Longstreet General Longstreet's opinion

Rebforever, sir:

I have zero knowledge if you have had any military background and even so, if in a command position in combat. Yet, to have been a good First Corps commander, one does question the Commanding General. Saying that -- before the heckles are raised; the importance is in how the questioning is presented. It does little good for either General as to sound off onto another General(s). The tactics of Cavalry, to which General Lee was last in command of, verses Infantry were different. It also provides a means of learning from the "teacher" and/or the commanding general--how he sees/what he sees --how does a potential replacement for Lee to learn, if he is not to question his teacher? As teacher "Stonewall" Jackson just repeated until it was memorized. Lee was an engineer and problem solved, frequently a quick calculation. Longstreet was many things, mainly Administrative and held every venue in the "Old Army" save artillery. Longstreet's alleged disobedience to Lee's orders cannot be fully proven as total rebellon or else the many reports would have reflected such, to include (as in this again narrow vision upon Gettysburg); Longstreet's failures in Lee's report to President Davis. Lee took, like a man -- like an officer, the blame and mentioned the loss of Stuart's services had a major impact on the overall battle. Again, only after Lee's death did the fangs show towards Longstreet and using him as a scape goat. President Davis did not believe such allegations and rode with Longstreet in parades as he was so villified by "the Lost Causers." Those who pointed fingers at Longstreet for the loss at Gettysburg, I found to have done much more damage to Lee than Longstreet. Why Early left his post which he was ordered to stay and be there for Stuart to meet up with; the moving of the ammunition train by General Pendleton without informing Col. E. P. Alexander, chief of artillery in charge of the "Pickett-Pettigrew" charge and so much more, which should remain in the Battle of Gettysburg Forum. General Lee could have at any time removed Longstreet from the Number 1 position as his replacement if he was killed or died. Recall please that Lee suffered health wise so, Lee had to have been investing in General Longstreet all the wisdom and judgment possible so he could take over and not have a repeat of when Jackson died, his commanders had no mentorship or inclusion as to force Lee to split command of "Jackson's Corps."

Further, General Lee often reversed and or rescind his orders on the battlefield. The famous phrase "If practical" was permission to use a on the spot judgment. Rarely, did Lee countermand those orders and or over-rode those orders. Again--Lee was teaching--even through other's errors. One learns more from mistakes than perfection at every task. Like Pickett said "...the enemy had something to do with it."

I prefer taking General R. E. Lee's stance with Longstreet--even through the trials of "Appomattox." Longstreet wouldn't abandon Lee. Lee wouldn't abandon Longstreet. These two men trusted each other in my opinion. Longstreet to Lee was as reliable as Traveller.

Since these long lost originals have been gone to us over 100 years now, I prefer to assume from what is documented between Davis, Lee and Longstreet, as proof that had Longstreet been so awful as claimed by the various sub-level generals of the CSA, et.al., some never having served in the ANV; let alone in Longstreet's Corps--the proof Longstreet was not cashiered, suspended, arrested, censored, chastised, court-martial and or charges applied during the war; there was no substance to the claims of others that Longstreet was disobedient and or rebelled against Lee and or Davis.

Question remains -- if a General does disobey an order and saves the army from destruction and win the battle verses, a General obeys an order, the army is totally destroyed and looses the battle -- which one would have been applauded by President Davis, the citizens of the Confederacy and the soldiers to whom lived/died through that battle?

Just my thoughts and opinions.

M. E. Wolf
Very well put. However, I stick with what I previously posted. That is my feelings from all the books I read.
I disagree with your statement on the hilited lines. Did Lee know Longstreet tried through his wife and Grants wife to reach a surrender? Longstreet was consorting with the enemy!!
 
Very well put. However, I stick with what I previously posted. That is my feelings from all the books I read.
I disagree with your statement on the hilited lines. Did Lee know Longstreet tried through his wife and Grants wife to reach a surrender? Longstreet was consorting with the enemy!!
Lee absolutely knew and Lee forwarded the information to Davis, who supported the effort. It was Lincoln who refused to hear of it. Grant forwarded the information and acted as instructed.
 
Last edited:
Very well put. However, I stick with what I previously posted. That is my feelings from all the books I read.
I disagree with your statement on the hilited lines. Did Lee know Longstreet tried through his wife and Grants wife to reach a surrender? Longstreet was consorting with the enemy!!

Rebforever, sir:

It goes back to the old "glass half full or half empty?"

The General's wives had their opinions about the war as well. In society circles, I have little doubt that General R. E. Lee (being so many Lees in that position), was ignorant of the ways of women and military affairs. Military bares a small community, especially in the "Old Army." I'm sure with the original 6,000 souls serving under the Old Flag knew each other's business from the past and present, such as during the War. How else would they have matched up so well against each other and have as many successes against each other, much like sparring with a classmate at West Point? But, in the end--it was still on the shoulders of the Generals and their Presidents, to whom directed the Military.

That said. These wives of Generals Longstreet and Grant had a marital connection to which no gentleman, let an officer interfere with. It would be no different than mother and father discussing each other's day and opinions on life, politics, etc., at the table. These were professional soldiers. Their duty would be independent of the influence of women in their lives yet, appreciate and care deeply about how their wives felt. I am certain that the women did more to reassure, comfort and praise their husbands yet--wished the war to be over as soon as possible.

Furthermore, ladies married to high ranking officers frequently were given the concerns of lower ranking officers to whom shared what their men were suffering under. It would have been extra intelligence on the civilian impact on the war effort. Soldiers had to obey yet, their opinions would be expressed in the letters and vice-versa. Since intelligence is all important in winning the war, it was just as important to gain through their wives who attended various charity and fund raising events. These officer's wives, perhaps have been overlooked by most writers of Civil War History. It must be mentioned, that Mrs. General (Mary) R. E. Lee, knitted socks for her husband and troops and many times in a parlor with other ladies. Both sides--the General's wives did their part, supporting their husbands away at war by supporting them at home.

No war has ever been won without the home support.

I must also add, reflecting back on my youth -- perhaps 'ancient history' to some reading this post yet; cannot help but add, that kids growing up in my neighborhood could not get away with much. The mothers would talk with each other over tea, garden clubs, evening parties/entertainment, parent-teacher meetings, over the fence, church, fund raisers and community supported events, e.g. flower shoes, bake sales, etc. Women during the Civil War would no doubt have similar means of transmitting gossip. The telephone just amplified the effect. :rofl::smile coffee: So, I'm sure the father/husband got intelligence of what was going on when he came home. As a kid, sitting at the table, I sure learned a lot of stuff on neighborhood kids (intelligence) by parents talking. That was taken to school and passed around as gossip (intelligence) and the flow back and forth continues to this day.

No such thing as a secret unless kept to yourself and shared with no other--to include the President(s) and other generals. :D

Just my opinions,
M. E. Wolf
 
Last edited:
Rebforever, sir:

It goes back to the old "glass half full or half empty?"

The General's wives had their opinions about the war as well. In society circles, I have little doubt that General R. E. Lee (being so many Lees in that position), was ignorant of the ways of women and military affairs. Military bares a small community, especially in the "Old Army." I'm sure with the original 6,000 souls serving under the Old Flag knew each other's business from the past and present, such as during the War. How else would they have matched up so well against each other and have as many successes against each other, much like sparring with a classmate at West Point? But, in the end--it was still on the shoulders of the Generals and their Presidents, to whom directed the Military.

That said. These wives of Generals Longstreet and Grant had a marital connection to which no gentleman, let an officer interfere with. It would be no different than mother and father discussing each other's day and opinions on life, politics, etc., at the table. These were professional soldiers. Their duty would be independent of the influence of women in their lives yet, appreciate and care deeply about how their wives felt. I am certain that the women did more to reassure, comfort and praise their husbands yet--wished the war to be over as soon as possible.

Furthermore, ladies married to high ranking officers frequently were given the concerns of lower ranking officers to whom shared what their men were suffering under. It would have been extra intelligence on the civilian impact on the war effort. Soldiers had to obey yet, their opinions would be expressed in the letters and vice-versa. Since intelligence is all important in winning the war, it was just as important to gain through their wives who attended various charity and fund raising events. These officer's wives, perhaps have been overlooked by most writers of Civil War History. It must be mentioned, that Mrs. General (Mary) R. E. Lee, knitted socks for her husband and troops and many times in a parlor with other ladies. Both sides--the General's wives did their part, supporting their husbands away at war by supporting them at home.

No war has ever been won without the home support.

I must also add, reflecting back on my youth -- perhaps 'ancient history' to some reading this post yet; cannot help but add, that kids growing up in my neighborhood could not get away with much. The mothers would talk with each other over tea, garden clubs, evening parties/entertainment, parent-teacher meetings, over the fence, church, fund raisers and community supported events, e.g. flower shoes, bake sales, etc. Women during the Civil War would no doubt have similar means of transmitting gossip. The telephone just amplified the effect. :rofl::smile coffee: So, I'm sure the father/husband got intelligence of what was going on when he came home. As a kid, sitting at the table, I sure learned a lot of stuff on neighborhood kids (intelligence) by parents talking. That was taken to school and passed around as gossip (intelligence) and the flow back and forth continues to this day.

No such thing as a secret unless kept to yourself and shared with no other--to include the President(s) and other generals. :D

Just my opinions,
M. E. Wolf
I hear you. I am not so sure Lee new what Longstreet was doing. Nothing here to change my mind and resort back to previous post.

Have a good day, all.
 
I hear you. I am not so sure Lee new what Longstreet was doing. Nothing here to change my mind and resort back to previous post.

Have a good day, all.
I would expect nothing less. I can't wait to meet you. What will it be Swords or pistols? Lol
 
Last edited:
In General Longstreet's book, "From Manassas to Appomattox" he stated that he thought J.E.B Stewart's death had a greater impact than did Stonewall Jackson's death. Your thoughts.

I think Longstreet is envious of Jackson because he was almost consider a god. While he was just the old war horse and Jackson was second only to Lee in the southern mythology.

But Longstreet had three boys after the war and named one after himself, one after Robert E Lee and one after Thomas Jackson... so he must have respected Jackson too...
 
I think Longstreet is envious of Jackson because he was almost consider a god. While he was just the old war horse and Jackson was second only to Lee in the southern mythology.

But Longstreet had three boys after the war and named one after himself, one after Robert E Lee and one after Thomas Jackson... so he must have respected Jackson too...
No doubt about it.
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top