Longstreet Interview: Longstreet says Early "was a marplot"

Good stand at I Manassas
Pulled Hill out the fire at Fredericksburg.
Saved Stonewall Jackson at Cedar Mountain by moving his army in position on Banks left flank .
Fought well a II Manassas.
Held off Sedgewick's corp with 1 division at 2nd Fredericksburg in the Chancellersville battle asked Lee for help and got a division to run Sedgewick back across The Rappahanock River.
Strongly held his line in the Antietam battle in the West Woods.
For a start.
It was Early's Division that broke the Eleventh Corps on Day 1 at Gettysburg.
 
Gee thanks, Eleanor!!!! As if we needed him!

Gee I didn't think about how that might sound to my lovely neighbors to the North. Sorry Lorna! :giggle:

Now for a few more thoughts on Jubal...

Moxey Sorrel wrote of him: “Jubal Early….was one of the ablest soldiers in the army. Intellectually he was perhaps the peer of the best for strategic combinations, but he lacked the ability to handle troops effectively in the field….His irritable disposition and biting tongue made him anything but popular.

Source: Robert I. Girardi. The Civil War Generals: Comrades, Peers, Rivals-In Their Own Words, p.206.


Early’s hatred for anything to do with the North was demonstrated when he “refused even to donate funds to a monument to Robert E. Lee in Richmond when he learned that the pedestal would be carved from Maine granite.”

Source: Guelzo Allen C. Fateful Lightening: A New History of the Civil War Era and Reconstruction Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York 2012 p.526.


While serving as Governor, James Kemper, found Early’s views so dangerous that he begged him not to attend the unveiling of a monument to Stonewall Jackson in 1875. Kemper wrote to Early, “for the sake of public peace and harmony, I beg, beseech and implore you, for God’s sake stay at home.”

Source: Charles C. Osborne, Jubal: The Life and Times of General Jubal A. Early, CSA, Defender of the Lost Cause p.418.


One of the worst things about Early in my mind is that his ideas live on in the minds of many Americans, who like him have not reconciled with the results of the Civil War and who are still susceptible to his message. Early set the example for them:

Like an Old Testament prophet, Jubal supported the message by his own extreme example – his “constancy” and intransigence, his unremitting hatred for Grant (even after Jefferson Davis had forgiven the Illinoisan), his refusal to be pardoned or reconstructed or to regard the North, at least in the abstract, as anything but an evil empire.”

Source: Charles C. Osborne, Jubal: The Life and Times of General Jubal A. Early, CSA, Defender of the Lost Cause p.476.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if there really was a Mrs. Early to put up with him. I am sure that putting up with him was a full time job. Early was a fighter, but not so much a winner. He did not quit, but I think his men lost faith in him eventually I would say that Longstreet was no fan of him, neither was Armistead, who broke a mess plate over his head at West Point. I think he made a few enemies to say the least.

I'd liked to been there when Armistead did that! GELongstreet pointed out a good thread on Early's family life - apparently he never married but he loved them every one!

I love 19th century insults - marplot! Longstreet could have said a lot worse and Early wouldn't have been able to challenge him to a duel over it - it would all be true. But he was one of Lee's most pugnacious generals, always ready to fight. If Lee pointed him in the direction of such an affair, he'd be there with bells on his toes. However, I wouldn't rank him as one of Lee's best. He wasn't in the best of positions to be firing shots over Longstreet's bows about Gettysburg, either. He'd heard cannons firing in the near distance but didn't check it out. If he had, he'd have found Lee's missing cavalryman - it was Stuart having a skirmish. He was supposed to connect with Ewell, but Early was the next best thing!
 
I think @Rebforever was referring to the fact that in July 1864 Early and his men made it before the gates of Washington, just 6 miles away from the White House. There he rested his men, allowing the Union troops to draw reinforcements - otherwise Washington would have been attacked - and who knows what may have been come from that.
No other Confederate General made it so close to Washington.
http://www.historynet.com/jubal-early
He certainly made it close to the city. However a pause on his part or no pause, I don’t believe the city was ever in any real danger. Unfortunitly the same could not be said for Chambersburg.
 
Gee I didn't think about how that might sound to my lovely neighbors to the North. Sorry Lorna! :giggle:

Now for a few more thoughts on Jubal...

Moxey Sorrel wrote of him: “Jubal Early….was one of the ablest soldiers in the army. Intellectually he was perhaps the peer of the best for strategic combinations, but he lacked the ability to handle troops effectively in the field….His irritable disposition and biting tongue made him anything but popular.

Source: Robert I. Girardi. The Civil War Generals: Comrades, Peers, Rivals-In Their Own Words, p.206.


Early’s hatred for anything to do with the North was demonstrated when he “refused even to donate funds to a monument to Robert E. Lee in Richmond when he learned that the pedestal would be carved from Maine granite.”

Source: Guelzo Allen C. Fateful Lightening: A New History of the Civil War Era and Reconstruction Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York 2012 p.526.


While serving as Governor, James Kemper, found Early’s views so dangerous that he begged him not to attend the unveiling of a monument to Stonewall Jackson in 1875. Kemper wrote to Early, “for the sake of public peace and harmony, I beg, beseech and implore you, for God’s sake stay at home.”

Source: Charles C. Osborne, Jubal: The Life and Times of General Jubal A. Early, CSA, Defender of the Lost Cause p.418.


One of the worst things about Early in my mind is that his ideas live on in the minds of many Americans, who like him have not reconciled with the results of the Civil War and who are still susceptible to his message. Early set the example for them:

Like an Old Testament prophet, Jubal supported the message by his own extreme example – his “constancy” and intransigence, his unremitting hatred for Grant (even after Jefferson Davis had forgiven the Illinoisan), his refusal to be pardoned or reconstructed or to regard the North, at least in the abstract, as anything but an evil empire.”

Source: Charles C. Osborne, Jubal: The Life and Times of General Jubal A. Early, CSA, Defender of the Lost Cause p.476.
The bitter old man certainly influence one Douglas Southall Freeman!
 
Nobody has mentioned what he said about Ewell. He's all over the place on his assesment of him. He literally put Ewell on the same level as Stonewall., he was more reliable than Hill in corps command, but lost all his efficiency when he lost his leg

Well...which is it??

I don't see him being overly inconsistent. He says that Ewell was more reliable than Hill, Jackson's equal tactically but inferior independently, but lost much of his efficiency with the loss of his leg (although I think that this is overstating the matter; Ewell did fairly well until his health began to deteriorate in the spring of 1864 and then his breakdown at Spotsylvania), and he was hindered by Early. I actually agree with a lot of this assessment, aside from the missing leg issue.

Ryan
 
He certainly made it close to the city. However a pause on his part or no pause, I don’t believe the city was ever in any real danger.

No, sure it was not and it never was Lee's or anyone's goal to take Washington, they did not want to conquer the US, they wanted to be left alone. Nevertheless, Early had come that far and even if Longstreet thought Early was a man with a "limited mental horizon", this was something! :smile:
 
Longstreet had to do something to prop himself up.

Not really. He was driven by a sense of honor and duty and sincerely believed that the South would be best served by acknowledging their Northern victors and working to reunify the country. He didn't try to "spin" a version of the war to make the losing side feel better. He was a man about it. :wink:
 
Not really. He was driven by a sense of honor and duty and sincerely believed that the South would be best served by acknowledging their Northern victors and working to reunify the country. He didn't try to "spin" a version of the war to make the losing side feel better. He was a man about it. :wink:
He made a remark to a News Paper in 1866 about General Lee that started the attacks later on himself.
I will put that up when I get back to my desk computer.
 
Not really. He was driven by a sense of honor and duty and sincerely believed that the South would be best served by acknowledging their Northern victors and working to reunify the country. He didn't try to "spin" a version of the war to make the losing side feel better. He was a man about it. :wink:
His memoir says things that are not true. There are volumes here in the archives also.
 
Back
Top