet, we think all readers of this book will admit that, considering the inequality of strength brought into the field by the two belligerents, and of the vast superiority of the North, General Lee was far too fond of fighting. Many extracts might be made from it to show that such is the undoubted opinion of its author. Perhaps so. Unquestionably this opinion was shared by Generals McClellan, Pope, Burnside, Hooker, Meade, and Grant, of the Federal Army of the Potomac. Now, there is the gist of the London telegraph's version of General Longstreet's criticism of General Lee. Our old chief was too fond of fighting. Well, who else is there in the Army of Northern Virginia who cannot pardon him for that weakness in consideration of the very brilliant results that almost invariably attended his exhibitions of pugnacity? In war it is said that nothing succeeds like success
Hood (search for this): chapter 1.5
wo divisions to the front at dawn of day on the 2d. The only question I propose to consider now is, at what hour did the troops of General Longstreet reach General Lee? For, as will be shown later, there appears to be a contradiction in General Longstreet's own statements about this. In his book, page 362, General Longstreet says: The stars were shining brightly on the morning of the 2d, when I reported at General Lee's headquarters and asked for orders. After a time Generals McLaws and Hood, with their staffs, rode up, and at sunrise their commands filed off the road to the right and rested. Sunrise in that locality and at that date is about 4:35 o'clock A. M. General McLaws, in speaking of the movements of his division on that occasion, says: My division camped at Willoughby Run, about four miles from Gettysburg, on the night of July 1st, about 12 o'clock, perhaps it was later. While there I received an order to move on at 4 A. M. of 2d; but that order was countermanded, an
Jefferson Davis (search for this): chapter 1.5
s and the unquestionable ability and admitted excellence of each of these great soldiers. Had General Lee lived he would unhesitatingly have accepted his fair share of responsibility for the lack of final success at Gettysburg; but his readiness to assume all blame for failure, even though his lieutenants had failed to do what he had a right to expect of them in the way of co-operation, is in striking contrast to the statement of General Longstreet, as set forth by the Telegraph, that President Davis, Mr. Seddon, and nearly every officer of rank serving under Lee, were opposed to invading the enemy's country, especially after the failure of the Sharpsburg campaign.(?) * * * Yet not a voice was raised against this fatal march, except by General Longstreet when he rejoined General Lee after the battle of Chancellorsville. The two were alone together and what passed between them is now made known for the first time. This is indeed a revelation to those of us who were near General Lee
1 2 3 4