Longstreet Rehabilitation of Longstreet's Popular Reputation

Based on my memory of the book he performed both roles. Perhaps with Longstreet he only was in charge of artillery. On the other hand Porters memoirs would make for good background on Longstreet.
Leftyhunter

Porter was trained as an engineer, as all West Point graduates were. His first job in the confederate army was as an engineer, but under Longstreet he was an artillerist and became Longstreet's Chief of Artillery.
 
Have you read Porter Alexanders memoirs ? Gen. Alexander was Longstreet's chief engineer for quite a while and thus knew Longstreet very well. Linconities and rebels by Robert McKenzie covers the Knoxville debacle very well.
Leftyhunter

Certainly have referred to it. It's available on googlebooks for free https://books.google.com/books?id=kuopAAAAYAAJ&dq=porter alexander memoir&pg=PR7#v=onepage&q&f=false
Unfortunately for Longstreet's reputation, Alexander's didn't publish his memoir until well after Longstreet died and the damage had been done.
 
Certainly have referred to it. It's available on googlebooks for free https://books.google.com/books?id=kuopAAAAYAAJ&dq=porter alexander memoir&pg=PR7#v=onepage&q&f=false
Unfortunately for Longstreet's reputation, Alexander's didn't publish his memoir until well after Longstreet died and the damage had been done.
One could argue generals like everyone else have good days and bad days. certainly Burnside and unfortunly the AoP had a bad day at Fredricksbug. Longstreet had a mini Fredricksburg at Knoxville. I have not studied his other independent campaigns. One has to add up his plus's and minus and make their own conclusions. Off hand Longstreets venture on his own was not a rousing sucecess. That does not mean he had some good days.
Leftyhunter
 
One could argue generals like everyone else have good days and bad days. certainly Burnside and unfortunly the AoP had a bad day at Fredricksbug. Longstreet had a mini Fredricksburg at Knoxville. I have not studied his other independent campaigns. One has to add up his plus's and minus and make their own conclusions. Off hand Longstreets venture on his own was not a rousing sucecess. That does not mean he had some good days.
Leftyhunter

As far as I'm concerned all of them made some bad calls. They were only human...even General Lee.
 
We judge historical characters due to our assimilation of facts and prejudices.
Because Longstreet 's post Civil War activities, many make undue criticism of his ability as a military general.
I judge him like the rest of the Civil War Heroes on both sides. He was human, therefore he had both good and bad points.
Lee chose him as Stonewalls replacement. He must have pleased Gen. Lee. So he was slow at Gettysburg, so what, so were others, not only slow but also reckless. He fought for what he believed. He was reconstructed early, leaving the war behind.
 
We judge historical characters due to our assimilation of facts and prejudices.
Because Longstreet 's post Civil War activities, many make undue criticism of his ability as a military general.
I judge him like the rest of the Civil War Heroes on both sides. He was human, therefore he had both good and bad points.
Lee chose him as Stonewalls replacement. He must have pleased Gen. Lee. So he was slow at Gettysburg, so what, so were others, not only slow but also reckless. He fought for what he believed. He was reconstructed early, leaving the war behind.

It's hard- I think- to separate commander's personality and sometimes the uniform they wore from the genuine work they did.

Longstreet was human- he could be obstinate, stubborn, perhaps back-stabbing (towards Bragg) and self-important and maybe a little slow, maybe he didn't handle Reconstruction 100% right, and maybe he got bitter towards the end- he could also be reliable, loyal, hard-hitting, intelligent, a good friend and husband, someone who understood the importance of reconciliation after the war, someone who had a lot of reasons to be bitter and someone who Lee trusted greatly. The former traits don't necessarily cancel out the later.
 
It's hard- I think- to separate commander's personality and sometimes the uniform they wore from the genuine work they did.

Longstreet was human- he could be obstinate, stubborn, perhaps back-stabbing (towards Bragg) and self-important and maybe a little slow, maybe he didn't handle Reconstruction 100% right, and maybe he got bitter towards the end- he could also be reliable, loyal, hard-hitting, intelligent, a good friend and husband, someone who understood the importance of reconciliation after the war, someone who had a lot of reasons to be bitter and someone who Lee trusted greatly. The former traits don't necessarily cancel out the later.
Nothing wrong with his reconstruction work. I only wish he and others could of made reconstruction work. Unfortunately the US public was burned out and sold out its black citizens.
Leftyhunter
 
The problem with bringing up Knoxville is that he was arguably set up to fail. Bragg was just trying to get rid of him and didn't provide him with anything remotely resembling sufficient resources.
Sorry it took so long . I will quote from" Lincolnites and rebels a divided town in the American Civil war Robert McKenzie Oxford University press. P.159 "Had McLaws moved more promptly the rebels might have blocked Burnside's retreat and smashed the Union troops from both front and rear". Interestingly enough no more the 3,500 Union troops of the 9th corps was able to hold off converging Confederate divisions from noon to dusk so that the other Union troops could reach Knoxville. So much for one of our posters who claims that CSA troops are supermen and Union troops are mere cowards. P.160 "An officer in a Mas regiment observed Knoxville was not in a defensible position. Captain Orlando Poe Gen.Burnsides chief engineer met ever unit and assigned them a task to entrench or build fortifications. Union Col.Sanders with just 700 men many armed with repeaters holds off Confederate troops for 36 hours giving Union forces time to dig in. Longstreet does not attack Knoxville but instead digs in himself.P. 161 two Union officers though that Longstreet could have taken Knoxville. Even capt.Poe stated that Union forces"where only tolerably under cover".
I am no expert on gen.Longstreet but has I mentioned before everyone has bad days and for Longstreet the battle of Knoxville was not his finest hour. perhaps the debacle at Knoxville was not Brags fault.
Leftyhunter
 
everyone has bad days and for Longstreet the battle of Knoxville was not his finest hour. perhaps the debacle at Knoxville was not Brags fault.
Leftyhunter
I certainly agree with that sentiment, and I do think that Knoxville probably could have fallen to Longstreet, but I also think that so far as Longstreet and Bragg knew that wasn't the case. Perhaps it would be better to say that for Longstreet, Knoxville wasn't a failure of strategy, but of intelligence-gathering.
 
I certainly agree with that sentiment, and I do think that Knoxville probably could have fallen to Longstreet, but I also think that so far as Longstreet and Bragg knew that wasn't the case. Perhaps it would be better to say that for Longstreet, Knoxville wasn't a failure of strategy, but of intelligence-gathering.
I think your right. I would have to reread what Gen.Alexanders memoirs on Knoxville and also of Longstreet since Alexander knew Longstreet very well.
Leftyhunter
 
Back
Top