From Manassas to Appomattox: Memoirs of the Civil War in America: Longstreet's Personal Account of the Civil War

by James Longstreet

First published in the year 1895, the present book 'From Manassas to Appomattox: Memoirs of the Civil War in America' was written by Longstreet. It has various memoirs of the personalities involved with the American Civil War.

Genres: Civil War, History, American Civil War, Biography, Memoir, Nonfiction, American History

501 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1896

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name. See this thread for more information.

Born in South Carolina, James Longstreet graduated from West Point in 1842 and fought in the Mexican War. He resigned from the U.S. army in June 1861 and joined the Confederate army. Spending most of his Civil War service with the Army of Northern Virginia, by the fall of 1862 he was a lieutenant general and commander of the army's First Corps. He surrendered with the rest of the army at Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865.

After the war Longstreet joined the Republican Party, accepted jobs with the U.S. federal government, and criticized his former commander Robert E. Lee in several postwar writings. These actions made him unpopular with many Southerners.

Reviews

[Creighton · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have been reading a lot of books on the American Civil War lately, after several years of focusing on other conflicts, I realize why I keep coming back to this conflict, and that I'll always be interested in it.


James Longstreet's memoirs were a great read and I am glad I decided to finally read them after having them on the shelf for many years. Longstreet gives some great insight into the war, gives his judgements about certain actions, certain battles, and he addresses some of the post war criticism of his actions. I wanted to read this book because I was curious as to what his comments were on Gettysburg and Antietam, both of which fascinate me as battles, but I also appreciated his entire work that focused on the war. This book is important to read for civil war buffs, and they should read it. One can judge Longstreet's bias or his questionability on accounts of certain battles and/or his descriptions of his peers, however, I think he doesn't really show it. Longstreet definitely is not playing a blame game, nor is he trying to make himself seem infallible, and nor is his book filled with literary vomit consisting of slander. Overall, I believe Longstreet was a good corps commander, and I think this book was written well.

At first, when I picked up this book, I was filled with fascination at how it would turn out; as I progressed into it, I felt a little apprehensive about whether I liked it or not, but once I finished it, I knew I liked it. It goes to show I have to read a whole book through before I can truly judge whether I like it or not.

[Jonathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Unjustifiably trashed by the Lee groupies, "Old Pete" was reliable on both sides of the ball.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

After spending years on campaign to win your new nation’s independence, after the war unsuccessful conclusion your former comrades bury you after you decided to support the victors. From Manassas to Appomattox: Memoirs of the Civil War in America was James Longstreet’s answer to the post-war criticisms leveled by those who created the Lost Cause myth.

Longstreet gives a quick overview of his early life, his time in West Point, and his service in the Mexican War before going into his resignation from the US Army and journey from New Mexico to Virginia to join the Confederate Army. As the title of the memoir indicates, Longstreet was a participant of the first major battle of the war at First Manassas and he described his own actions throughout the battle as well as the overall course of the confrontation. Longstreet would continue this throughout the book, but also added in his interactions with Lee, Jackson, A.P. Hill, and various Confederate government officials including President Jefferson Davis especially when defending his actions around Gettysburg which Lost Cause proponents claimed cost Lee and thus the South victory. Longstreet also talked about his strategic view of the war as the conflict progressed and viewed the situation in the West where the war could be changed for the better of the Confederates but found his superiors neither supportive before Gettysburg nor once allowed to help in the West undermining the efforts of Confederate forces. Longstreet’s detailed account of the end of the war in early 1865 brought the desperate fight in full view until the surrender before acknowledging that his friendship with General Grant started up again right after the surrender that helped him going forward in his life.

Given this was a memoir and a defense of his own actions against the attacks of those who were political motivated to raise up Lee and Jackson as part of the Lost Cause meant they needed someone to actively undermine them and thus caused the South to lose, one must think hard about what Longstreet is writing through this lens. While fighting for his own reputation, Longstreet was not afraid to show the human fallibility of both Lee and Jackson though not at the expense of their accomplishments nor to aggrandize his own except when the reputations of the troops under his command was at stake. Longstreet’s strategic view of the war, especially the West but also in the Gettysburg campaign, were a fascinating read and interesting to think about. If there is one criticism of the edition that I read it was with the battle maps included as they were hard follow given poor shading and small print which did not really distinguish between Union and Confederate forces.

From Manassas to Appomattox is obviously not an unbiased account of the war from the view of a Confederate general, yet James Longstreet unlike some other Confederates aimed to show the flaws of the Confederacy instead of creating a mythos of a Lost Cause.

[James M. · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's a great read but you'd better have your Civil War Battle maps with you because Longstreet goes into great detail about the deployment, maneuver and disposition of every brigade in every battle for both sides which sometimes bogs down the narrative.

[Lance Kinzer · Rating 4 out of 5]

A definite must read for anyone interested in the Civil War. Full of fascinating insights, the book is a true treasure trove of information on numerous aspects of the war. That said, and even as someone highly sympathetic to Longstreet, the book does suffer from some weaknesses. At times he becomes bogged down in order of battle issues that can easily be gleaned from other sources, while neglecting to give us the kind of unique and personal insight he is so well positioned to provide. And most unfortunately once we get to Gettysburg, and then for much of the balance of the book, the desire for score settling becomes a distraction and a bit unseemly. All of this is understandable as there is no question Longstreet was poorly treated by many offer the war, but none the less this work suffers from his desire for self justification. Still, the book is endlessly fascinating for what it teaches about the conduct of the war, the manner in which strategic and tactical deductions of monumental import were made, and the personality and character of one of this seminal war's greatest Generals.

[Jack L Stevens · Rating 5 out of 5]

The other side of being called a traitor



I grew up hearing stories about General Longstreet. And along with most of the Confederate Generals he was one of the best. General Jackson may have been Lee's Right arm, in the precursor to shock and awe, Longstreet was the man who Lee could use to fix the Army of the Potomac, and if he would have been supported in Tennessee, he would have routed the Western Union Armies. His tactics today, are still looked at during planning for Operations. Operation Longstreet in Iraq in August 2003 by 1st Brigade 1st Armored Division, took into account, on how to take a Brigade from the east side of Baghdad and deploy it West of Baghdad, without raising alarms of insurgents. It followed those same principals used when Longstreets Corp moved from Virginia to South of the Chickamauga River. These seniors should be required reading for any future officer entering the military services.

[Adelaide Mcginnity · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unless you have a fantastic knowledge of the geography of Virginia, Maryland, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania as it was in the 1860s, Longstreet's descriptions of his campaigns can be a little opaque. Fortunately, the American Battlefield Trust has a series of Youtube videos illustrating the deployments of the various troops during the important engagements; watching these in tandem with reading this book dramatically improved both experiences.

Still, even though the prose can be both a bit dry at times (and a bit purple and maudlin at other times), I found I enjoyed it, even though I was usually a bit lost geographically. No doubt the enormous heaping of salt that Longstreet fills his books with helped; it is impossible not to notice his utter contempt for Jubal Early, Fitzhugh Lee, and a few other Virginians, and his bitter, often prickly defenses of his own conduct while lambasting theirs added a good deal of enjoyable color.

[Aaron Crofut · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was decent, though I would more highly recommend Alexander's work. Unfortunately, Longstreet often comes off sounding defensive, which he undoubtedly was. His personal account at Appomattox makes it worth reading, as he wasn't with Lee but with the troops awaiting word. His reunion with Grant is touching if you can picture it.

I do wish we could know more about what was going on in his head during this horrific events. While not entirely detached and clinical, his accounts really leave me wondering what he was feeling during these battles and the aftermath. Could they really be so comfortable with death?

[Johnny · Rating 4 out of 5]

For years, this has been one of those books I was going to get to. I suppose it was a recent trip to Gettysburg that spurred me to finally crack the dingy-looking pages of a bookstore special, the memoirs of General James Longstreet, From Manassas to Appomattox. There is a raw power to this material that sometimes overwhelms. There is self-interest in this account, an alibi-intensive recounting, that sometimes pervades the narrative, but there is also that sense of helplessness, of waste, that surrounds the account. In one sense, I avoided this book out of denial. Longstreet was a Confederate general. I may have thought that reading such a volume would offer approval of the “Rebel” cause. Since my own ancestors lived in the mountains of Georgia at the time, I somehow sensed that I would incur a certain amount of guilt in the reading.

I know this is illogical. In wargames, using map-like boards on table-tops, moving miniature figures across model railroad-like terrain, and commanding troops on my computer screen, I never sensed that I was giving in to the darker portion of my heritage. That was always “representative” of history. It was close enough to learn, but not close enough to be locked into the perspective of the time. With General Longstreet’s perspective, one senses the waste, the futility, the self-absorbed ambition, and the incompetence within that ragtag army. For some reason, it hits me harder because the reader is experiencing these battles from the perspective of someone who wanted to win and was frustrated when it wasn’t happening. And, personally, it often felt like Longstreet was very quick to pass the blame (or conversely, to claim credit).

I often wondered why so many men who had been trained and served as Union officers (such as Longstreet himself) were allowed to resign the army and enlist with the Confederate cause, but hadn’t seen the clear-cut reason until I read, “…private soldiers could not go without authority from the War Department; that it was different with commissioned offiers, in that the latter could resign their commissions, and when the resignations were accepted, they were independent of military authority, and could, as other citizens, take such action as they might choose…” (p. 30).

These memoirs contain some interesting suggestions. Longstreet believed that a spy in Colonel Stuart’s Confederate cavalry had tipped off Union General McCall of a raid on a supply depot in Dranesville (p. 62), leading to what Longstreet called the first Union success of the war and McClellan’s largely undeserved reputation as “the Young Napoleon.” (p. 63) Longstreet also cites the account of General Rains (of D. H. Hill’s division) finding an abandoned ammunition wagon with some artillery shells which hadn’t been fired and sensitive fuse primers. By burying them in the midst of some brush and tree limbs, the general was able to transform ammunition that couldn’t be used by the Confederate troops into what we would call IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices) today and probably suggested “mines” to those in Longstreet’s day. The devices were apparently successful as a group of Federal cavalry are reputed to have set them off and taken casualties (p. 79). I hadn’t thought about that tactic in ACW terms.

Ever consider that movie trope (in westerns and war movies in particular) where a character puts a hat on a stick to draw fire or uses an impromptu designed “dummy” to draw fire? Longstreet tells about the creation of a literal “straw man” that the Confederates named “Julius Caesar” designed to draw Federal artillery fire (pp. 325-6). Maybe that trope isn’t as far-fetched as one would think. Do you remember stories and pictures about barefoot Confederate soldiers? Longstreet confirms, “…the poorly protected feet of our soldiers sometimes left bitter marks along the roads.” (p. 526) On the same page he details ordering men without shoes to remain as camp guards instead of marching into battle, but “…many preferred to march with their comrades.”

I really enjoyed some of the interesting (but sometimes gross) anecdotes told by the general in this volume. Longstreet seemed inordinately interested in the third horse shot out from under General D. H. Hill on the first day of Antietam. Lee, Longstreet, and some others were reconnoitering from the crest of a hillside on foot while D. H. Hill was riding on horseback. Longstreet states that he asked Hill to ride a bit aside from them lest he draw fire on the whole group. A single cannon shot rang out and Longstreet claims he said, “There comes one for General Hill!” Then, the shot took off both of the horse’s forelegs. Even then, when Hill was having trouble extricating himself, Longstreet makes the suggestion of how he could get loose (p. 254).

Did you ever think about how security was handled in that pre-shredder era? Longstreet recounts: “Some of the Confederates were a little surprised that a matter of such magnitude [an operational order from Lee] was intrusted [sic] to pen-and-ink despatches [sic]. The copy sent me was carefully read, then used as some persons use a little cut of tobacco, to be assured that others could not have the benefit of its content.” (p. 213) How about the recoil in cannons packed with double-shot? In a desperate, last-ditch effort to hold off a Yankee advance, a gunnery captain named Miller double-shot the two cannons he commanded and, according to Longstreet, “…his guns at the discharge leaped in the air from ten to twelve inches.” (p. 251) The recoiling cannons were just so easy to picture!

In a testament to the times, Longstreet cannot resist preaching a sermon comparing the situation with the conquest of Israel. Alas, he mixes his metaphors by first comparing the Confederates to the inhabitants of Jericho (“…was scarcely a greater miracle than the transformation of the conquering army of the South into a horde of disordered fugitives before an army that two weeks earlier was flying to cover under its homeward ramparts” – p. 283) and then, similar to the army of Israel which was immediately routed at Ai (“Providence helps those who can avail themselves of His tender care, but permits those who will to turn from Him in their own arrogance. ….in self-confidence, they lost sight of His helping hand, and in contempt of the enemy dispersed the army, …given up to the reward of vainglory.” – pp. 283-4). This excerpt demonstrates how pervasive Biblical allusions were—even in such violent times and in support of a reprehensible institution (slavery).

Ever wonder at military lessons to be learned from reading old battle accounts? How about the following warning about using what could be “combined arms” as though all were the same type. In this case, the Confederate infantry were under the command of a cavalry general near Hagerstown, MD. “They had dire complaints to make of the way cavalrymen put them in columns of fours against batteries when they could have advanced more rapidly and effectively in line of battle and saved half of their men lost.” (p. 428) Of course, logistics are important as well as revealed when “…unfortunately, as our resources became more circumscribed, the officers, instead of putting forth stronger efforts in their business, seemed to lose the energy of their former service, and General Lee found himself called upon to feed as well as fight his army.” (p. 574) And, one learns from such memoirs that some things never change. More than once Longstreet complains of Bragg, “…he wanted papers that would throw the responsibility of delay upon other shoulders” (p. 483) and complained of having to fight a campaign while “…our friends in rear putting in their paper bullets.” (p. 486) “Paper bullets” is an exceptionally good term for harmful bureaucracy.

Some of the history recounted in this volume was unknown to me. I had forgotten that General Braxton Bragg, after ignoring the advice of his subordinates and failing to follow through on his orders was relieved of command at Dalton, GA, President Davis called him to Richmond as commander-in-chief (p. 516). It was rather unnerving to see this action take place where a general who kept snatching defeat from the jaws of victory could countermand the orders of more efficient officers (pp. 541, 545).

Thinking of Bragg, I was very amused at the unidentified newspaper which printed upon learning that General Bragg was ordered to Wilmington: “We understand that General Bragg is ordered to Wilmington. Good-by, Wilmington.” (p. 584) One other particularly interesting observation was Longstreet’s description of a meeting with Lincoln about amnesty. Lincoln told the general that neither Jefferson Davis, General Lee, or himself would ever get amnesty. Even when Longstreet quoted Jesus’ words about the one being forgiven the most loving the most, Lincoln was adamant (p. 634). The book took me a long time to read. It was a lot to take in and required a bit of map study and correlation with other sources. But it is probably the most valuable book on the War Between the States/War to Preserve the Union that I’ve read. I’m very thankful someone preserved this.

[columbialion · Rating 3 out of 5]

The conflagration of the American Civil War, or as my southern brethren refer to as "The War Between the States," stands as the most perilous internal challenge to our enduring American Republic. Particular issues of slavery and states' rights divided the country, increasingly fracturing the entire body politic to open hostility. State governments and officers of the American military were forced to choose between allegiance to the Union or coalesce around their roots of native statehood.
James Longstreet was born in 1821 in South Carolina. His parents hailed from the future War divided states. His father was raised in New Jersey, his mother in Maryland. Longstreet rose to military prominence as the recognized third member of the Confederate triumvirate behind CSA President Jefferson Davis and General Robert E. Lee. Written in 1895, From Manassas to Appomattox is a comprehensive eye witness accounting of the crucial major battlefield campaigns of the War. The author previews his military career as a less than impressive cadet at the US Military Academy at West Point, NY. Ironically, Longstreet's West Point years brought him into close relationships with future members of his enemy's high command. His relationship with General U.S. Grant is particularly intriguing, growing to be very close friends in the Mexican War. Longstreet was Grant's best man at the General's wedding.
Longstreet chronicles the intricate tactical descriptions of both the Union & CSA armies from Bull Run, Antietam (*Sharpsburg), Fredericksburg, the decisive and famous Battle of Gettysburg, Chickamauga, and the ebb of the Confederacy following the Wilderness battle in Tennessee.
The text includes exhaustive accounts detailing the War's most arduous days and the topographical positions of both armies, including each corresponding commanding officer in the field of battle, the soldier's positioning & weapons deployed. Longstreet's narratives include the commanding officers' strategic calculations, as they interweaved their movements on the battlefields with precise, detailed records of the furious exchange of messages that directed the troop movements. Additionally, the author includes an extensive summary of each battle, compiling a roster of all principal officers involved (from both sides) in each engagement, as well as casualty and wounded totals.
As an accurate source of the intimate details of the most critical battles of the Civil War, the book is excellent and recommended for the serious Civil War enthusiast or military historian. However, it may prove to be overwhelming for the casual reader of Civil War history in its detail. My 3-star rating was not directed at content or accuracy in reporting. This particular edition published by First Rate Publishers was severely deficient in providing any reader's navigable reference resources. The edition lacks maps, indexing, glossary, and even numerical paging. As a result, the events described by Longstreet are confusing to the reader. The format forces the reader to utilize outside identification resources for maps and military officers to understand, at a basic level, the scope of the fighting on the field or to keep track of which Generals are participating and on what side of the hostilities they were fighting. The reader should choose other editions.

[Glenn Trust · Rating 4 out of 5]

From Manassas to Appomattox Memoirs of The Civil War in AmericaFrom Manassas To Appomattox
The war of northern aggression…the War between the States…the Civil War…call it what you will, the conflict that took more American lives than any other war and more than almost all of our other wars combined, changed the United States from a collection of, mostly independent, states into a nation. Without the Civil War, the history of this continent would have been vastly different.

For the record, I am a southerner, born in Georgia. I am not an apologist for slavery or the plantation society that made the south of the 19th century one of the richest places on earth at the expense of the terrible bondage of other human beings.

There is no doubt that many of the rank and file felt that they were fighting for freedom from the aggression of the Federal government, intent on preserving the union of states. Most southerners, in fact, did not own slaves. But, for those of my southern friends who try to justify the war on the basis of state’s rights, make no mistake about it…the states’ right they were trying to preserve was the right to own slaves.

Having said that, I have respect for my forebears who, misguided and wrong as they were, fought against overwhelming odds to secure what they mistakenly and ironically thought was “their freedom” to enslave others.

James Longstreet’s memoirs of the war is, perhaps, one of the finest and most detailed accounts of a great portion of the conflict that tore the country apart and resolved the issue of slavery that the Founding Fathers had put aside during the writing of the U.S. Constitution. Full of details and descriptive accounts of the movements of troops, battles and statistics Longstreet takes the reader backstage, into private meetings and strategy sessions with Lee and other generals as they planned campaigns and fought to stave off their eventual defeat.

His memoirs begin with his service in the Mexican War and subsequently in the west as a fairly junior officer. When war breaks out, he and a number of other officers, resign their commissions to return home and fight for their native state (country). During the course of the war, he rises to the rank of Lieutenant General, commanding the First Corps of the Army of Northern Virginia under Robert E. Lee.

In addition to gaining a better understanding of the strategies and battlefield conflicts, Longstreet give us a rare, eyewitness view of the personalities involved, from his perspective.

The memoirs occasionally take on a tone of self-justification that the reader may not understand without knowing in advance that at the conclusion of the war, there were those in the south who tried to blame Longstreet for the south’s loss. To many at the time, it was impossible that Robert E. Lee, who had been elevated to almost god-like status, could have made mistakes. Instead, some found a scapegoat in Longstreet, claiming that he had not carried out orders aggressively enough or had failed to carry them out at all. Longstreet goes to great lengths to provide letters and documentation, many from Lee himself, to prove that his actions were in strict accordance with orders and with the military protocols of the day. The truth was that many of his detractors were covering their own failings and culpability for the loss of the war.

In the end, the discussion of responsibility for the loss of the war is moot. The south was destined to lose, as long as slavery was an accepted institution authorized by the government and as long as the north had the will to fight on and incur the significant losses in men and material the south inflicted on them. Certainly, when Ulysses Grant took command of union forces, the war became a war of attrition. The south could not replace losses as quickly as the north. At that point, the war was lost, as Longstreet, forcefully points out.

Longstreet writes in the 19th century style, which may make it a bit tedious for some readers, but if you are student of the Civil war, it is necessary reading in order to gain a full understanding of the relationship between what was happening on the battlefield and the political atmosphere of the day.

Want to understand our nation today, and the struggle that continues to put the shame of slavery behind us? If so, 'From Manassas to Appomattox Memoirs of The Civil War in America', by James Longstreet is a must read.

Note - The Kindle version is free ( or was) but does not contain maps, charts etc. Paperback or hardcover editions provide more visual context with maps etc., to help the reader understand the action at times.

[Matt Robertson · Rating 4 out of 5]

"L'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace." Longstreet's usage of a quote I know from the movie Patton amused me. He goes on to say:

"An Americanism which seems an appropriate substitute is, A level head, a level head, always a level head."

This reveals much of the character of James Longstreet, at least how he portrays himself in this book. Amongst a colorful cast including Stonewall Jackson, J.E.B. Stuart, and Robert E. Lee, Longstreet's level-headed contribution to the Southern cause is easily overlooked or taken for granted. Combined with other factors, such as not being a Virginian (his suspicion), his criticism of the lionized Lee, and his post-war activities as a Republican, Longstreet just "didn't make the podium" of Southern heroes that we see today, despite being Lee's "old war horse" commanding the first corps of the Army of Northern Virginia, and despite being one of three Confederates that President Johnson refused to grant amnesty - the others being Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee. I believe this reveals a great deal about the motivation behind Southern revisionist history.

Longstreet's book is very highly detailed, giving lengthy accounts of the various engagements he was involved in, which is a large proportion of the war. Sometimes it is too detailed. At several places he lists the units involved in the battles on both sides, along with their commanders, down to the regiments. These listings are invaluable data, to be sure, but they do little for the narrative. He also incorporates information of Union movements, that one gathers he must have collected details of later, to give the reader a comprehensive, almost objective, view of each engagement. Many times he even refers to himself in the third person. Sometimes I wished he would focus less on the "military history" and more on his own memoirs of the events, but overall the work is excellent, and in several places he holds no punches defending his record. And toward the end, he even seems to have found the inspiration to wax poetic about the army he served:

"As morning approached the combat was heavier. The rolling thunder of the heavy metal reverberated along the line, and its bursting blaze spread afar to light the doom of the army once so proud to meet their foe,–matchless Army of Northern Virginia!"

My copy is complete with about a dozen maps, portraits of various individuals, and artwork depicting several key moments in the described battles. The introduction and end notes by historian James I. Robertson, Jr. add context and correction where needed. This is certainly a "deep cut" read of Civil War history, but I would argue an important one. Like his pre- and post-war friend Ulysses S. Grant, Longstreet was a practical soldier, making up for his lack of flash with a broad understanding of his craft, and a profound sense of duty.

[William Boyle · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a overall disappointment. It had so much potential, so much opportunity. If Longstreet could write as good as Grant, we could have a classic, but unfortunately he cannot write a moving narrative, but a dry rundown of the events of the war. No personal insights, no added description, and no emotion or feeling whatsoever. It has a feel as if Longstreet by then had forgotten his memories of the war and instead just read a history and went from there. Again, a disappointing book.

[Mary · Rating 2 out of 5]

This one was kind of tough to get through because it was so focused on statistics and logistics. Longstreet could write well when he wasn't focused on minute descriptions of troop movements, or lists of officers.
It was really interesting, particularly since I recently read Horace Porter's account of the Civil War.

[Jordan Crump · Rating 2 out of 5]

A good primary source and reference for specific battles and movements, but a slog to read from start to finish.

[Robert]

my favorite general

[William Guerrant · Rating 5 out of 5]

The most interesting parts of Longstreet's memoir/history of the war are the passages where he responds to his critics. Of course there were lots of them in the South (Longstreet critics, that is) when this book was published in 1896, Longstreet having been widely derided as a traitor after joining the Republican party and allying with U.S. Grant, and the oft-repeated claims that Longstreet was to blame for the loss of the war became something of a Lost Cause article of faith. In his book, Longstreet jabs back at those who made such claims, particularly Fitz Lee and W.N. Pendleton. Usually his responses are measured and reasonable. A few times they come across as petulant or unconvincing. In any event, reading this book will be very helpful in making a fair assessment of the controversies.

On page 568 he writes: "Bad as was being shot by some of our own troops in the battle of the Wilderness,—that was an honest mistake, one of the accidents of war,—being shot at, since the war, by many officers, was worse."

Readers should be forewarned however, that the vast majority of the book is not Longstreet's replies to critics but rather a straightforward narrative history of the war. Although the writing is tedious at times, the careful reader will note Longstreet's occasional sarcasm and subtle humor.

I found this remark (on page 196) surprising, revealing that Longstreet was certainly not above responding in kind: "A cursory review of the campaign reveals the pleasure ride of General Fitzhugh Lee by the Louisa Court House as most unseasonable. He lost the fruits of our summer's work, and lost the Southern cause. Proud Troy was laid in ashes."

Sometimes his remarks are cryptic, such as this one, which is aimed at either Jackson or A.P. Hill (I can't tell): "As a leader he was fine; as a wheel-horse he was not always just to himself. He was fond of the picturesque."

Although there are maps in the book, readers who do not already have a good understanding of the history of the war will have difficulty following the narrative. It is not a good introduction to the subject but rather is for those making a deeper dive.

The Gutenberg Project has made this book available on line, which is how I read it. It is available on Google Books as well. More evidence that this a great time to be a geek.

[Jerry Cosyn · Rating 3 out of 5]

Longstreet's memoir is not as readable as Grant's or Sherman's, as he doesn't really write as well. He also gets bogged down in minutia, such as meticulous and lengthy recitations of specific troop alignments, sometimes going on for pages with mere lists of regiments. Of interest to a scholar of the specific battle, no doubt, but tedious to read. He also has a habit of declaring that if only Lee, and Jeff Davis, and others had followed his ideas, the Confederacy would have been saved, which sounds a bit dubious and self-serving. He's very defensive about his reputation, which is entirely understandable considering the way the Lost Cause prophets and bloviators treated him. I read this memoir as a follow-up to Elizabeth Varon's excellent biography, and although it was a bit of a slog to get through, I found it worthwhile to hear Longstreet's own account. Varon gives a rich amount of detail of his later, postbellum years, and I would have liked to hear Longstreet tell that story, but he says almost nothing about his life after the war. Everything after Appomattox he dispenses with in a few paragraphs, with no detail at all. That's fair, considering the title of the memoir, but one can wish he had been inclined to describe his "transformation" regarding things such as negro suffrage, integration of troops, and so forth. All-in-all, the book contains some good information from his front-row seat at so many of the critical battles of the war, if one is willing to plow through all the dry and ponderous verbiage.

[Nick · Rating 4 out of 5]

While dry in spots, this was a very informative memoir, told from a viewpoint seldom heard.
Longstreet was a solid tactician and reliable general who, in postwar times, got the blame for everything that went wrong during the entire war. That was because he accepted the fact that the South had lost, and came to the conclusion that the next order of business was for the South to get political power back. His solution was to join the Republicans, then led by his old friend Grant. For that, he was demonized by the die-hard, "The South will rise again" faction, which happened to include more than one general that Longstreet had criticized during and after the war. Rightly or wrongly, accusations flew in both directions, in some cases ignoring documented facts, dates and times of things that affected battles.
Worse, in terms of controversies, Longstreet was mildly critical of Robert E. Lee's actions in a few cases, a crime of crimes to those folks to whom Lee could do no wrong.
So, it is worth reading Longstreet's version of events, which help to put the postwar controversies into perspective.

[Pat Phelps · Rating 4 out of 5]

“From Manassas to Appomattox” was an interesting book on the role Lt. General James Longstreet played in the Confederate Army during the Civil War. This would basically be his memoirs as told from battle notes dictated during the war. The book details all major battles Longstreet participated in, and he provides details of each battle, troop movements, and thoughts behind the officer’s decisions. I believe Longstreet also had recaps of each battle from the Union war archives, which gives the book so much more credibility.

There is a lot of detail in this book, which can be a little dry at times. However, the detail is needed to give a true picture of what was happening during each battle, and the quick decisions that had to be made to turn the tide for victory, or for defeat.

If you are more of a biography person, this may not be the right book for you. If, however, you like to understand the small details, and the Civil War interest you, then this might be a good read for you.

[Pete Grondin · Rating 4 out of 5]

General James Longstreet, one of the key generals commanding the Confederate troops during the American Civil War, provides his personal, detailed account of the war in and around Virginia, and of his time on the western theater in Eastern Tennessee. If you are not a Civil War buff, this would be a difficult read. It is written more for those who have studied the war in detail. Longstreet seldom goes into the bloody details of the carnage of the war, instead describes the strategic moves of both armies and his opinion on how certain battles might have gone differently, given the benefit of hindsight. There is a large measure of criticism by Longstreet for officers, both Union and Confederate, throughout the book. For me, comparing this view with text written by other Civil War authors was eye-opening and enjoyable.

[Prospectavebooks · Rating 5 out of 5]

Extremely interesting account!

Although sometimes confusing because the author names officers on both sides as if assuming we know which side they are on, the account fascinates because he was there, and it's not some historian's distilled account. I suspect he wrote it more for answering his critics than for any interest in recording history, but regardless it remains an astonishing personal account of a conflict important to American history.

[Kevin · Rating 3 out of 5]

There is a lot of detail in this book - amazing that they still had all that information after the war. The book seemed to miss key parts of battles - although if it is told just from Longstreet's view, I guess that makes sense. I will admit this was better than I thought. I was not overly impressed with the battle descriptions and felt they could have been more thorough. He did seem to be defending himself (or thought alot about himself).

[Ed Barton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Old Warhorse

Longstreet was one of the more successful, and following the war, more controversial Confederate generals. His memoirs are a good read for anyone interested in Civil War history or military history. Showing a different side of figures such as Lee, Stuart and Pickett, he writes with both passion and precision. A bit dry in spots, the book nevertheless conveys great insights into the man and his military experience.

[Larry · Rating 2 out of 5]

The only real reason to read this book is for the Longstreet version of several controversial strategic decisions by Lee; this book caused Longstreet to be further shunned by former colleagues and the South in general.....but I think his version of several controversies holds up pretty well. The narrative of the battles is not anything of real value to a real CW reader.

[Jim Dulin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Underrepresented view of the Civil War

I had always admired what little I found in histories about General Longstreet. This account was well written by him and worth reading. Both the honor and jealousy of many who served with him, both Confederate and Union, are fairly covered. I think General Longstreet understood how good men could be used both well and poorly.

[Erin L · Rating 4 out of 5]

Removed one star due to transcription issues. The book itself was very good. A first hand account of the Civil War from one of the people that lived, participated in, and was both a victor and a victim of it is as true to life of the times as it gets. The relationships made, lost and maintained is one of the best aspects of this book. We hear all the time from revisionist history about "what the Civil War was about", how evil the confederate side was, yet here we have a primary source telling his story and the struggles he dealt with with as well as the strategy's used. Low and behold history is not nearly as one sided as modern media, pop culture, and government (the government that won mind you) run education would have us belive.

[Henry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very informative...lengthy

[Doug · Rating 4 out of 5]

Eyewitness history is definitely the best.

[Thomas Warger · Rating 5 out of 5]

For all the historical revisionism he's endured (since Gettysburg), this is one of the best and most objective overviews from the Southern side.