hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity (current method)
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position
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
G. T. Beauregard 390 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 278 0 Browse Search
Braxton Bragg 256 2 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 188 0 Browse Search
H. B. McClellan 172 2 Browse Search
W. T. Sherman 160 2 Browse Search
U. S. Grant 150 2 Browse Search
Stonewall Jackson 147 1 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 130 0 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 130 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 12. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 46 total hits in 15 results.

1 2
July 4th, 1883 AD (search for this): chapter 4
by Burnside's at Fredericksburg, is a difficult matter to determine. If he had been, the final result would not have differed much in all probability. Yet this man, who happened to receive the surrendered sword of Lee, became on that account the supposed hero of the war; received the credit of having suppressed the Confederacy; without education for or experience in civil affairs was made President for eight years; and finally was carried around the earth and exhibited to the nations as the greatest prodigy of the age. The people in their exuberant joy at the return of peace wished for a hero to whom they could pay homage, and, Lincoln being dead, seized upon Grant as the nearest object. Happier for him and for them had he been allowed to continue, like Sherman and Sheridan, quietly at his post of duty. America does not require celebrities of a false lustre to satisfy her pride. There are others who are deserving, as Mr. Emerson said. F. P. S. College Hill, mass., July 4, 1883.
Burnside (search for this): chapter 4
; to possess those qualities of mind which constitute the great strategist and tactician—in short, the qualities of a great General—is an entirely different thing. In the tenacity with which Grant followed out a determination once fixed in his mind, perhaps no man has ever surpassed him; but it was an expensive virtue for his soldiers, as the hundred thousand men he lost in Virginia are a witness. Whether he should have been removed after Cold Harbor, a disastrous blunder only equalled by Burnside's at Fredericksburg, is a difficult matter to determine. If he had been, the final result would not have differed much in all probability. Yet this man, who happened to receive the surrendered sword of Lee, became on that account the supposed hero of the war; received the credit of having suppressed the Confederacy; without education for or experience in civil affairs was made President for eight years; and finally was carried around the earth and exhibited to the nations as the greates
Emerson (search for this): chapter 4
y Burnside's at Fredericksburg, is a difficult matter to determine. If he had been, the final result would not have differed much in all probability. Yet this man, who happened to receive the surrendered sword of Lee, became on that account the supposed hero of the war; received the credit of having suppressed the Confederacy; without education for or experience in civil affairs was made President for eight years; and finally was carried around the earth and exhibited to the nations as the greatest prodigy of the age. The people in their exuberant joy at the return of peace wished for a hero to whom they could pay homage, and, Lincoln being dead, seized upon Grant as the nearest object. Happier for him and for them had he been allowed to continue, like Sherman and Sheridan, quietly at his post of duty. America does not require celebrities of a false lustre to satisfy her pride. There are others who are deserving, as Mr. Emerson said. F. P. S. College Hill, mass., July 4, 1883.
U. S. Grant (search for this): chapter 4
A Northern opinion of Grant's generalship. [The following able criticism of General Grant's clGeneral Grant's claim to great generalship was published in the New York Tribune last summer, and is worth preservingents and conclusions, but that his estimate of Grant will be that of the future historian there canthe Tribune. Sir,—The attitude in which General Grant has so long been posed before the world isnever seen seriously questioned, speaks of General Grant as one who was successful on a moderate teginia campaign was a failure, and elsewhere of Grant's useless sacrifice of ten thousand men at Colputable facts. I understand from him that General Grant was at least seven times conspicuously andl believe that had Jackson lived a year longer Grant would not only have been defeated, but, as a cingle military idea, pretty nearly destroyed. Grant possessed an advantage over all his predecessos at that period. The dry truth of it is that Grant lost more battles in Virginia than he ever won[4 more...]
Hambley (search for this): chapter 4
rness, and accuracy of detail, that he has reached somewhere near the truth of his subject. His statements are indeed tacitly admitted by other writers on the last year of the war in Virginia, but have been either clouded over or not brought forward to the importance they properly deserve. Neither do I understand that he reflects on the mistakes and failures of the Union General with the severity he well might employ, but leaves the reader to draw an evident conclusion for himself. Colonel Hambley, of the British army, in his great work on the Art of War, a work which I have never seen seriously questioned, speaks of General Grant as one who was successful on a moderate terrain like Vicksburg, but whose Virginia campaign was a failure, and elsewhere of Grant's useless sacrifice of ten thousand men at Cold Harbor. This judgment is tacitly supported in General Humphreys's book by what would seem to be a column of indisputable facts. I understand from him that General Grant was at
John M. Hancock (search for this): chapter 4
t is tacitly supported in General Humphreys's book by what would seem to be a column of indisputable facts. I understand from him that General Grant was at least seven times conspicuously and with enormous loss defeated by General Lee before the exhaustion of his war materials and the universal collapse of the Confederacy compelled the latter to surrender. These were not reported as defeats in the bulletins of the day, and some of them were even supposed to be victories, as in the case of Hancock's magnificent attempt to break through Lee's centre at Spotsylvania Courthouse; but they were defeats nevertheless. When a commander assumes the offensive and is repulsed by the enemy with severe loss, it is a defeat for him and a victory for his antagonist, although it may not be a decisive one. Many things conspired to prevent General Lee's victories from being decisive: The overwhelming superiority of the Union army in numbers and munitions of war, his own lack of absolutely necessary
J. T. Humphreys (search for this): chapter 4
f the Tribune. Sir,—The attitude in which General Grant has so long been posed before the world is likely to receive a severe blow from the publication of General Humphreys's last volume of The Campaigns of the Civil War, of which the Tribune contained a review yesterday. Most people who read General Humphreys's book will be sGeneral Humphreys's book will be satisfied, from its frankness of tone, clearness, and accuracy of detail, that he has reached somewhere near the truth of his subject. His statements are indeed tacitly admitted by other writers on the last year of the war in Virginia, but have been either clouded over or not brought forward to the importance they properly deserve. whose Virginia campaign was a failure, and elsewhere of Grant's useless sacrifice of ten thousand men at Cold Harbor. This judgment is tacitly supported in General Humphreys's book by what would seem to be a column of indisputable facts. I understand from him that General Grant was at least seven times conspicuously and with eno
Stonewall Jackson (search for this): chapter 4
which we can thank the blockade— the determined bravery of the Union forces, and the lack of an able coadjutor like Stonewall Jackson. One can well believe that had Jackson lived a year longer Grant would not only have been defeated, but, as a consJackson lived a year longer Grant would not only have been defeated, but, as a consequence of his stubborn adhesion to a single military idea, pretty nearly destroyed. Grant possessed an advantage over all his predecessors in Virginia, that he never was forced to contend with Jackson. With Jackson taken from one side and SheridaJackson. With Jackson taken from one side and Sheridan added to the other, it ought not to have been so difficult to get the better of Lee.. As it happened, Sheridan's brilliant victory at Cedar Run, a battle gained with equal forces and the most decisive ever fought in Virginia, was all that saved usJackson taken from one side and Sheridan added to the other, it ought not to have been so difficult to get the better of Lee.. As it happened, Sheridan's brilliant victory at Cedar Run, a battle gained with equal forces and the most decisive ever fought in Virginia, was all that saved us at that period. The dry truth of it is that Grant lost more battles in Virginia than he ever won elsewhere. General Grant's tactics evidently succeeded in the West on account of their simplicity. They were not too good for the then undisciplin
W. H. F. Lee (search for this): chapter 4
that General Grant was at least seven times conspicuously and with enormous loss defeated by General Lee before the exhaustion of his war materials and the universal collapse of the Confederacy compe even supposed to be victories, as in the case of Hancock's magnificent attempt to break through Lee's centre at Spotsylvania Courthouse; but they were defeats nevertheless. When a commander assume for his antagonist, although it may not be a decisive one. Many things conspired to prevent General Lee's victories from being decisive: The overwhelming superiority of the Union army in numbers anside and Sheridan added to the other, it ought not to have been so difficult to get the better of Lee.. As it happened, Sheridan's brilliant victory at Cedar Run, a battle gained with equal forces anffered much in all probability. Yet this man, who happened to receive the surrendered sword of Lee, became on that account the supposed hero of the war; received the credit of having suppressed th
Abraham Lincoln (search for this): chapter 4
y Burnside's at Fredericksburg, is a difficult matter to determine. If he had been, the final result would not have differed much in all probability. Yet this man, who happened to receive the surrendered sword of Lee, became on that account the supposed hero of the war; received the credit of having suppressed the Confederacy; without education for or experience in civil affairs was made President for eight years; and finally was carried around the earth and exhibited to the nations as the greatest prodigy of the age. The people in their exuberant joy at the return of peace wished for a hero to whom they could pay homage, and, Lincoln being dead, seized upon Grant as the nearest object. Happier for him and for them had he been allowed to continue, like Sherman and Sheridan, quietly at his post of duty. America does not require celebrities of a false lustre to satisfy her pride. There are others who are deserving, as Mr. Emerson said. F. P. S. College Hill, mass., July 4, 1883.
1 2