 |
| (Source) |
But my kids know me pretty well and have a good sense of what the old man might find interesting, they don't let me stay in a rut, that's for sure.
I started reading it almost immediately, Longstreet's record during the war is looked at. But this is not a history of the ACW, rather it is a look at one of that war's outstanding personalities.
Longstreet was very controversial in the postwar, tending to side with those who wanted to reconcile and not those who wanted to simmer in old grievances.
A fascinating book, I highly recommend it.
In other news ...
LUSH got us tickets to go see the Foo Fighters up in Fenway in July.
I was put off by the ticket prices when they first announced this tour, apparently she was not.
Am I excited?
Oh yeah, you betcha.
Lee used to refer to Longstreet as " My old warhorse." I believe that even though Lee was deified during ans after the war, Longstreet was his superior strategically. Lee was talented tactically, though no human being could live up to his post war reputation, but he was blessed with less than competent opponents for most of the conflict. His overall vision of how to conduct the war was seriously flawed and he bears a certain amount of responsibility for how things ended. When Longstreet disagreed with Lee, such as at Gettysburg, he was almost always right and Lee wrong. As you said, his contributions were discounted by the Southern fabulists, also called the Bitter Enders, after the war because of his "betrayal" of the cause, or at least of their perception of it. Starting immediately after the war they pushed a narrative that became truth for many and still has a great del of influence today.
ReplyDeleteWell said.
DeleteAnother visit to this blog is going to cost me $$........(sigh). Saw that book was released recently also Sarge, the bookshelves are already groaning.....:)
ReplyDeleteHeh, I know the feeling.
DeleteI (for whatever the reason) started wondering just where Rhode Island was (besides the east coast..) and pulled up google maps (google makes it all easy & that makes me lazy) to take a look.
ReplyDeleteNot a real big place is it? I left myself a note to look up & read about how Rhode Island came to be.
Anyway I needed to leave a comment & check the "Notify me" box because this blog has (historically) some of the best comment reading for the day and I just couldn't think of anything else to say & check that box.
Little Rhody is the smallest state in the Union, square mileage wise. It has an interesting history. King Philip's War, slave trading (yes, in a Yankee state), smuggling on Narragansett Bay was bad enough to require the full time attention of the Royal Navy. there's lots more. It's also a very "blue" state, voting for the Ds regardless of issue.
Delete"(yes, in a Yankee state)"
DeleteJust about all Yankee "Old Money" is based on some connection to the slave trade, be it shipwright, chandler, cordier, or financial backing. Plus northern financial institutions benefited from cotton production in the south.
Slavers were putting out from New York at least as late as 1859. Search "Northern complicity in the slave trade."
It was big money.
DeleteLongstreet was a fascinating person, a good soldier and great general. I think you'll come away with some gems; good on your progeny for knowing you better than you do; both in books and concert prices.
ReplyDeleteHad Lee followed Longstreet's counsel and disengaged at Gettysburg, our history would be very different.
Boat Guy
I always liked Longstreet's concept of the strategic offensive but acting defensively tactically. Force the Union Army to engage in costly frontal attacks by forcing the issue strategically. Invade, then make them force you out. Lee had far too much confidence in his army, mostly because before Gettysburg he had faced a number of really bad generals.
DeleteSarge, opening up a book to start that one has anticipated reading is one of life's glorious pleasures. The Ravishing Mrs. TB bought me two volumes of Diodorus Siculus. I read the first one on the plane this week. I was almost joyous when I cracked the first page (also, apparently, singing Handel's Messiah at the top of your lungs in a plane is frowned upon. Who knew.).
ReplyDeleteConcerts are terribly expensive now. The Ravishing Mrs. TB has been to several last year - fortunately her "bands" are on the "Final Gasp" tours, which helps.
A new book is a treasure, an old book is a cherished friend.
DeleteThere were a lot of soldiers, officers and enlisted, who, after the war, just wanted reconciliation.
ReplyDeleteIt should be noted that even (evil to the Southerners) Lincoln wanted reconciliation, no worse enemy in war, no better friend in peace, until some idiot managed to give him heavy metal poisoning.
Lots of photos of veterans' groups from both sides shaking hands and picnicing after the war.
Then there was the monument of reconciliation at Arlington. Was. As the Dems had that one removed recently.
There was a small, hard core, group in the South who didn't want reconciliation, who didn't want equal rights for blacks, and were determined to fight the federal government in every way possible, except, of course, militarily, that question having been settled.
DeleteI have mixed feelings about that statue, having seen it. I see no reconciliation in it.
Sarge,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the info. I'm not going the $28 pathway. Think I'll go the $12 Kindle version. I also carry my iPad with me virtually all the time, so more likely to be able to read it from there. But, I trust your judgement (book wise anyway ;-) ) so will be looking forward to it.
juvat
It's eye-opening in many ways. (As I read it the thought, "the more things change ..." keeps popping up.)
DeletePainting with a broad brush here, most of the Confederate leaders, once hostilities were ended, wanted reconciliation. Longstreet's unpopularity was more about his support of the politics of the vindictive Reconstruction and his criticism of Lee than wanting reconciliation.
ReplyDeleteAt least in my semi-informed opinion. I'll freely admit that I've been no more than a dilettante on him.
Way too broad of a brush. The defeated South couldn't get over the defeat, they wanted to deify Lee. Longstreet was good friends with Grant, he wanted Reconstruction to go well, carpetbaggers from the North and Lost Cause fanatics in the South wanted it to fail. Longstreet got in the way.
Delete(Don McCollor) Many of the people of the south did want reconciliation. There is a small book (1868) 'Sgt. Bates' March'. A Union veteran undertook to walk through the South from Vicksburg to Washington, alone and unarmed carrying an American flag (that was a brave man). The only place he was not warmly greeted and feted was in Washington DC.
DeleteMost of them wanted to be left alone, particularly by Northern carpetbaggers. Reconciliation to what? Northern laws? Northern values?
DeleteThe South wasn't happy with the outcome. Many still aren't.