General Longstreet at Gettysburg

[terchris]

This is question that has been debated for a longtime.Many people still feel General Lee should have not launched the frontal attack at Gettysburg and apparently one of those was Longstreet.
However, there are many though who feel General Longstreet was hesitant and didn't act as quick as Lee wanted him to in the fighting on the 2nd day.I think it was Early whom especially criticized Longstreet in the years to follow about not executing Lee's plans fast enough.I have always liked Longstreet and thought he was one of the CSA's best Generals.The question is what do you guys think about this?Was Longstreet stubborn at Gettysburg and would it have made a difference had he acted different?

[hoosier]

A friend has pointed out to me that Longstreet was a soldier. As such, he was obligated to obey the orders of his commander. Therefore, even though he did not believe a frontal attack would work, he should have launched it without hesitation.

That said, I'm inclined to agree with Longstreet that the frontal attack wasn't going to work, no matter when it was launched. The Union position was too strong. Had he attacked earlier, in strict obedience to Lee's orders, I feel the only difference would have been that more of the criticism for the attack's failure would have been directed elsewhere.

[mobile_96]

"it was Early whom especially criticized Longstreet in the years to follow"
Its very interesting that Early's attacks on Longstreet didn't really start until after Lee passed away. Why not before Lee died, when he could have put forth his imput on Longstreet??

[tamaroa]

Whew, this one of those what came first? The chicken or the egg routines. I doubt if there will ever be a satisfactory explanation. I will throw in my 2 cents then go ahead and fire away.

Let's start with a basic fact. While the Civil War was probably the most documented war ever up to that point, it is well to remember that most of the writings occurred in the 1880's and 1890's. Very few autobiographies were written in the 1860's or 1870's. As the soldier became older, his memory became more enfeebled. The mind is not crystal clear 30 years down the road, so a lot of what I read, I don't really believe unless there are independent corrabative sources. Longstreet and his detractors were not the most accurate writers as a result.

Secondly, Longstreet riled up a lot of people when he became a republican then served on Grant's team. So now we have another group of people who may throw darts at Ol' Pete.

Taking all that into consideration, I tend to believe that Longstreet sulked a bit on day 2 when Lee went ahead with his own plans. Had he been quicker or had he done a flanking attack around the right of Little Round Top, things may have been different.

I fault him tremendously for his lack of activity on the morning of the 3rd. It is documented that Lee wanted to attack both flanks again the next day. He tried to in the wee hours of the morning. Ewell actually listened and engaged the enemy. Longstreet was supposed to have engaged as well at the same time. It never happened. Consequently, Ewell broke off his attack in the early morning.

Now Lee was faced with another problem. What is left in his bag of tricks. Day 1 the rebs had many gains. Day 2 they had some gains. there is no way, he could up and leave, therefore, a frontal assault became the only option. I believe again that Longstreet erred here. He should have not held so many soldiers in reserve. This was do or die. A second assault wave may have carried the "angle". But Longstreet chose to keep back about 38 regiments in reserve "in case" of a counter attack.

As to Longstreet being a soldier, I agree with that assessment and he did do as he was told. I just think there is too much evidence incriminating him with regard to his lack of alacrity. He did it, he just didn't do it quick enough.

I was in the service myself. If you don't obey orders, you get in trouble. Often times though, you didn't exactly set the world on fire with speed if the orders didn't thrill you.

Regards,

Bill

[kyreb]

Bill, Thanks so much for the insight. Even though I knew all those facts, you have a great way of bringing it all together (you should think about writing a "Civil War for Dummies", I'd certainly take a copy!

[mobile_96]

Someone even wrote a article for Gettysburg Mag. concerning a 2nd wave, to follow closely behind the 1st one, to take advantage of any breakthru's.
And there were also letters and comments in diaries about men looking behind them when close to the stone wall and asking where the re-inforcements were.
As far as "Longstreet was supposed to have engaged" in the morning of the 3rd day, no orders were issued for this movement.

[tamaroa]

Chas,
Oh jeez, go ahead and make me look up where I read that about Longstreet and Ewell. I think it
was George Stewart's Microhistory of Pickett's Charge but I'll have to look it up in thr next few days.

Regards,

Bill

[tamaroa]

PS, how many posts does it take to make Sergeant? I'm tired of being a private. :-)

[hoosier]

Bill, there's good news and bad news.

Mike set out the guidelines in a post on the Campfire Chat board on May 5. According to those guidelines, you have to accumulate 500 posts before you get to be a sergeant.

The good news is, we get to be corporals at 250 posts - and I'm almost there.

[mobile_96]

Well, I've got a very long while to go to get
Corporal. Maybe make it next year at this rate.

George, will look forward to your posting, I don't have that book. But don't feel bad, about hunting up something in 1 book, I just finished going thru about 150 days of digests from getts discussion group and found 3 days worth that concern Day 3 and Longstreet in the am. Also finally remembered where I read the 'no orders' I stated. So will be reading thru all, and Coddington, and probably Bachelder's Papers and maybe breeze thru Longstreets memoirs also. Any idea if there is any more info in Battles and Leaders or Annals of the Civil War??
(Gonna help you get your Stripes here real fast {8-))

[mobile_96]

Sorry, meant Bill and his posting. I must be more tired than I thought.
Anyway, I also visited and bkmarked your website. Can only imagine the thrill you got when finding so many shipmates and all the work on the Tam was completed.
I did 3 years army, most of it in a NATO med lab,in Germany, as a histo-tec. We were all also involved as the Poison Control Center for all of NATO. So far have only been able to locate 1 teammate, with a 2nd one apparantly dropping off the face of the earth.

[Ed Hill]

Rather than copy and pasting the entire chapter out of the book, read "What can detain Longstreet?" Volume 3 Chapter 7.

Robert E. Lee (The Biography by Douglas Freeman, 1934)

This is a wonderful book, Freeman is a VERY good writer.

[Elennsar]

But notoriously reluctant to say anything harshly critical of Lee.

The claim that Longstreet was "slow" at Gettysburg seems heavily based on the biased information of his enemies and totally ignores worse performances by Ewell and Hill in regards to getting their men into action effectively.

I would not say Longstreet moved to execute his orders "with all possible speed" - but under the the circumstances, he doesn't seem to have done any "dawdling" either.

Day 3...a second wave would not necessarily be of any great use. The first wave's remains would be in the way, and any reinforcements Longstreet could drag into the attack could be countered by Meade much more easily than they could assist the first wave.

[5fish]

We must be honest the Virginians following the war tried to put the blame on Longstreet for Lee and the AoNV failure at Gettysburg. In those years following the war the accusation and assertion form both the Virginians and form Longstreet become more cursed.

To the point that it color Lee's and Longstreet's personal relationship when view by historians.

The behavior of Longstreet at Gettysburg was one one colored by Virginians so how much value does it have. Since we know they(Virginians) have an agendas to tarnish Longstreet efforts at Gettysburg...

I ask this before if you know your commanding officer is making poor judgement calls what do you do as his number two man?

Lee made fundamentally bad military decision at Gettysburg. What or how should Longstreet had behavior knowing Lee was making bad fundamental decisions? In the end Longstreet obey and carried out the orders knowing the outcome would be unfavourable for his side...

A thought...

[The Iron Duke]

Relying on Freeman for an objective view of Longstreet is the same as relying on Bob Krick. Freeman's portrayal of Longstreet during the Second Manassas campaign as some kind of nefarious schemer is one of the most rediculous things I've read. Thankfully, John Hennessy has pretty much debunked Freeman's assertions.

[Elennsar]

At least Freeman is subtle about the "nefarious" part. Krick, not so much (if I'm not mistaken).

Longstreet made mistakes at Gettysburg, I'm sure.

One thing that really gets my goat about the idea that he was "slow" is that it took some time for Law's brigade (a quarter of Hood's division) to arrive - not any fault of anyone in First Corps.

Similarly, going into battle without Pickett is going into battle with eight (instead of eleven) brigades.

[Southernbelle]

Hello - I have been reading all the comments posted in the thread - General Longstreet at Gettysburg. The debate concerning the General's actions at Gettysburg continues. I have visited the battlefield many times and have noticed that the monument to General Longstreet seems undignified in that it appears he is riding a carousel horse, and the monument is placed directly on the ground, and not on a pedestal as many others are. The tour guide pointed this out and suggested that this was done purposefully. Have you seen this monument? Did its' appearance seem not quite what it should be? I would appreciate any comments on this question. I will be visiting the battlefield again next month and will take another look. Thank you.

[whitworth]

General Jubal Early took Confederate troops to Gettysburg, before the battle, on June 26.
Jubal Early should have warned Robert E. Lee, not to come to Gettysburg, days before he decided to change orders and move his corps to Gettysburg.

Perhaps, that is why Jubal Early laid blame on James Longstreet. Lee went to Gettysburg, because Longstreet employed a spy, who caused Lee to move his troops. Early, might have found good reason for Lee, not to concentrate his troops in Gettysburg and felt double-crossed, as he never sent word to Lee.

[K Hale]

Hello - I have been reading all the comments posted in the thread - General Longstreet at Gettysburg. The debate concerning the General's actions at Gettysburg continues. I have visited the battlefield many times and have noticed that the monument to General Longstreet seems undignified in that it appears he is riding a carousel horse, and the monument is placed directly on the ground, and not on a pedestal as many others are. The tour guide pointed this out and suggested that this was done purposefully. Have you seen this monument? Did its' appearance seem not quite what it should be? I would appreciate any comments on this question. I will be visiting the battlefield again next month and will take another look. Thank you.

It does look like a carousel horse, now that you mention it. Very cartoonish. It's an OK monument, I guess. The Longstreet part is pretty good, it's just the horse that seems odd. Not only cartoonish but also too small for the rider.

[K Hale]

I ask this before if you know your commanding officer is making poor judgement calls what do you do as his number two man?

Lee made fundamentally bad military decision at Gettysburg. What or how should Longstreet had behavior knowing Lee was making bad fundamental decisions? In the end Longstreet obey and carried out the orders knowing the outcome would be unfavourable for his side...

A thought...

Longstreet's job, as far as I can see, is to give Lee his input, and then, once Lee makes the final decision, the subject is over and Longstreet's job is then to carry out the orders to the best of his ability whether he likes them or not.

[cash]

Rather than copy and pasting the entire chapter out of the book, read "What can detain Longstreet?" Volume 3 Chapter 7.

Robert E. Lee (The Biography by Douglas Freeman, 1934)

This is a wonderful book, Freeman is a VERY good writer.

I have all four volumes. It's one of my favorites. Having said that, though, Freeman relied way too much on the southern historical society papers, which we now know have falsified information in them concerning Longstreet at Gettysburg. For discussions of Jubal Early's lies and his control of the SHSP see Piston's _Lee's Tarnished Lieutenant: James Longstreet and His Place in Southern History,_ Connelly's _God and General Longstreet: The Lost Cause and the Southern Mind,_ and Gary Gallagher, ed., _The Lost Cause and Civil War History._

Regards,
Cash

[cash]

Longstreet's job, as far as I can see, is to give Lee his input, and then, once Lee makes the final decision, the subject is over and Longstreet's job is then to carry out the orders to the best of his ability whether he likes them or not.

Which he did.

Regards,
Cash

[K Hale]

Yes, he did! I am not anti-Longstreet as far as Gettysburg is concerned.

[bama46]

so far as southernors were concerned--

Longstreet had 3 strikes against him after the war


Strike 1-
Lee is beyond criticism. Someone must be the goat for the loss at Gettysburg and since Lee cannot be blamed, the goat is Longstreet

Strike 2-
Longstreet becomes a Republican

Strike 3-
Longstreet becomes the tax collector at the port of New Orleans

[K Hale]

He also led the New Orleans militia, consisting of blacks, against rioting ex-Confederate soldiers. That didn't have a pretty outcome.