Interview: Longstreet on Jackson

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

lelliott19

Captain
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Mar 15, 2013
Messages
5,968
Lonstreet on Jackson.JPG

On the occasion of Longstreet's visit to Antietam in 1893, a correspondent of the Washington Post recorded the General's opinions and criticisms on a number of topics. Here is what General Longstreet had to say about Stonewall Jackson.

"General, what about Stonewall Jackson? Was he as great a man as the people of the South thought?"

"Jackson was undoubtedly a man of military ability. He was one of the most effective generals on our side. Possibly he had not the requirements in a commander-in-chief, but no man in either army could accomplish more with 30,000 or 40,000 men in an independent command. But in joint movements he was not so reliable. He was very self-reliant, and needed to be alone to bring out his greatest qualities. He was very lucky in the success of his critical movements both in the Second Manassas campaign and at Chancellorsville." <more below>​

Note: This post is part of a series on Longstreet's opinions of various Generals, expressed during an interview with a Washington Post corespondent in 1893. Longstreet's opinions on various generals are posted in separate threads so they can be easily located - Bragg, Early, Ewell, Hill, Joe Johnson, Jeff Davis, Lee, McClellan, Sheridan and more.
Part 1 - Intro to the article
Part 2 - Longstreet on Bragg

Source: Reprinted from the Washington Post of June 1893, the article appeared in The Times Dispatch. (Richmond, VA.), November 12, 1911, page 3.
@Eleanor Rose @Union_Buff @FarawayFriend @War Horse @novushomus @GELongstreet @LeesWarhorse
 
Last edited:

lelliott19

Captain
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Mar 15, 2013
Messages
5,968
Longstreet on Jackson 2.JPG

Subsequently in the conversation, General Longstreet said:
"I suggested to General Lee that Stonewall Jackson be sent to the Trans-Mississippi instead of Kirby Smith, as the best fitted among all the Confederate generals to make headway against the Federals in that region. The suggestion met with General Lee's approbation, but Lee wanted Jackson himself."

This was new, and with considerable surprise I asked: "Why did you assume that Jackson was better equipped for command in the Western country, general, than any of your other officers?"

"He was the very man to organize a great war over there. He would have marched all over Missouri, invaded Kansas, Nebraska and Iowa. In fact the very vastness of the theater was well calculated to sharpen his faculties and give scope to Jackson's peculiar military talents. His rapid style of campaigning, suddenly appearing at remote and unexpected points, would have demoralized the Federals."​

Source: Reprinted from the Washington Post of June 1893, this article appeared in The Times Dispatch. (Richmond, VA.), November 12, 1911, page 3.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

BillO

Captain
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
6,407
Location
Quinton, VA.
View attachment 207727
Subsequently in the conversation, General Longstreet said:
"I suggested to General Lee that Stonewall Jackson be sent to the Trans-Mississippi instead of Kirby Smith, as the best fitted among all the Confederate generals to make headway against the Federals in that region. The suggestion met with General Lee's approbation, but Lee wanted Jackson himself."

This was new, and with considerable surprise I asked: "Why did you assume that Jackson was better equipped for command in the Western country, general, than any of your other officers?"

"He was the very man to organize a great war over there. He would have marched all over Missouri, invaded Kansas, Nebraska and Iowa. In fact the very vastness of the theater was well calculated to sharpen his faculties and give scope to Jackson's peculiar military talents. His rapid style of campaigning, suddenly appearing at remote and unexpected points, would have demoralized the Federals."​

Source: Reprinted from the Washington Post of June 1893, this article appeared in The Times Dispatch. (Richmond, VA.), November 12, 1911, page 3.
It would have had the added benefit of getting Jackson far, far away from both Longstreet and the newspapers!
 

Ole Miss

2nd Lieutenant
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Dec 9, 2017
Messages
2,805
Location
North Mississippi
Longstreet was in the Sunset of his life; and had suffered many wounds both physically and verbally so his comments must be taken with those facts in mind. He was an honest man who lived his life according to the lights he saw. He was by far the most controversial Confederate after the War but don't think he was during the War.
Regards
David
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

lelliott19

Captain
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Mar 15, 2013
Messages
5,968
I had never seen this, fascinating. Jackson in the western theater, imagine the possibilities.
So Old Pete not only wanted Jackson sent away, but as far away from him as humanly possible in the war. Wow. I had never heard this.
Right!?!? I had never heard/seen it before either. And there's lots more of the same kind of stuff in the article. So far, I've only posted the Intro to the article and Longstreet on Bragg and, of course, this one on Jackson, but there's plenty more to come so stay tuned. :thumbsup:
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Yankeedave

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Dec 3, 2012
Messages
4,764
Location
Colorado
"He was the very man to organize a great war over there. He would have marched all over Missouri, invaded Kansas, Nebraska and Iowa. In fact the very vastness of the theater was well calculated to sharpen his faculties and give scope to Jackson's peculiar military talents. His rapid style of campaigning, suddenly appearing at remote and unexpected points, would have demoralized the Federals."

I have to agree... TJJ would have been a success...and be away from the bullet that killed him.
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
8,661
Location
Hannover, Germany
I agree with Longstreet.
I do also.
Although calling Jackson “a man of military ability“ is a of course huge understatement!
But Jackson was a strange guy, he did not drink and did not gamble , while early in the war before he lost three of his kids in one week, which changed him greatly, Longstreets HQ was a place where neither whiskey nor poker games were uncommon. I can imagine that Longstreet and Jackson did not harmonize too well on a personal level.
We had an interesting thread on the Longstreet/Jackson relationship a while ago:
https://civilwartalk.com/threads/the-relationship-of-jackson-and-longstreet.123881/
 

War Horse

Captain
Forum Host
Member of the Year
Regtl. Quartermaster Gettysburg 2017
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
6,629
Location
Lexington, SC
View attachment 207727
Subsequently in the conversation, General Longstreet said:
"I suggested to General Lee that Stonewall Jackson be sent to the Trans-Mississippi instead of Kirby Smith, as the best fitted among all the Confederate generals to make headway against the Federals in that region. The suggestion met with General Lee's approbation, but Lee wanted Jackson himself."

This was new, and with considerable surprise I asked: "Why did you assume that Jackson was better equipped for command in the Western country, general, than any of your other officers?"

"He was the very man to organize a great war over there. He would have marched all over Missouri, invaded Kansas, Nebraska and Iowa. In fact the very vastness of the theater was well calculated to sharpen his faculties and give scope to Jackson's peculiar military talents. His rapid style of campaigning, suddenly appearing at remote and unexpected points, would have demoralized the Federals."​

Source: Reprinted from the Washington Post of June 1893, this article appeared in The Times Dispatch. (Richmond, VA.), November 12, 1911, page 3.
Seems accurate to me.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

War Horse

Captain
Forum Host
Member of the Year
Regtl. Quartermaster Gettysburg 2017
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
6,629
Location
Lexington, SC
So Old Pete not only wanted Jackson sent away, but as far away from him as humanly possible in the war. Wow. I had never heard this.
Don’t forget, he also wanted to go where, in his perception the real threat existed. This doesn’t suprise me at all.
 
Last edited:

War Horse

Captain
Forum Host
Member of the Year
Regtl. Quartermaster Gettysburg 2017
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
6,629
Location
Lexington, SC
Was there a dislike between them? From what I have read, there wasnt much interaction.
There was certainly a distaste. On more than one occasion, Jackson was tardy to the ball. They were a great tandem which Lee recognized. Between the two of them the room was to small for the two of them. Lol
 
Top