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
United States (United States) 324 0 Browse Search
Richmond (Virginia, United States) 294 28 Browse Search
Virginia (Virginia, United States) 262 0 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 210 2 Browse Search
Andersonville, Ga. (Georgia, United States) 177 1 Browse Search
Washington (United States) 162 2 Browse Search
Arkansas (Arkansas, United States) 116 0 Browse Search
R. E. Lee 114 0 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 106 0 Browse Search
William T. Sherman 105 1 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 1. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 70 total hits in 32 results.

1 2 3 4
Buell (search for this): chapter 1.5
had commanded the numbers which Northern generals and Northern writers attribute to him, then the story of Gettysburg and of the war would have been far different. Sherman's Historical raid. By H. V. Boynton. Cincinnati: Wilstach, Baldwin & Co. The author has kindly sent us a copy of this able and scathing review of Sherman's Memoirs, and we have read it with very great interest. He shows most conclusively from the official records that Sherman has done great injustice to Grant, Buell, Rosecrans, Thomas, McPherson, Schofield, and almost every other officer to whom he alludes in his book, and he carries the war into Africa by severely criticising Sherman's generalship, upon some of his most important fields, and showing that he was actually saved from terrible disaster again and again by the very men whom he now disparages. We cannot, of course, accept all that General Boynton has written; but we rejoice to see this well merited rebuke to the General of the Army who not
Jedediah Hotchkiss (search for this): chapter 1.5
lians and soldiers on that side. This book completely refutes the popular idea of the defenceless condition of Washington at the time of General Early's advance on it in 1864, and shows that he acted with proper prudence in not making a more serious attack upon very formidable works which were defended by a force much larger than his own little army. From Col. Wm. Allan, formerly chief of ordinance, Second Corps, Army of Northern Virginia, we have received Chancellorsville, by Major Jed. Hotchkiss and Colonel Wm. Allan. This is a very able and valuable contribution to the history of the Virginia battle fields. The narrative is clear, accurate and vigorous, and the maps are in every respect admirable. The book is gotten up in the best style of D. Van Nostrand, New York, and should have a place in the library of every military student. The battle of Gettysburg. By Samuel P. Bates. Philadelphia: Davis & Co., 1875. We are indebted to the publishers for a copy of this bo
Benjamin H. Hill (search for this): chapter 1.5
time publish a full review of it. We can only say now that the author seems to have bestowed on it a great deal of labor, and has produced a book of historic value which will be widely read. It was not remarkable, perhaps, that Federal commanders during the war should have so egregiously overestimated our numbers; but it is entirely inexcusable that a historian at this day (with easy access to the official reports of the Confederate generals) should commit the same blunders. Mr. Bates puts Hill's corps at Fredericksburg at 30,000 men, Stuart's cavalry at Brandy Station at 12,000, the force which environed Milroy at Winchester at 60,000, and General Lee's entire force at Gettysburg at 107,000 men. Now the truth is that these figures are most inexcusable exaggerations. General Lee's entire force at Gettysburg was not quite 57,000 men. Ah! if our grand old chieftan had commanded the numbers which Northern generals and Northern writers attribute to him, then the story of Gettysburg an
H. V. Boynton (search for this): chapter 1.5
57,000 men. Ah! if our grand old chieftan had commanded the numbers which Northern generals and Northern writers attribute to him, then the story of Gettysburg and of the war would have been far different. Sherman's Historical raid. By H. V. Boynton. Cincinnati: Wilstach, Baldwin & Co. The author has kindly sent us a copy of this able and scathing review of Sherman's Memoirs, and we have read it with very great interest. He shows most conclusively from the official records that Sheverely criticising Sherman's generalship, upon some of his most important fields, and showing that he was actually saved from terrible disaster again and again by the very men whom he now disparages. We cannot, of course, accept all that General Boynton has written; but we rejoice to see this well merited rebuke to the General of the Army who not only makes himself the hero of his own story, but oversteps all bounds of delicacy and propriety (not to say common decency), and well illustrates
Virginian Thomas (search for this): chapter 1.5
numbers which Northern generals and Northern writers attribute to him, then the story of Gettysburg and of the war would have been far different. Sherman's Historical raid. By H. V. Boynton. Cincinnati: Wilstach, Baldwin & Co. The author has kindly sent us a copy of this able and scathing review of Sherman's Memoirs, and we have read it with very great interest. He shows most conclusively from the official records that Sherman has done great injustice to Grant, Buell, Rosecrans, Thomas, McPherson, Schofield, and almost every other officer to whom he alludes in his book, and he carries the war into Africa by severely criticising Sherman's generalship, upon some of his most important fields, and showing that he was actually saved from terrible disaster again and again by the very men whom he now disparages. We cannot, of course, accept all that General Boynton has written; but we rejoice to see this well merited rebuke to the General of the Army who not only makes himself
Rosecrans (search for this): chapter 1.5
anded the numbers which Northern generals and Northern writers attribute to him, then the story of Gettysburg and of the war would have been far different. Sherman's Historical raid. By H. V. Boynton. Cincinnati: Wilstach, Baldwin & Co. The author has kindly sent us a copy of this able and scathing review of Sherman's Memoirs, and we have read it with very great interest. He shows most conclusively from the official records that Sherman has done great injustice to Grant, Buell, Rosecrans, Thomas, McPherson, Schofield, and almost every other officer to whom he alludes in his book, and he carries the war into Africa by severely criticising Sherman's generalship, upon some of his most important fields, and showing that he was actually saved from terrible disaster again and again by the very men whom he now disparages. We cannot, of course, accept all that General Boynton has written; but we rejoice to see this well merited rebuke to the General of the Army who not only mak
U. S. Grant (search for this): chapter 1.5
hieftan had commanded the numbers which Northern generals and Northern writers attribute to him, then the story of Gettysburg and of the war would have been far different. Sherman's Historical raid. By H. V. Boynton. Cincinnati: Wilstach, Baldwin & Co. The author has kindly sent us a copy of this able and scathing review of Sherman's Memoirs, and we have read it with very great interest. He shows most conclusively from the official records that Sherman has done great injustice to Grant, Buell, Rosecrans, Thomas, McPherson, Schofield, and almost every other officer to whom he alludes in his book, and he carries the war into Africa by severely criticising Sherman's generalship, upon some of his most important fields, and showing that he was actually saved from terrible disaster again and again by the very men whom he now disparages. We cannot, of course, accept all that General Boynton has written; but we rejoice to see this well merited rebuke to the General of the Army
J. E. B. Stuart (search for this): chapter 1.5
say now that the author seems to have bestowed on it a great deal of labor, and has produced a book of historic value which will be widely read. It was not remarkable, perhaps, that Federal commanders during the war should have so egregiously overestimated our numbers; but it is entirely inexcusable that a historian at this day (with easy access to the official reports of the Confederate generals) should commit the same blunders. Mr. Bates puts Hill's corps at Fredericksburg at 30,000 men, Stuart's cavalry at Brandy Station at 12,000, the force which environed Milroy at Winchester at 60,000, and General Lee's entire force at Gettysburg at 107,000 men. Now the truth is that these figures are most inexcusable exaggerations. General Lee's entire force at Gettysburg was not quite 57,000 men. Ah! if our grand old chieftan had commanded the numbers which Northern generals and Northern writers attribute to him, then the story of Gettysburg and of the war would have been far different.
R. H. Milroy (search for this): chapter 1.5
or, and has produced a book of historic value which will be widely read. It was not remarkable, perhaps, that Federal commanders during the war should have so egregiously overestimated our numbers; but it is entirely inexcusable that a historian at this day (with easy access to the official reports of the Confederate generals) should commit the same blunders. Mr. Bates puts Hill's corps at Fredericksburg at 30,000 men, Stuart's cavalry at Brandy Station at 12,000, the force which environed Milroy at Winchester at 60,000, and General Lee's entire force at Gettysburg at 107,000 men. Now the truth is that these figures are most inexcusable exaggerations. General Lee's entire force at Gettysburg was not quite 57,000 men. Ah! if our grand old chieftan had commanded the numbers which Northern generals and Northern writers attribute to him, then the story of Gettysburg and of the war would have been far different. Sherman's Historical raid. By H. V. Boynton. Cincinnati: Wilstach, Bal
1864 AD (search for this): chapter 1.5
the history of those great campaigns which threatened the capture of Washington. General Barnard falls into the common error of all Federal writers in greatly overestimating the numbers of the several Confederate armies to which he has occasion to allude; but we have come to regard that as almost a necessity with both civilians and soldiers on that side. This book completely refutes the popular idea of the defenceless condition of Washington at the time of General Early's advance on it in 1864, and shows that he acted with proper prudence in not making a more serious attack upon very formidable works which were defended by a force much larger than his own little army. From Col. Wm. Allan, formerly chief of ordinance, Second Corps, Army of Northern Virginia, we have received Chancellorsville, by Major Jed. Hotchkiss and Colonel Wm. Allan. This is a very able and valuable contribution to the history of the Virginia battle fields. The narrative is clear, accurate and vigorous,
1 2 3 4