good evening everyone and welcome to atlanta history center. my name is claire haley. i am vice president for special projects here at the atlanta history center. it is absolutely my pleasure to welcome you to tonight's program featuring elizabeth varon. her newest book, long street the confederate general who defied

the south. you all are in for a wonderful conversation again this evening. elizabeth varon is the length born w.m. williams, professor of american history at the university of virginia and a member of the executive council of uva's john allen the third center for civil war history. she is an accomplished author has written several books on civil war history and was the recipe at the 2020. gilder lehrman lincoln prize and named one of the wall street journal's best books of 2019 for her book, armies of deliverance. she will be in conversation tonight with dr. gordon jones. gordon jones is a senior military historian here at atlanta history center. among his many includes serving as the chief for cyclorama big picture here at atlanta history center. well, as turning point, our exhibition about the civil war. now, further ado, please join me in welcoming elizabeth varon and gordon jones discussing the book. longstreet the confederate general defied the south.

good evening, everybody thanks for being here. thanks to you, claire. thanks to team who's putting thing together. thank you, liz. it's a delight to be here. i'm so grateful you all came out. and actually, the first thing i want to point out. okay. is the cover of this book, which a lot of what you need to know about liz baron's work. normally in a biography, a civil war general, you would expect to see someone in a uniform in black and white. no. here you see a colorized image of james longstreet after. the war in civilian clothing. that tells you a great deal about what we're going to be discussing tonight. so front. but from the cover of that book to the back of that book to the

very last sentence, which i was struck by, because i read the book backwards, you're you're you say that longstreet commands our attention as one of the most endure relevant voices in american history. so as a way of introducing your subject, what is it that is so important about james longstreet? why should we care, especially today? that's a great question. so james longstreet born 1821, died 1904, lived a long, influential and unlike early and impossibly dramatic life. and he was an actor in a participant in bore witness to and commented on the political turmoil of the 19th century the civil war reconstruction, the jim crow era. and part of the point of this book is suggest that that he has

a great to to reveal to us about issues and problem that roil the 19th century and that still fascinate us today and roil our society today. political polarization is an example of race relations, southern identity, civil war, memory. he speaks and his life speaks to all of these themes. now, i chose that word voices of the most influential voices. and the quote you read, because i feel that although there's been lot of good work about james longstreet by prior historians focused mostly on his war record, the thing that's been missing is voice. and i try really tune in his voice. there's a bit an image of longstreet in the popular and in longstreet studies if you will, as a sort of gruff taciturn man of few words. well, in truth, he was a vile, prolific writer and speaker who just loved to hold forth on

issues of all kinds and who left a sort of vast body of work. you will. you know, military and speeches, too, is troops and letters to his family in interviews in the press and and articles that he wrote his his wartime record and a 690 page memoir. we have a copy that as a prop right here. so this is a man who had a great deal to say. so one of the things you notice about book, if you read it, is that you hear longstreet in it a lot and you me muse about the meetings, his words. i felt that his body work in effect deserved a close analysis, a careful the way that we've looked, what lincoln had to say, what frederick douglass grant and other you know, figures from the 19th century had to say. so recovering that that was was an aim. and then one last quick observation, which will help to frame our conversation.

longstreet is this is a familiar name to most of you, if not all of you. i know and realize and we longstreet primarily with a particular place in a particular moment and that's gettysburg in 1863 and of course gettysburg is fascinating will have a lot to say about but part of the object my book was to say to understand this man and indeed to understand gettysburg and its legacies, you have to appreciate the other moments, key moments and the other key settings. his life, new orleans in 1867, when he makes a really surprising decision to support reconstruct in gainesville, georgia in the late 19th century not far from here. he settles and writes this memoir and really digs into the defense of his wartime record against critics. atlanta washington d.c. where he is a part of an important republican political operation. he's a political operative for

nearly 40 years after the civil war. and my contention is that you have to look at these other times places to understand longstreet and also that that these other settings in these other moments are, dare i say, just as interesting and compelling as that. is that more familiar gettysburg story. and to follow on that just is a remind. so in 1965, at the end of the civil war is 44 years old. he's going to live another 39 years until his death in january of 1904. that's 39 years. that turns out to be the most critical part of your study includes. as you referenced this defense of his career or his military career, which if although certainly it was intended as a

literary weapon, it could be a physical. one through somebody. yeah. but liz just pointed out to me something that i had not noticed in the first edition. noticed that the sword is pointed down, not up key to understanding longstreet. absolutely. so you brought up the g word, the george salute. yeah. gettysburg. yeah. and that that is the big thing that everyone who associates with longstreet. absolutely. and of course, you know, the the his detractors ers, the prophets of the lost cause, going to criticize him and blame essentially for the loss at gettysburg, by extension, the loss of the war. and then he's going to actually get a little bit of a revival in the 1970s at the hands of geoff shaw. right. so one would what i think we want to know here is, okay, look, you've studied this what's

the what's the bottom line about longstreet's capability as a military commander. so longstreet gains a reputation during the as lee's right hand man as his war horse. he is second only to lee in the army, northern virginia. and really the third most important confederate in the confederate war effort. after jefferson davison and robert e lee and he gains that reputation as lee's right hand by doing many things well. so if you want to see examples of successful leadership by longstreet military leadership, you can find them. he he is successfully delivers punches as he did at second manassas against fitzjohn. he successfully adapts tactics to the terrain as he did chickamauga in the brotherton woods successfully fortifies positions as the confederates did at fredericksburg. he's he's has nobody doubts, even detractors. he has a great deal of personal courage. famously, at antietam, he jumps

off his horse and he mans an artillery you know, weapon. so he he's very good at it, surrounding himself with a competent staff that remains very loyal to him. you can find plenty as a strictly military speaking, to to to you know, to highlight in this in this record. so gettysburg the famous the famous disagreement with lee gettysburg lee's strategic offensive into pennsylvania in the summer of 1863. longstreet to lee's tactical decision is famously july 2nd, july 3rd to to go on tactical offensive and to attack a federal position on on cemetery ridge. longstreet believes that that those attacks that lee plans and calls for are ill considered and longstreet propose is famously again on the evening of july 1st looking forward to second that the confederates themselves from

the disadvantageous this low ground and and move around the left flank of the yankee army get between it and richmond find some a strong position of their own some high ground and invite the union army to attack them. and he has in mind a repeat of fredericksburg essentially. so he proposes this to lee not once, but many times and lee rejects his advice. longstreet is hurt by the fact that lee rejects his advice, and this is all a matter record so and we'll come to origins of the scapegoating of longstreet. but let me just make a few more observations. so longstreet's hurt that lee waves off waves off his advice famously again. and longstreet's critics will make great deal of this. the lee's attack on the second day is delayed. it doesn't happen when lee wants it to, but much later in the

afternoon or when it might have happened. ideally so, longstreet will be charged by his critics. the war with having having tarried having been slow and and and and even some critics will charge defiant having disregarded lee's orders and even some critics will charge having sabotaged that on the second day. similarly, he'll be accused of not having fought with with vigor and purpose in in in ordering pickett's charge on the third day. so a debate has ensued. endless amounts of ink spilled about. there's a there's a kind of common sense which i'll sketch out and then three important things that i people to remember that that the important foundation for what's to come so the common sense position is yes longstreet was not pleased with

lee's plan. yes, he was ambivalent about it. he felt the plan for the second day was problematic and he felt the plan for the third day was hopeless that that pickett's charge did not enough men to succeed simply put, there was, you know, various kinds of, you know, misinformation promulgated by both sides longstreet's critics would argue that lee had ordered a sun rise attack on on july 2nd. there's no evidence of that. longstreet would later claim that lee had promised longstreet, that he wouldn't fight on the tactical offensive. no, no evidence of that. but when we sort of sweep aside all of this, these claims and and it seems perfectly clear to me that longstreet was ambivalent. he he in no way directed lee sabotaged lee's effort. and and he was it's impossible to i think that he was solely to blame as confederates would see it for that defeat there.

there was much blame that could could go around. and here i come to the the sort of three important points. the first important point is that if we look at longstreet's in the mold and reflections on all this because, it's going to be litigated for years and years. there'll be all kinds of special pleading down the line. but if we look at this in the moment on this, he stresses his deference to lee ultimately deferred to lee. he didn't agree with lee's plan, but he did as lee directed both on the second day and on the third day. and he had there was some potential off ramps. john hood proposes a flank attack on second and longstreet could signed off on that as a way of modifying plan. but he doesn't he says to hood no we have to defer to lee so that theme of deference is key in longstreet's own writing that's what he believed he did ultimately. the second important thing to note that at the time but longstreet was not considered by

lee by davis by the confederate press by confederate civilians who commented on the battle he was not considered a scapegoat. primary, secondary really. there was again confederates as they looked at this campaign, did two things. they spread the blame. hill stewart lee himself, you know mistakes you can to across the board they also spun the battle every battle got spun in saying, oh, this was a successful raid, not a disastrous, you know, a disaster, an invasion. and then the third important thing to remember is that coming down to the nitty gritty of those delays. again longstreet's in the moment, reflections that he believed the purpose of the delays was to and i'm talking really mostly about the second day now to increase the chances of success. so the confederates waiting for laws brigade or for the clause

counter march these were things that that presumed billy would would increase the chances success not decrease them. so the summary is simply to say no one's going to ever have the last word in this debate. we can go round and round and, round and will. but it's seems to me that the key takeaway that at the end of the battle reputation as lee's war horse as as his right hand man is intact. it is completely so longstreet the scapegoat that comes later for reasons that that i'll explain and my my follow up is is this because in in later years this is 1876 when longstreet is starting to be to be criticized and he's responding and he you know he definitely as good as he gets in the in the in his defense but he brings up this letter that lee supposedly wrote in january of 1864, which he never actually

produces a physical copy of it, just the recollection and, the the the letter supposedly this is lete longstreet had i taken your advice at gettysburg instead of pursuing the course i did, how different all might have been. and yet you're also that longstreet at any time came to see confederate defeat as a sort of a divine intervention, that it was meant to be, and i was struck by this quote, longstreet says it is hardly possible that slavery should have ceased if we had been made an independent nation. so in effect, longstreet saying, well, it's actually better that lee did not. my advice. yeah. you know, of course, people have asked one of the many fascinating counterfactual, so what if what if lee had followed his advice and historians have pointed out that there was no, you know, sort of magic scenario in which longstreet's would have

guaranteed victory. what would he proposed doing, dislodging from that position meant moving away from supply lines into unfamiliar terrain. you know, the confederates would have been vulnerable a different way if they'd done that the the the letter that he never produces is this this definitely seems like a kind of wishful thinking on longstreet's part, to be sure. but he does that that attitude towards towards the war. seeing providence in confederate defeat again that comes you know part of point of my book is to say longstreet is a good die hard confederate from manassas to appomattox as as the as the title of his book says. he he never loses faith in the confederate cause he loses a degree of confidence in it. he begins brood about confederate failures and shortcomings. but he's looking for a way to

win up until the end. you know, the about failures and shortcomings is. a fascinating is a fascinating theme he really begins to brood when. he's out west in the knoxville campaign and and in longstreet's view, failures include logistic failures. he feels his men are perennially undersupplied, that this is a this is a major, major problem. but more interestingly, for our purposes he begins to brood on what he considers moral failings of the confederates. and in his view, the moral failing is or arrogance, a tendency to underestimate their enemies. and he feels that again and again. and again that hurts them. and he and it's no coincidence that he really starts to be pretty occupied with this theme of hubris when he's out west, where who else is out there? well, when you grant, who's going to move east and have this epic showdown with lee longstreet feels it would be a

very dumb thing to underestimate us. grant that us grant will be able to make the confederate pay for their dysfunction in a way that no other no other could and leads directly to to the next question, because you place a lot of emphasis on longstreet its relationship with grant and that was key in shaping his his thinking. and of course, they were friends before the war and and so forth. but how how did that relationship with grant really start? and what did it mean to longstreet through his life? yeah, it's sort of impossible to to to really capture the meaning this friendship for for longstreet. so longstreet and grant were at west point at the same time. they became fast friends, although they had a quite different personalities they courted their wives at the same

time they're posted to jefferson barracks in missouri. they fought in the mexican war. their wives and families, friends and indeed longstreet's was a distant cousin of grant's julia. so there was even a sort of kin connection there. obviously the war disrupts the friendship, but the friendship looms again at another one of those moments, a place and time, not gettysburg, but a place in time that is essential to understanding james longstreet story. and that is appomattox, virginia, 1864. so grant's army brings lee to army to heal. grant famously his generous terms at the end of a war has resulted in the deaths of 750,000 soldiers, as grant says, you confederates are free to go home. nope, no reprisals, no punishments provided you pledge your future allegiance to the union that. you won't take up arms against the government again and that you'll obey the law pretty good deal.

so grant's terms were not intended to exonerate the confederates. they were intended to change hearts and minds, effect atonement and effect repentance and effect submission and. and longstreet almost uniquely among confederates at that at that rank and among confederates period, interprets those terms. the lens of his friendship with u.s. grant that to longstreet are it that's an honorable offer made by an honorable man and confederates are obliged to is they accept those terms to do what grant intended those to give the victors way a chance to yield and and to try to turn the page. and so he he accepts grant's terms in the spirit in which grant offered them as an invitation to turn the page, but he also grant they also briefly

on on april 10th and grant literally extends hand of friendship old pete let's let's play cards like we used to do this kind of thing story that longstreet loved to sort of retail after the war is as as a symbol of their friendship longstreet just takes those offers that offer of a of leniency to heart and it really frames his postwar period so so longstreet goes from being a dedicated aide to the cause confederate general to being a postwar politician of radical republican stripe. how it possible. oh, right. that's that's million dollars that gets through that. that is the million question. and i have to as a biographer, if i had found signs in longstreet's early life or during the war of wavering about

the cause and so them where i could say, ah, this prefigures you know what we see later that would have been great but but he was a diehard confederate he was a you know he grew up in plantation society, a slaveholding family. his who was essentially a surrogate father was one of the most fire eating defenders of slavery in states rights and secession in the south. longstreet rushed to join the confederate army. some confederate generals were sort of reluctant secessionists. longstreet wasn't one of them. and then, you know, during the war, he makes all kinds of frothing speeches to his troops about the barbaric yankees and all the rest. yeah, manassas to appomattox. so how do we explain this turnaround after the war, i spent a lot of the book talking about this and should start by noting this is a little window into the way historians work. longstreet never sat and wrote, you know, and here's by the way, here's why i did it. you know. so there's some there is some speculation you know, involve piecing things together. and my answer is that it's not a

mono causal sort of thing. there's a number of factors. the friendship with grant is one important factor, not just the moment of appomattox, but afterwards so here's the way to think about it. wall street moves to new orleans after the civil war, wildly popular among former confederates. again, they see him as a hero. he's working as a as cotton broker, and he's looking across the political landscape. reconstruction begins to unfold. so the first phase of reconstruction is presided over by abraham lincoln's successor, andrew johnson becomes president after lincoln dies and johnson gives excessively leniency to former confederates, including unreconstructed ones who have no ounce of repentance to offer, and that excessive leniency, including pardons of former politicians and generals, so on, so that they can hold political office results in the south, falling back the hands of ex

confederates who under johnson's regime begin to pass a series of laws, so-called black codes, try to recreate something akin to slavery, a forced labor system that is that is reminiscent of slavery. meanwhile, the southern democratic party that had defended slavery before the war and had been behind secession is is a very belligerent mood, basically basically saying, you know, that they'll continue to fight the war through the through the means of politics to relitigate the issues of the war. so johnson is a is a volatile drunkard is southern democratic party and some ex confederates like jefferson davis don't seem to realize that they've lost. what does longstreet want? he wants he wants peace. and he wants peace for his family. he wants prosper, charity and serenity for his family. his family has had a brutal civil war as so many.

but it's just a particularly brutal moment in the winter of 1862, when he loses three small children in one week to scarlet fever, and after that his just changes his mood, his his wife has suffered, his family has suffered. he just wants peace and prosperity for them. so he looks around the landscapes. who's going to bring peace is andrew johnson going to bring peace? no. he's divisive. or people who are who are in this, you know, will live to fight another day kind of lost cause mentality, going to bring peace. no. who's waiting in the wings to sir, to to replace andrew johnson as his disastrous term comes to an end impeached almost removed office u.s. grant us grant who i long street thinks is a man of honor, a man who wants peace. grant, who has had his own political journey. grant was not an abolitionist when the war started, grant came

to support emancipation came to support the enlistment of black troops in the union army, came to support black voting only. gradually, longstreet watched that journey very, very carefully. grant was just taking the realities of of life on the ground in the south and what it was going to take to secure the peace so long story is that friendship with grant is key. his desire for peace and prosperity on the part of his on the part of his his family is key and then there's this third element, this kind of wild card in this in this story, and that is new orleans. the place where he settles is this absolute distinct political environment in the american landscape. and what makes it distinct is that new orleans has a free black leadership drawn to color of labor in the francophone. new orleans, you know, speak and these are men, mixed race men of french and spanish lineage going

back many generations, many of whom have served as commissioned officers in the union army. in a brief the union had with commissioning black officers during, the war men like pbs's pinchbeck who becomes an important ally of longstreet's pinchbeck, a union veteran of louisiana state senator, reconstruction, acting governor of louisiana during reconstruction. so that that that facet dating black leadership class is sort of positioned to challenge longstreet's on race. so now we come to the of the matter. i'm sorry for going on and on. here's the moment that that gordon has referred to in 1867, congress decides that johnson's reconstruction a disaster and that it's going to hit the reset button and implement its own plan. and congress's plan is is to put the south temporarily under military control to create a new body politic, a really truly

democratic southern polity, by enfranchising african-american men so that they can participate in southern politics and asking the southern states to write new constitutions, to accept emancipation and so on is a series of conditions before they readmitted to the union, a new orleans paper asks james longstreet, what do you think of this congressional plan? he knows that vast majority of ex-confederate it's abjure and reject the congressional plan as radical, something that they they detest and will resist at all costs. but longstreet writes, a letter to this new orleans paper, four letters, actually, in which he says, you know what, let's give this congressional plan a chance. let's let's try and see how this works. and his argument, in effect, is we southerners said we have this this this quarrel with the north. we appealed to the sword to be the arbitrator. and guess what? we lost. and so now we have to try to to to live by new rules. and some of us has to step

forward, try to make this work. so longstreet says, let's give reconstruction a chance. and the blowback against this series, letters he writes in which he the letters say things like it's time to abandon ideas that are obsolete. let's let's turn the page. the blowback is i mean, just there's no way to conjure how ferocious it is ex confederates men he had led and respected worked with just turn on him with the ferocity that is hard to describe. they call him judas. they call lucifer, they call him benedict. they say, we wish you had died of the wounds you sustained during the war in the wilderness. and he is just, you know, thrown on his heels by by this. meanwhile, what is the response? the republicans, the republican party is is, of course, in this era, the party of abraham lincoln, of the union of emancipation, of black voting, the party of congress, and this

reconstruction longstreet is essentially on to the republican plan. republican party open welcomes with open arms. and they say yes, you were a great civil war general because more a general he was during the war the useful he is as a symbol of repentance and of that turning of the page of atonement in the new a new start and all the rest. so he is, in a way, the most surprising thing is not the decision which was the initial decision to write the letters was somewhat tentative. but the fact, as you alluded to, that after the blowback, he doubles rather than backing down because the blowback vindicate hates him in the belief that these ex confederates don't really want peace, you know, and what he wants is peace. and at one point he is actually reinjured and reinjured the same arm. he's leading an african-america

militia in a street battle. in the september 1872. what call the the canal street coup? oh, yes. a coup d'etat in the state level. this is all so long. street becomes. he writes these 1867 letters, a republican party and he will remain as such for makes a commitment to the republican party he leads committee serves on committees with african-american men enfranchised. he's on a school board committee to integrate the schools. is he he celebrates milestones on the road to freedom. the passage of the 15th amendment in elaborate ceremonies. most importantly, he becomes the head of an interracial state militia that exists to protect this of you know this new republican coalesce in government and that republican coalition government includes these newly enfranchised black some northerners who have settled in the south, and then

some white southerners who have decided to give the republican party a chance. he's not the only one. longstreet. he's the most important one. he's the lightning because he was the highest ranking confederate to do this. so he leads this interracial militia. why is it necessary? well, because from the moment congress starts this reconsider program, it is under siege by on reconstruct did southern democrat ex-confederate who believe that the republican party has right to participate in southern politics and that african-americans have no right to participate in the polity whatsoever, not as voters or in any other way. and the campaign to bring this these republican governments down is a campaign of propaganda, false charges of fraud and malfeasance and so on. but it's a prop. it's a campaign of violence than anything, of course, the violence of the ku klux klan. this is the most infamous example, but has its own versions of like white supremacist groups that are, in effect, a paramilitary arm of the southern democratic party.

and in louisiana, they call themselves the white leads and the white league attempts to overthrow the duly elected republican government of louisiana on september 14th, 1874, in what is nothing less than a coup attempt in which we find longstreet again, as all you civil war buffs, you can't make this stuff. i mean, if you wanted to, it's just, you know, longstreet, lee leads the interracial militia against, the insurrectionists fighting against former who he had led against the union army in the civil war. his men are overwhelmed and the government falls briefly and the federal army comes and restores it. but it marks really the beginning of the end reconstruction, because northerners lose the will to really commit resources. the project, the of violence and propaganda suppress is the voting of blacks and of white republicans. eventually, federal troops are

removed from the south and the experiment is over and as we were talking about before, you know, this whole book is a great lens as a window into reconsider as seen through the eyes of longstreet which i think is one way to because that is such a tangled it's such a complicated person thing. so that's part of part of the reason i really enjoyed your book was because it gave me a lot of these insights and a whole lot of stuff that was just totally unexpected. plus, it's georgia. it's georgia, georgia. so he spends all longstreet spends the last 30 of his years in gainesville. gainesville, georgia, is 50 miles up the road and, has a lot of interactions here in atlanta. and this this i this is part of it. this is part of his life. i think that his least been understood there is not really made it into the literature. so just tell us if you could.

we've got about 10 minutes here to tell us. tell us what we need to know about longstreet in georgia, how he played a role, politics and the federal patronage system. yeah, so it's fascinating so he he's pretty battered by that new orleans experience as you can imagine that all fairly traumatizing so he decides to dislodge from new orleans the turmoil there and he moves to gainesville. you kinfolk in georgia and to sort of start a new life, establish a new political base there and he runs a hotel in gainesville has a small you know sort of farm and homestead on the outskirts of town he remains active in the republican not leading an interracial militia. what he's doing is representing the georgia state republican party in washington to the national leadership and patronage is so key because after the fall of reconstruction, the removal

federal troops from the south, you have one party rule in the south. the southern democrats will control the region for for a very long time. so the republicans aren't winning a lot of state offices in a place like georgia. but the one thing they can win is federal patronage positions. when there's a republican president in power in washington, d.c., so longstreet sets himself up as a guy who, you know, a bit at the levers of, the patronage machine and and he he is the recipient of patronage. again, one of the points of this book is to say longstreet's critics and of the historians have considered his life, portrayed him as an inept politician and inept defense of his own record and so on. here's a guy who keeps getting these federal patronage positions which suggests a certain amount of political savvy he's appointed a postmaster of georgia as u.s. marshal of georgia, as minister

or to turkey. i mean, you know he's appointed to represent the united states as an embargo sitter. 13 years after he led confederate against the i mean, again remarkable that the british press was, like you americans, are crazy like what? what is this? so so you know he keeps getting these federal patronage positions interestingly he remains committed to black suffrage and make up 90% of the voters in the in the georgia republican party. but he very much more and more emphasizes in the last phase of his life that he wants whites to control that party. whites like himself. and this is just of the really key, important points to to make here to not lose sight of longstreet was not alas racial egalitarian the way thaddeus stevens or frederick douglass were employed was longstreet's view was that african-americans should play a role in politics as constituencies voters and in

some secondary leadership positions, suborn it to the right whites peaceable, progressive whites like himself as he as he saw it, he was not for full power or sharing in any in any or or of the full, full complement of political rights and opportunities for african-americans. but even this limb added challenge to this to, the old racial caste system, was enough to make him a pariah because the southern democrats wanted was no participation by african-americans in southern politics whatsoever and no participation by the republican party. so even his limited challenge comes up against this very hard barrier of of of of of entire is. and one thing that i learned from this book is, the the power at that time of being a us marshal. yeah and this comes this was reminded about this because you mentioned the 1883 1884 case,

the yarborough case, which was eventually decided by the supreme and the supreme says that, yes, indeed, the u.s. government does have, quote, the power to protect the elections on its existence depends from violence and, corruption. and this stemmed from a case in georgia and longstreet's deputies took those guys to prison in. yeah rounding up some some white supremacists who were terrorized seizing african-americans in banks county try to suppress the vote there and longstreet's marshals you marshals did things like chase down whiskey distillers and tax evaders and so on. but they also had this really important work of trying to, at least during this period, try to protect voting rights. and so longstreet's marshal's office involved in this case that results in this supreme court decision. and, you know, again, all of is by way of saying even the lesser

known chapter of longstreet's life, like this gainesville chapter is is very revealing about american politics. he was a political animal and his life us a great deal about american and the politics in a way that most concerns him in his gainesville years comes back to that tome and that defending himself against. the critics of his war record. so in here we'll wrap things up with with with the following closing of the circle. so as i said at the end of the war, longstreet is considered a great hero by confederates. no blaming him for the loss of gettysburg or anything else. long about 1872, 1873, when not coincident when he's at the peak of his powers and influence in new orleans. some virginians begin to make speeches jubal early william nelson pendleton and others saying. longstreet is to blame long. street is to blame for losing gettysburg. longstreet delayed the attack longstreet was willfully

disobedient and incompetent, and by the way if longstreet's to blame then guess who remained retains his reputation as the saintly perfect, flawless marble. man one robert e lee right. so these attacks begin in the early 1870s, they're made by men who are very open about. their disapproval of longstreet's politics and they, they, they keep going, you know, for decades and decades and decades. and when he moves back to georgia, longstreet really turns his attention to trying defend his military record. and this book is is 99% of it is about the civil war and about his his effort to do to just that. and that means he has to relitigate things like gettysburg it means he does controversial things like comparing lee and grant saying. you know, lee was off his game at gettysburg big emotions had gotten the best of him he lost his balance or equipoise as compared to grant who had a level head lee comes the poorer for the comparison this is

heretical talk you know for which one doesn't get forgiven by certain certain people so you know he continues to court controversy at the same time there is a turn in this last phase of his life towards reconcile creation at the end of his life he really is more eager than ever to try to harmonize competing elements of his life, to try to harmonize his confederate identity and performance about which he's quite proud of, and his republican identity does. and he and he sets himself up as a sort of herald of reconciliation as the guy could see long before anyone else could that both sides would have to make concessions. if you're really going to have people come together. and so he emphasizes that theme of reconciliation, partly in an attempt claw back some of old popularity among among white southerners. and he succeeds to it to a to a certain extent, so that by the

time he dies in 1904, he has somewhat rehabilitated himself, not the eyes of everyone. he'll have is his critics, especially in virginia. but but but in the eyes of many he's kind of refashioned himself as a sort of prophet of reconciliation, as a statesman, you know, and even something like that little episode as minister to turkey helped this image emerge of him as as as as a statesman. and so once. the sword is pointed down, make sense. now think about it reconciliation really is the keynote out of the last of the last phase of his life. and i know i know this is a question your your paper. and i know we're running out of time. i'm going to go there just for a few minutes before we get the wrap things up, signal. we're about to long street has a partner in. this work of saying i was a prophet of reconciliation, it is none other than his second wife

in 1897, he marries a woman who is 42 years younger than him. yeah, he catches a lot of flack. there's a lot of charges of cradle robbing and digging and all the rest. but the pair of them, him and helen dortch longstreet, who was a sort of maverick journalist from georgia in own right, they defend their union as a real partnership and a meeting of the minds and will join him in defending his reputation. and she'll undergo her own of interesting awakening in world war two era and become quite a champion black civil rights herself. although that's not where she started so and she lives till 1962. so you put the two stories together. 1821 when he's born in 1962. when she dies and it's a saga of american history, the year of my nativity. well, okay. well, sir, you're one year older than me, then. yes, helen. george longstreet is is famous among you, atlanta. so because she worked as riveter

at the bell bomber plant, marietta, at age. this is just such a remarkable. she was unbelievable. she just did not stop going. it's just an story. so i'm i encourage everybody to get book because it really is a super read as interesting so claire we have some questions. so if you have any questions, please raise, your hair and i will come to you. i'm going to start here. yes. two quick questions. his actions after the war do you think they reflected more a fundamental change of heart or more pragmatic response to the political environment? that's a great question. and, you know, i might add as a as another option or element, you know, was there was there some opportunism here? people have asked that and i would say that that it's it's his views evolve. i think initially it's a it's a approach move again he's looking around the landscape trying to figure out who can who can

provide, you know, a sort of a peace and and stability. i think the ferocity of the reaction which surprises him. the negativity of the reaction in in in a sense sort of radicalizes him and and and and causes him to to sort of rethink some some, you know, older beliefs. and so on. but but but it's but it's it's a journey i would say i would say a kind of pragmatism, the initial impulse. but that belief system changes in the face of this this the controversy forces that his his initial decision generates. and as for opportunism, you know, eventually he will become a federal recipient of federal patronage grant will make him give him a surveyor's position in the new orleans customs house? so you can see eventually he'll benefit but at the time he writes the letters he doesn't know he's going to benefit in any way.

indeed he's taking a huge risk. he does have to withdraw from his businesses, his insurance and brokerage business in new orleans because it's bad for his partners. much heat he's getting from his critics. and so so there is there's an element of risk there that somewhat complicates the notion. i mean, it's pragmatic but he's it's it's an uncertain and he's moving into an uncertain world it's in a sense the way to think about it is that what will happen if he takes this chance is uncertain. but but but what will happen if if the status quo continues, he feels, is quite certain. and that is division. and the second thing is most of his early life we would find offensive. but postwar he was obviously more enlightened than most of his confederate contemporaries. so in your mind, which outweighs the other? well, i mean, that's that is also a great question. it's come up some recently as people have thought about things like confederate

memorialization. and a number of people say, oh, maybe we ought to put up statute along st. you know, my feeling is he's just far changeable to be a kind of you know more marble man he his own journey was as i said, unexpected and unlike lee and and while one does have to admire. here and of course i do the courage of his of of his you defiance of of the the of what was expected of the status quo after the war. we have to remember that his first choice was for the confederates to win. and if they had won his entire remarkable self-reinvention would have never happened you know so in a sense to me takeaway is that it is is is just to increase my admiration for grant because i think grant this the key element that made that that not only because he's the one who brings the confederate army to heel but also because he's the one who makes this invitation to turn

the page that that longstreet to heart as i put it did. longstreet ever consider leaving south that's a really great and think the answer is i think no and it would have been an easy and logical move in a way he was really quite wildly popular the north in the last decades of his life. he did live in washington, d.c. for a time as when he was commissioner and under the mckinley and he didn't much washington, d.c. he did traveling the country. and one of the things he had to do is railroad commissioner was go around, particularly the west, the far west, to literally inspect the railroads. and he met with wild acclaim wherever he wherever he went. but he was a southerner. and he and i'm so glad you asked the question because thing that's very clear from longstreet's writing again tuning in, his voice so

important is that he believed he made his decision in 1867 out of loyal loyalty to the south, in defiance of the south. and that sense, the title is a little misleading and i that to the editor and he was like you you'll have opportunities like this to kind of explain that but but but in a sense he really believed that it was of loyalty to his kinfolk to his people, to them turn page and he says so again, his words are so remarkable among the things he writes in those letters in which he announces his support, reconstruction is in effect, we have to perform the funeral rites for the confederacy. dead matter must buried because otherwise how can we overcome the of our grief, as he put it so he again the turning the page was about saying says a soldier wants the dead to be buried and it's time to bury the confederacy and performance. funeral rites.

yes, i'm neely young and we have some ancestors of general longstreet here, including descendants, i'm sure of john. john longstreet. neely is here. but anyway, i have a question. we've written about i've written about this myself. there's an altar and one of the funniest things i have all the who the big gettysburg instead of long straight they said the yankees did something to do it. yeah. they had something to do with it. that's exactly right. and i mean, i think we appreciate more and more now. there's recently been an excellent biography of general meade that that explains that, you know, he was a very skilled general. and, yes, the yankees absolutely had something to do with it. what was. oh, it's very loud. what was the relationship between longstreet beauregard in new orleans since obviously beauregard was also a big

supporter of civil rights, but a slightly different political party leader. yeah, i mean, longstreet continued to get along well with a number of confederates. beauregard is one of them. pickett is another d.h. hill, who felt that he was scapegoated somewhat, by some other confederates, another so he didn't cross swords with. there were some some people considered. to be fair minded. i think he considered porter alexander to be pretty fair minded. then there were others, you know again early and pendleton and john brown gordon and so on who he felt really had it in for him but but it's it's an important question because you know it is important to note that while longstreet had many many critics the who served under him tended to defend him at least to defend his personal courage and to try to put his politics and his war record into two different boxes. his staff, officers, men like tom gray and moxley sorrel remained quite to him, though they had different politics, so

it wasn't impossible for him to retain cordiality with some people with whom he disagreed. it's just there were others, like early, who even he felt had no interest in cordiality. and did robert e lee live long enough, have any to weigh in on longstreet's conduct at gettysburg? question question two was ever any interaction between alexander stephens once he became governor and longstreet? yeah, great question so on the subject, lee lee, of course, dies in 1870 and lost he longstreet and lee were very close, including at the end of the war. their relationship begins to sour when longstreet writes his letter, supporting reconstruct because lee opposes grant's election as a terrible tragedy, longstreet as he's about to send the letters, writes lee, and says, hey, will you support me

in this? you know, if a man of your stature came along and said, hey, let's make the best of it, that would be. and lee says, no, i'm sorry i just, you know, i just don't don't agree with you and support you so and their relationship really soured in a way after lee died because, you know, lee did not single out longstreet for during his lifetime. it was only after died that lee's acolytes really got into that into game. and longstreet was think really embittered by the fact those men cast so much doubt on the on his relationship lee and on and on the way that their of mutual trust that had existed during the war that that that that really kind of angered and disappointed longstreet as for alexander there was some longstreet when he first moves back to georgia has some hope he's just looking for ways to make the republican a viable entity in post-reconstruction georgia and there's a brief flickering moment where seems like alexander stephens might be

to head a fusion ticket that would include some republicans and sort of moderate democrats. but he backs away from that and essentially becomes someone who is, you know, an anti political antagonist of longstreet. well, two more questions this evening. hey, thank you. i'm thing i really enjoyed the book. but one thing i was really striking towards the later end of it is there's almost this cult of celebrity. this culture developing around old war generals. and i want to know how much you see this as something kind of a natural outgrowth of the sectional tensions of people holding up the people they for their own political and how much was it purely just aspect of the reconciliation cult you talk about? that's a great question. as the great historian david blight has has written and others have written to this, this, this sort of movement towards, reconciliation was in part a kind of agreement on the part of whites in both the north and the south to take all of the

the harrowing issues and push them off to side and celebrate the war as an exercise in manly valor on both sides, where you don't have to ponder the politics, which are so disturbing. but but just think about about about the battlefield. and so we see a cult of celebrity around around these older veterans and and, you know, increasingly as that cult of reunion develops. it means. it means northerners are more willing to look admiringly upon southern leaders, for example. and indeed, the sort of southerners agree to this of reconciliation on the premise that reconciliation can come on their meaning. everyone gets to share the high ground and and and so it's it's sure you see, you know, some some some of it is, as you say,

kind of, you know, choosing the heroes on your side or your team. but increasingly, the cult of reconciliation is it is a is it is a trend towards celebrating the man alone as they saw of of of those on on both sides longstreet. you know i'm sure this is part of what you were referring to. he becomes a sort of celebrity figure. image is used to shill medicine, as you know, because he's got all of chronic problems. he's dealing with and he can, including the after effects of his wounding. and he can say, know this tonic is a great is a you know is a great great way to and here's other veterans who will tell you that if you have aches and pains, this is the medicine to take and so on. so it it it it gets caught up in a concern. tourism of the gilded age and the emergence of advertising and, all those kinds of things. thank you for the presentation. really enjoyed it. given we know about what longstreet after the war. i'm really puzzled by what he

did before the war. there were other southerners, for example george thomas who retained his commission with u.s. army. yeah. given longstreet's unique reaction, the surrender at apple maddox i'm it amazes me. there weren't hints before the war of where he would end up after. yeah. you know, that's a great point and it's paradoxical because to flip your example, some of the figures who were what we call reluctant secessionists, who wrung their hands about secession, was it the right to do coming to accept it only when it was a fait accompli. the people like that included jubal early for example or alexander stephens. so there was no you know, some people who were reluctant confederates became incredibly intense, not only confederates, but lost officers. so there wasn't necessarily a

sort of a correlation in some of the late comers were became very militant and stayed stayed very militant. i that that that that longstreet's rushing to join the confederate army had in part to do with a not belief. and this was much more this was much more common among eager confederates than among reluctant ones and not in common belief that the war would be short and and you know, he wasn't at that moment choosing the four year war with the deaths of 750,000 men. it's the unionists, the reluctant ones who tended to say things like, let's be careful what we wish for here, because this is going to be a long, grinding carnival of of death. you're part of what? the way i think about it a little bit is that longstreet it

was a man who had sort of two people sitting on his shoulders one was augustus baldwin longstreet that you know, fire uncle and the other was us and it's kind of a story of him of him know moving you in the direction of grant's influence. but only only you know very, very gradually. please join me in thanking elizabeth varon and gordon jones.

our speaker this