referred to jackson as a prince of bush whackers and has outgeneralled call of our commanders. a new yorker write being in the popular press in the north in june said oh, that they could find someone as dashing and plucky. one of the favorite court marshals i have ever seen among the 88,000 was of a quartermaster named simms in the fall of 1862. simms was court marshalled for treason. he said stonewall jackson has whipped us every time we fight him. and for saying such an outrageous thing, he was found guilty. a pennsylvanian, june '62, i'm sorry to say, i have frequently heard our men talk as though

they believe jackson could not be whipped. in fact he has to become what might be called a bugaboo. all of this, attitudes will in the south and the north, where there had been no doubt of success in the north and not much hope for success in the south after henry and donaldson and all of the other problems, is what made jackson what he was in 1862. so while jackson's high ranking subordinates underwent a parallel if not exactly the same met a moetamorphosis, theyed a hall thought that he was dangerous, crazy, and so on. by the end of the campaign, there were individuals who still found nothing to admire in jackson. despite his late life bouquets that i mentioned, tolliver was typical, but richard taylor and

dick yewel might personify the others. dick and i lore, who you probably know was the brother-in-law of jefferson davis, very, very well connected fellow. son of the president of the united states some years earlier and the brother in law of the confederate states, very well connected. his prose descriptions are probably familiar to every one of you. he described the general vividly. it's really good to read. he compared jackson to wolf and nelson for, quote, his place in the hearts of english speaking peoples and so on. really admired jackson. but -- and this is an episode that is virtually unknown -- shows up in the memoirs of chief of dick and i lore's staff. during the opening phases of valley campaign, when taylor first came in to contact with jackson, he was so unmanned by what appeared to be jackson's in-especiallity tud that he took leave, got on his horse, climbed over the mountain, came to

richmond and talked to his brother-in-law the president and said you have got to get rid of jackson. he's going to lose our call cause in the valley. so there's quite a revolution. as a foot note, and i lore came away thinking he had convinced jefferson davis about this, and that davis was considering sending james longstreet to replace jackson in the valley. if it had, longstreet would still be approaching winchester from the south today slowly i'm pretty sure. dick yewell, almost unbelieve pli excentric, he called on the 13th of may, ten days before the on fall against front royal, he called him that enthusiastic if a matt tick in a letter. and he said our army has no head at all, though there is room for

one or two. he called him that may speaking to another confederate officer a crazy as a march hair, a crazy man. when he received orders he didn't like, he said that this is damn foolishness. his road to damascus experience was actually on the road to republic in this instance and he called aside the colonel from lynchburg who was the man he had talked to before, and he said do you remember when i called jackson and old woman? well, i take it all back. he had been converted. charles s. winer on the other happened, his very able commander, he suited jackson perfectly well. he had a stern world view. he believed in discipline. jackson liked him. but he did not like jackson. and the diary which has never

been published other than occasional snippets, he was on june the 5th, campaign almost over, he wrote jackson is insane. that's directly from charles winerd. two days later. disgusted with jackson. on the 8th, requesting to leave his command. hener g never got away. he died in battle exactly two months to the day after that last entry. dick garnett is the most famous of the officers who jackson threw in to arrest. unjustly it seemed to me, a letter that's never been published by dr. pre-man whofre responded to a request from someone in will a private letter, i never could understand

why jackson persecuted dick garnett. even after the climax of the valley campaign, not all of the officers in close proximity were sure that jackson really had been skillful rather than lucky. a conclave of four of them agreed jackson could not continue to take such risks without at some time meeting with a great disaster. foot soldiers by this time had none of those reservations whatsoever at all. colon colonel folk event rson who had signed at the top of the out of channel communications to the secretary of war, probably went

through something of a met more metamorphosis, but his letter is subject to interpretation. he admitted the privates had the most unbounded confidence. he didn't say we all do. he said the privates. is that saying the hmen all lov him but i'm not so sure? he was killed 13 days after he wrote that letter, so we have no further evidence. the jackson legend that was crafted during a few week during that spring of 1862, 33 days, if you will, was far too strong to be unhorsed by the general's costly failures right here around richmond during the seven days campaign. the end of june to the first of july in 1862. in the aftermath of that performance, the only one in

jackson's career that was a failure by any gauge, it just absolutely was, popular opinion was inclined to blame lee for a lack of complete success in corralling mcclellan's army, defeating it more thoroughly, capturing more of it, and none of the public press, none of the public, blamed jackson. and in fact exactly the reverse was the case before every onces in a while the newspapers get it wrong. or they did then. i guess now they have it all straightened out. this entirely unfair judgment survived in the minds of the public right along. and to the degree that jackson did do it in the valley, it was in part as a man pes tags of this business i've mentioned to you about the impact on men's minds. his failure during the campaign seemed surely to be the result of stress fatigue or some

diminution of his source. i have an extensive chapter looking just at what happened to jab s jackson and why during that week entitled sleepless in the saddle because i think that probably was the root of the problem. but northerners facing up against jackson's corps were terrified when they heard that mighty stonewall had shown up. one of my favorite quotes from that week comes from a vermont fellow in the first united states sharpshooters. writing at the time, he talked about how when they found that jackson was there, it was unsettling. he wrote, the dreaded form of stonewall jackson seemed to lurk in every bush. well, it jackson was lurking in a bush, it was probably to sleep

when she have been aen he shoul doing something else. but the fact people were terrified of him is pretty significant. he had become the great threat of the yankees. the legend continued to expand after his death. i have been shackled with the injunction that i'm not to talk about anything that happened after 1862. your window of discussion is 1862. but evidence of jackson's impact upon the psyche north and south comes from a wonderful court marshall in afternokansas in 18r jackson was long dead. i was amused when i found this. a citizen named a.r. earl ran a little store , in the summer of

1864, a court marshall tried him for treason. under the constitution, there's no way a military tribunal could try him and no martial law enforced, but they were pretty much ignoring the don't tugs and they tried him and they convicted him and his crime was he had been offering for sale inis emporium is biography of stonewall jackson. this was the book which they introduced in evidence was the john easton cook biography, although his name wasn't on it. it was the pirated copy published in new york city. it had been copyrighted under the laws proum you wimise you w by the united states, so it was completely legal. certified by the government. but none of it mattered to the protectors of kansasian virtue and he was convicted for

treason. what a delicious tribute on jackson's impact on the public mind a year and a half after his death. northerners of less frenzied temperament openly admired their dead enemy. herman melville who was anything but a southern sympathizer who you've read his write building the war as well as the big whale, he wrote two poems aimed primarily at jackson and lauded jackson. in one he declared that though relentlessly he routed us, we drop a tear on the bold virginiian's beer. the other melville poem he marvelled how his sword with hunger was closed. some vindictive northern journals attacked melville as a traitor. although he certainly was very

pro union. and even in such an unadulterated northern venue as vermont, newspapers printed complimentary notices about his death. the same new yorker who i wroetwroet quoted to you who in june of 1862 had written home, no one in it our army is fit to compete with him, he admitted on jackson's death, i do not feel like exalting over the grave of such a brave, wise and energetic antagonist. northerners of that mean south to the posting of sentinels over jackson's grave in lexington. the degree to which southerners mourned jackson at his death is well-known to all of you. entirely typical reaction was to blame the country's loss on avengeful god in keeping with

the spirit of the times. a leading southerner cleric, you've probably heard this one, suggested just within days after jackson died that the news actually was good obviously. god clearly was on their side all along and he now evidently has charged himself rather than jackson with the care and protection of the struggling republic. a north carolinian, i have some north carolina friends here, charles and is anly, every time you find a literate north carolinian, this fellow writing home to his family, said the army loved him and sort of in the same vein as the cleric, i believe he was taken away to learn us not to depend upon the arm of flesh. a punishment for being too much in the south. a similarly piased virginiian reached the blissful conclusion

in a letter that it is all for the best. about but he could not help in the very same letter admitting in a little bit less relentlessly optimistic view, i almost feel like we are without a general now. the few southerners who were still not impressed by jackson, even after his valley triumphs, were primarily motivated it seems to me by jealousy. general joe johnston who had more than ample reason for jell jealousy of almost everyone, insisted that he was jackson was rather simply possessed with the sublime enthusiasm. he did have sublime enthusiasm, but perhaps more than jack stoo johnston was willing to admit. a woman made the mistake of

speaking glowingly about jackson in front of one of general james longstreet's staff. latrobe she wrote was greatly piqued by such good words and said that it detracted from longstreet's fame. certainly sounds like jealousy to me. and latrobe, who was a mild mannered fellow, surprised her. she added, i was very much taken a back that such a quiet self possessed individual should have been startled out of his usual he can wi nimity thus. longstreet himself of course bet three decades after the death pointed out their defects and trying to assail their reputations.

it grew expressly from those few days. southern newspapers admitted their conversion experiences. they had been making fun of jackson. they had been highlighting his ex-send tr t eccentricities. the richmond daily whig has been smaning how the war should have been run in hair view, they knew how to run it in the valerie and everywhere else, they had made a lot of fun of jackson and his eccentrici eccentricities. they had the good grace to spoof their earlier instances with a lengthy foe wanted circular. a liberal reward will be given for the apprehension of a confirmed lunatic who escaped from the asylum early in the spring.

a nice metaphor for what was going on. he thinks he's an officer in the confederate army. he was offering personal indignity to an aged ex-senator of the united states. all of this alluding to banks and free month and the rest and so on. the entire efforts of the united and confederate states governments have failed to arrest him. the georgia newspaper had been doing harm to jackson early, but they came away. they similarly reverse field and acknowledged that they had been wrong. jackson's recent victories give us a delight the georgia paper said, we hope he will keep on and give us an ap-poe lexie before he stops.

so this quite lunatic had become mighty stonewall. his new stature made him a purveyor of soap and the strong right arm for the southern confederacy. it made him possible for him to come over and facilitate the seven days that lifted the siege of richmond. it changed the whole complex of the war and that's why it seems to me he might well deserve attention as the man of 1862. we have by design ten minutes for questions and answers. i guess professor rawls will moderate those. >> professor rawls will change the way we're going to do it because you're going to come down here and sit so that the tv audience can be seeing you

better. t first the public q&a and then he'll come down here. okay. got it. first the public q&a. and we have sayingahave station. we can't pass the mikes. so if you have a question, please is an up and go to one of the mikes on either side so that the tv audience can hear you. >> all right. i'm hoping that stanley or charles will rise to the defense of tar heels everywhere. i should tell you fellows i'm an honorary north carolinian. the governor signed a proclamation and i do not have plastic flamingos on my yard, but otherwise i have bought into it. i really have. yes, sir. >> assume that about if someone were to nominate robert e. lee later in the day, assume that's

a possibility, since we're not having a panel discussion at the end that will give us all a came chance to diss each other's k d candidate, what would you say to someone who nominated -- why should the audience vote for seasonwall jackson instead of lee? >> well, i could hardly shriek with horror, but the question of when in southern consciousness, everything else aside, the track of the two crossed is something i've long debated with gary gallagher. he's inclined to think lee became the man in the south in perception well before jackson's death. i'm no t so sure of that. but lee's rise to prominence was later than jackson's. number one. number two, lee's rise to prominence was in some considerable degree facilitated by jackson's success allowing

the seven days to unfold. so you can pay your money and take your choice with that. general. >> bob, you have shared with us actually a treasure rove of commen comme rove of comments about the man. i wonder if you ccan comment on what jackson himself had to say during this period. have you had a chance to look at his letters, his thoughts about why he was having so much success against so many enemies in that 33 days? >> the question is an apt one and the answer is tied deeply to his unbelievably deep religious

person. it's difficult for me, i suppose for a lot of modern people even about it you are relynn yus today, to look back to an era in which the attitudes particularly of conservative folks a, he generally believed that he was god's instrument on earth. to a greater degree i suspect than even deeply religious people today do. and it vuk me whstruck me at fi being disingenuous, that the degree to which marianna would write and say you're all over the newspapers, you're famous. and he would say it's not me, it's god. i'm just his instrument. the certainty that he actually believed that in every fiber of his being is just about unvoid

unavoidable. anything that anybody tells you today, good news is you don't have to believe me, them or us. all of this material is available. it's not like the french and indian war in which i worked briefly where there are six accounts of the battle where i was posted for a while. you can read jackson to your heart's content and you can come to grips with it. i'll be surprised it if when you're done you do not believe that his attitude toward all of this was that it had nothing at all to do with him, he was merely the vessel through which god was doing things for his chosen people of the confederate states of america. while the rest of you contemplate something further, let me make an appeal that i always do when i get on my behind legs in front of people, even people who are not the friends of civil war preservation that you all ought to be. to support the preservation efforts that we're all involved in, the civil with an trust in

washington, the central virginia battlefields trust, richmond battlefields association in richmond whose president is here today, i saw him a bit ago, are all striving in the last decade that we have in the main theater as opposed to bentonville, north carolina or may fash southwestern virginia, to save the battlefields. and many of you are ardent supporters of that. mary roy edwards sitting in the front row here. always supported the civil with an trust, central virginia battlefields rust, battlefields trust. i can't get shrill with those of you who are not battlefield oriented, but you're all interested in the civil war.

if your special interest is political figures which you'll hear about, publication of their papers deserves support. preservation of their houses. but most especially the battlefields which is my own veb uhe. you folks need to support us. a lot of you do. more of you should. so there is my sermon. not a pre-decemberity theirian sermon. we have to work at it or it's p not going to happen. anyone else? walter. got to go to the microphone or you'll make the media folks unhappy. and that's a bad thing. >> a little later in 1862, stonewall performed at

sharpsburg. whe when did his difficulties with a.p. hill a rise? >> well, jackson had a good bit of difficulty with everyone who was sub ordinary maordinate to y without exception. the question i'm asked second most often, first what if jackson had been at gettysburg. why did the southern confederacy struggling with no leadership of any quality in the western theater despite jefferson davis' view, why did they never send jackson there or contrairely, leave jackson here and send lee. i have very little doubt that jackson would have been a complete failure because he could not get along with his subordinates. his world view was so narrow, so tight, so rigid that he just could not get along with sub ordinary thannants. and with lee to shield those subordinates to some degree with

him, jackson got away with being a grumpy person. by himself, he would have had the whole command of the tennessee in irons almost immediately. maybe that wouldn't have been a bad thing. but he was not cut out for that. really wasn't. but hill is the example of that and the problem began on the two days before the battle of cedar mountain, there's a good book that explain that to you. you probably have at least a couple copies already i hope. but it began where hill had misyou said stood somis you sa you said stood some orders can jackson had not been as skillful as she have been. jackson said few understand the

importance of so he layerity in war. that was probably the root of that in both cases. it's not widely known, walter, came that jackson and hill had a rapprochement of some sort near the end of their lives. they were still at logger heads during the winter of 1862 and 3, the last winter of jackson's life. the chief signal officer, adams of a.p. hill's division, was accepting orders from jackson's staff without going through the division commander. and that made hill angry and he complained about it. jackson lou him an arrest again. but a couple weeks before chancellorsville, there's good evidence that the two of them met at prospect hill looking down toward the lower crossing near smithfield. when they met, they climbed off the horse, took their