James Longstreet The Historical Misrepresentation of the Confederacy’s War Horse: Antebellum, Gettysburg, and the Lost Cause

Abstract

General James Longstreet had a long and fruitful life in military service. He was one of the few proponents of positive change after the downfall of the Confederate States of America, but for it was criticized. However, his personal and professional connections with various individuals such as Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee made him the focal point for criticism of the Lost Cause Movement and post-war Southern sympathizers. These individuals and organizations took control of America’s media as well as the stories of Civil War soldiers. Anyone who went against the Lost Cause’s narrative would be subject to extensive scrutinization as well as personal attacks on their character and image. Longstreet’s forward-thinking mind and willingness to accept defeat of the South made him the prime target for Southern hate. Longstreet’s reputation was destroyed after the war for his honest criticism of the South’s beloved hero: Robert E. Lee. Criticism from the South, as well as other Confederate commanders, accused Longstreet of being a traitor and willingly attempting to destroy the Army of Northern Virginia through his actions. The Battle of Gettysburg continues to be the focal point for this disparity in the historical representation of Longstreet. This paper argues against these accusations toward Longstreet and attempts to rewrite the false narrative surrounding his military career and life in public service. Utilizing secondary and primary source evidence, this paper will broaden the perception of Longstreet’s character in attempts to uphold his name in history.