Jump to content
Shiloh Discussion Group

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Last week
  2. This YouTube video of 36 minutes was published on 2 May 2019 by Misesmedia, a publication of Mises Institute at Auburn, Alabama. It relies heavily on the Diary of young Elsie Duncan to describe life for civilians of Hardin County after the Battle of Shiloh, after the Union Army mostly moved south to besiege Corinth, Mississippi. The Horrors of War are fully described, including mass graves, the number of wounded overwhelming available surgeons, “raiders” (roaming bands of Union deserters), “guerrillas” (roaming bands of Southern supporters), avoiding “summary justice,” and the increasing difficulty over time to avoid starvation. In addition, mention is made of Duncan's Cave, and Hoker's Bend. "Life After Shiloh: Tory Rule" is narrated by Chris Calton, and is part of the Historical Controversies series. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qITGlHH0iW8 "Life after Shiloh" [Other titles in the Historical Controversies series at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLALopHfWkFlGOn0oxjgp5gGzj-pnqeY0G ].
  3. Earlier
  4. Shiloh video by gaming guy The void being left by the inadequate teaching of History in public schools is being filled, in part, by an unexpected history advocate: the online gaming community. Dedicated to “authenticity” in recreating historic Battle Games, the school-age generation is being taught history, unawares, through participation in online games. With the above in mind... ran across this interesting video while searching for recent releases on Battle of Shiloh: “History Guy Gaming” has done other battlefield videos (Gettysburg, Antietam, Bull Run), and provided a review of the Battle of Shiloh game (Ultimate General) in 2017. His description of the events of April 1862 reflects the understanding of someone who was educated during the 1980 – 2000 period (with the summary of events and condensing of outcomes “necessary” to get through Civil War History in the least amount of time evident), but with obvious individual study undertaken. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syQ6wKjcFzE "The Battle of Shiloh" by History Guy Gaming (published on YouTube 6 SEP 2019.) Following a brief introduction, the tour of Shiloh NMP begins at 3 minute mark, with the undeniable truth: “Visiting a battlefield results in better perspective and greater understanding.” At 3:55 mark the battle begins with Peabody's unauthorized patrol (conducted by Major Powell.) 6:00 The Union defense of Duncan Field. Unfortunately, the narrator uses a modern map, and is further led astray by the location of General WHL Wallace's mortal wounding. Now that a key Union defensive line is re-named as “The Thicket,” he comes to the wrong conclusion (that the Hornet's Nest was co-located with the site of Wallace's wounding.) Since all histories of the Battle of Shiloh prior to 2010 make mention of the Hornet's Nest, those seeking the location of that site during visits to the park will struggle just that little bit, from now on. 9:00 Sherman's experience with repelling Rebel attacks. [CSA mass grave visited.] 10:50 Shiloh Church. 13:30 The mistake of General Albert Sidney Johnston. 16:15 Hornet's Nest (part 2) 18:30 Ruggles Battery a.k.a. “Thunder in the Thicket” 18:45 General Johnston's mortal wound. 23:30 Albert Sidney Johnston's loss; and relevance to War in the West. 24:00 Indian mounds. 24:50 Union retreat to heights above Pittsburg Landing: Grant's Last Line (Buell arrives.) 27:10 Dill Branch: Union gunboats versus Rebel advance. 28:30 “Lick 'em tomorrow, though” – U.S. Grant. 28:40 Day Two (and Fallen Timbers) 30:00 Shiloh National Cemetery. 32:30 Visitor Center (and review). [The review of online game "Ultimate General: Battle of Shiloh" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vj9sQKBu9U0 by History Guy Gaming on 30 DEC 2016.]
  5. One thing about electronic resources: existing references are subject to change without notice... The "Shiloh Animated Map" by American Battlefield Trust was upgraded middle of 2019 (although it just gained my notice, by accident, today.) After two views of the 18-minute presentation, I am impressed with the improvements incorporated; and I feel that the 2019 edition more accurately depicts the Battle of Shiloh than previously. Have a look, yourself; and feel free to comment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tlhlk3bp-f4
  6. Inspired by Tom's admonition to "find and post more Shiloh references," I stumbled upon a previously overlooked Staff Ride... Compiled by the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, this Staff Ride Handbook of 68 pages records the visit to Shiloh NMP that took place early in 2000, and contains many maps and illustrations, as well as biographies of key leaders and a timeline [ and is available at <https://www.smdc.army.mil> ]. Key takeaways: It was the intention of Major General Henry Halleck to “mount an offensive against the Confederate Army at Corinth” (page 3). “Grant made his base at Pittsburg Landing, a position in enemy territory with its back to the Tennessee River. Grant neglected, however, to fortify the encampment” (p. 3). “Johnston originally intended to attack Grant on April 4, but muddy terrain, green troops, and poor coordination slowed the Confederate advance and postponed the assault for two days. The delay would prove costly. On the morning of April 6, thousands of screaming Confederates poured out of the woods near Shiloh and routed many of the slumbering northern troops. Many dispirited soldiers broke for the rear and fled to the banks of the Tennessee, refusing to fight. Severely battered and facing disaster, other Federal troops rallied and began making fierce, determined stands. By the afternoon, they had established a formidable battle line at a sunken road, named the “Hornets Nest” by Confederates because of the stinging hail of bullets and shell they faced. Repeated frontal assaults failed to take the stronghold. Finally, a massive artillery barrage and flanking attacks turned the tide and the rebels overwhelmed the northerners, capturing, wounding, or killing most of the stalwart defenders” (page 3). General Johnston's battle plan was too complex (for implementation by inexperienced junior commanders); and its initiation was delayed at least one day by flooding rain (page 6). “Fraley Field: the battle begins...” (page 9). [Staff Ride Stop No. One.] Stop Two: invasion of the Union camps. Stop 3: Sherman's front crumbles. Stop 5: The Hamburg – Purdy Road (the Union Right collapses). Page 21: “Just after 10 am General Grant met BGen Prentiss and ordered him to hold his position at all hazards.” Stop 9: Grant's Last Line. Although this Staff Ride provides a good summary of the Battle of Shiloh, and pinpoints crucial moments during the contest, it suffers from the following faults and errors: Map of Shiloh Battlefield on page 10. Repeating the mistake of earlier writers, this map attempts to combine TWO DAYS of conflict on a single map, which leads to unnecessary confusion. Biography of Don Carlos Buell (page 36) contains many errors. Union Order of Battle (page 52) WHL Wallace should be recorded as [mw] mortally wounded, instead of [k]. Page 60 – Appendix F – Timeline. Smith (vice Grant) leads Union Army south up the Tennessee River after the victories at Fort Henry and Fort Donelson. https://www.smdc.army.mil/Portals/38/Documents/Publications/History/Staff%20Rid 2000 Army Staff Ride for Shiloh Gudmen's Staff Ride of 2003 (for comparison) http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/cgsc/carl/download/csipubs/gudmens.pdf
  7. Am writing a book right now on firearms at Shiloh. The basic question, "Did it make a difference,?" being armed with a rifle or smooth-bore musket. It made a lot of difference to the average recruit of 1861. They wanted rifles! and would be really angry if given a smooth-bore, especially on the Federal side. The poor Confederates in Johnston's Department No.2, from September of 1861 to April of 1862 were short of firearms. The majority of the firearms carried by the Confederates were smooth-bores and the majority of the firearms carried by the Federals were rifles. Now--------- Did it make a difference which one you had at Shiloh. Many say it did not because of the distances of combat and firing, much of it in dense forest and brush under 100 yards. That is the contention of these small arms writers, because of the distances fought-- rifles did not make a difference overall. Well, I have been researching battle accounts at Shiloh that at different times and circumstances it did make a difference. These I will share in my book. The idea of rifles shooting these big arcs is interesting, but more of theory than actual shooting. I have been a member of the N-SSA for 40 years and have shot every kind of Civil War firearm at a multitude of distances-- including targets at 300 yards. I have watched my fellow N-SSA shooters hit a target at that distance 4 times in a row. NOW these guys practice-- but I will tell you if they were shooting at a target, a cannon crew, or a line of infantry from 200 to 300 yards away-- their sighting would be to arc their rounds into a specific target-- like shooting a bow and arrow-- you arc your shot. If you missed, you would have missed an individual target, and yes your shot might hit the ground a number of yards behind that man or cannon-- true. But you were not looking for a volley fire effect. You had one target and one target only. Over 100 yards your chances of hitting a man with smooth-bore was down to 30% or less. I have tried it and that is a fact. The Confederate Army at Shiloh it appears did not have a disadvantage being armed with smooth-bores at Shiloh. They pushed the Federals back two miles or more, but did take a lot of casualties doing it. They were stopped at times by Federals armed with rifles, hidden behind trees and in ravines for hours. That is a fact.... So-- wait for my book and send me all those accounts where Soldiers at Shiloh were thankful they had Enfields or were mad because their smooth-bores did no damage. To far away!
  8. Hello-- Just going through all these Shiloh posts-- on the uniform- It appears to be a Nashville or Memphis pattern Tennessee issued frock coat. The distinctive cuffs with three buttons stand out.. It was probably dark blue with red or black cuff and collar. The hat is interesting and is Militia. The ribbon in front could be part of a cockade, a Secession cockade. Medium blue color.
  9. WOW! This from 2008! Heck Yes-- start doing your research! What Shiloh needs is research. Dig into those local libraries, Historical Societies, private and State collections. Look for first hand accounts. Letters, diaries, memoirs buried in some old box in the back of the museum. What folks do not know-- that not EVERYTHING-- is on the internet. There are still hundreds of letters, reports, papers on Shiloh no one has ever seen. HECK! I have one hanging on my wall in the Office. A quartermaster requisition signed by General Sherman for his whole Division! Doing research for a number of authors over the years-- many do not do their own research, especially academics. OF course some do-- but they do use students and aids to help out. So put on your walking shoes, get in the car and drive to your local historical society and ask if they have any Shiloh letters or stuff on Shiloh. Go to your local Round Table and ask if folks have memorabilia or letters from relatives on Shiloh. They do!!!!! Look in the old newspaper for soldiers letters-- they exist and often fascinating to read and historically sound as research. Gettysburg has their own magazine for petes sake. They fill it with articles that are based on sound research and it shows. Just do it and get back to us.... Tom
  10. Yes--- Grant also said he never was able to see Buell's Official Report of the Battle for years and years. When he did read it--- he came out with that, "totally misunderstood," line that laid the foundation of the "What ifs," and all the rest of the story on Shiloh. Tim Smith is very good on the What ifs!
  11. And still more on Buell... During the 1847 Campaign for Mexico City, General Scott recognized that it was vital to gain control of one of the three causeways leading to the Mexican Capital (the city occupied highground in the midst of a swampy lake.) Thus, the Battle of Churubusco was fought on August 20th. After gaining control of an important convent, Scott's men attempted to advance towards the causeway, but were pinned down by fire of Mexicans occupying a field of corn, nearly ready for harvest. Hesitant to advance until the defenses (trenches or fortification) being used by the enemy were known, the American commander was gratified to observe Brevet-Captain Buell climb onto the roof of an adobe house in order to take stock of the situation. But soon after gaining the elevated position, Buell was seen to tumble off again, obviously shot; it was assumed that he had been mortally wounded. Later, it was surmised that Don Carlos Buell's superior fitness allowed him to survive being shot through the right chest, near the shoulder, although it required nearly two months for him to heal sufficiently to return to active service. In meantime, the American Army crossed the causeway and took possession of Mexico City. Why is this important? When Major General Buell arrived at Pittsburg Landing at (or just before) 2 pm on April 6th and met Major General Grant aboard the Tigress, it was their first face-to-face encounter since late February 1862... the ill-starred, unauthorized Nashville meeting. Now in the Ladies' Cabin of the steamer, the two generals exchanged pleasantries: Grant showed off the bullet wound to his sword scabbard; and Buell was unimpressed. A man who had cheated death after being shot through the chest could hardly be expected to find such a minor incident noteworthy. General Grant soon departed (to once and for all call forward Lew Wallace.) And General Buell was left behind at the Landing to organize the movement of his Army of the Ohio across the Tennessee River. References: Medical Histories of Union Generals by Jack Welsh (1996) Kent State University Press. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Gazetteer/Places/America/United_States/Army/USMA/Cullums_Register/1090*.html Don Carlos Buell. Various SDG posts.
  12. Union POW's play Baseball. The above image is interesting, and has relevance to SDG enthusiasts due to the fact over 2000 Federal soldiers were captured during the Battle of Shiloh; and most of the enlisted men were held in Montgomery Cotton Prison (April - May 1862) and Camp Oglethorpe, Macon, Georgia (May - October 1862); both sites record baseball as having been played. Although not stipulated, the soldiers playing ball could very well be competing at Camp Oglethorpe during May or June of 1862. The tall picket fence in background would have enclosed the west side of the compound, with the corner to the compound perhaps eight yards behind the catcher (and the south boundary wall stretching away to the east.) Shiloh prisoners are likely the first baseball playing POW's (enough to field several teams) held by the Confederate States of America long enough to "manufacture" equipment with which to play. [A change of Commandant at Camp Oglethorpe put an end to baseball playing in July 1862... the same man created the "dead line" inside the boundary walls of the prison pen.] Above image in Public Domain.
  13. The Call for Volunteers -- 1861 [From America's National Game by Albert G. Spalding (1911) and in the Public Domain.]
  14. More on D.C. Buell Actively engaged during the Mexican War (and wounded at Battle of Churubusco) Don Carlos Buell was brevetted to Major, and remained on active duty with the U.S. Army after the war and served in Texas, Missouri, and New York; and in the two years leading up to outbreak of the Civil War was at Washington D.C. on “special assignment” with the War Department. Major Robert Anderson arrived at Charleston Harbor November 1860 and took command of the Federal forces (then based at Fort Moultrie) on the 21st. Shortly afterwards, with unrest growing at Charleston, Captain D. C. Buell was sent to Fort Moultrie (arrived on 11 DEC) with written orders for Major Anderson, which “directed Anderson to remain on the defensive; and upon belief that attack on his force was imminent, to select which ever available fort was deemed strongest to defend to the last.” [See Doubleday pages 42 - 51.] It is also rumored that Captain Buell delivered verbal orders (possibly from General Winfield Scott to Major Anderson) but this has never been proven. Major Anderson moved his force to Fort Sumter on 26 DEC 1860. And, Don Carlos Buell returned to his duties in Washington and was available as Staff officer to General Sumner, when that man was sent by the Lincoln Administration to replace Albert Sidney Johnston as commander of the Pacific Department. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/24972/24972-h/24972-h.htm#CHAPTER_III Reminiscences of Forts Moultrie and Sumter by Abner Doubleday (1876).
  15. As regards the "friction" between Buell and Grant, this may be blamed on the lack of an Official Report on the Battle of Shiloh, which should have been written, and then submitted through proper channels by the supreme Federal commander: Ulysses S. Grant. But Major General Grant never submitted this report, and in his Memoirs (page 306) blames, "the lack of reports by Buell and his subordinates [which would have permitted Grant to write a true and full account.]" In essence: Buell did not acknowledge Grant as supreme commander; therefore, Grant was not obligated to share credit for the Union victory at Shiloh with Buell. Lack of sufficient credit for Shiloh, combined with the "Nashville incident" [in late FEB 1862, during which U.S. Grant revealed his new rank as Major General to Brigadier General Buell] festered. And when General Buell was removed from command of the Army of the Ohio (and that force subsequently renamed Army of the Cumberland) Don Carlos Buell appears to have attributed a portion of the blame for failure of his professional career (in particular, lack of credit for Shiloh) at the feet of U.S. Grant. [Of note: General Buell's Chief of Staff during Shiloh, James B. Fry, later became Provost Marshal General of the United States, and became better acquainted with U.S. Grant; and he considered both men to be his friends. After the war, General Fry attempted to "heal the rift" between Grant and Buell; but James Fry was unsuccessful. The sour relations between the two Union leaders remained un-reconciled at the time of Grant's death in 1885.] To summarize: lack of an official Shiloh report allowed "rumor and supposition" to fill the void and gain currency, resulting in the Real Story of Shiloh only being unearthed (today) with great effort. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.$b15913&view=1up&seq=311 Military Miscellanies by James B. Fry (page 305).
  16. Ozzy

    Skills to be Taught

    CSuniforms, Thanks for your contribution. As regards U.S. Grant's acknowledged ability to "write terse, concise orders," that is just one of many desired skills that can be taught to young leaders. [Whereas "the ability to ride a horse," so important in Grant's day, is a skill no longer deemed necessary... most of the time.]
  17. Mona, Thanks for clarifying the status of the seasonal watercourse in vicinity of Stoney Lonesome. It remains curious that this seasonal stream was deemed significant to include on the map, yet the purpose-built Shunpike is not displayed. (General Sherman stated he had knowledge of all the roads in vicinity of the Pittsburg Camp, and knew the Owl Creek Bridge was strengthened to accommodate passage of artillery, and had elements of the 6th Iowa and Behr's Artillery deployed further west to defend approach to the bridge...) Omission of detail can affect understanding as powerfully as manipulation of facts.
  18. as to #3..the stream in question at stoney lonesome..is a wet weather water-run from the springs north of stage rd and s\does continue south..older people that live along the stage road in this area retell of the large,deep cold swimming holes that they as kids played in..so there is a water feature in this area..also Purdy is more northwest of adamsb\ville than the map shows.
  19. EXACTLY--- And the only question is, was this an omission of deceit or just plain memory loss. Either way, it makes it harder to study the Battle of Shiloh, especially if you were unawares that some sources are incorrect.
  20. Thanks for broaching this topic... as I had encountered the above map in Sherman's Personal Memoirs (1889) and was looking for someplace to put it and discuss it. Although there is no credit accorded, I believe it is reasonable to assume that the above depiction was created by General Sherman (or member of his staff); or it was endorsed by Sherman as "close enough to include in my Memoirs." The claim that "Grant and Sherman... re-wrote their maps [to suit a narrative]" I believe is proven without doubt: General Grant's staff officer, then- LtCol James McPherson concocted a map focused on Snake Creek in 1863 that appeared to show Major General Lew Wallace "not getting very far" on his march from Stoney Lonesome, before turning around (countermarching) back to the River Road... but the map does not show the Third Division ever crossing Snake Creek (OR 10 page 183.) As concerns the above Sherman map, there are at least twenty errors (which is difficult to accept as "accidental" nearly thirty years after the Battle of Shiloh.) Compare to Atwell's 1900 map, or any later map (before the streams were re-routed) and the discrepancies become obvious. Here are a few: 1) The River Road (a.k.a. Savannah- Pittsburg Landing Road) is indicated WAY too close to the Tennessee River. 2) The road from Crump's Landing to Adamsville is plotted as dipping 2- 3 miles further south than actual. 3) Where is Stoney Lonesome? Where is the road south from Stoney Lonesome? (There is a non-existent seasonal stream flowing south from the site of Stoney Lonesome.) [Combined with the poorly plotted River Road, and Adamsville Road, these features could be used to "verify" that Lew Wallace was a chowder head for selecting the "wrong road" and/ or "getting lost."] 4) Where is the important Dill Branch Ravine? 5) Where is the Tilghman Branch (in 1862 called Briar Creek)? 6) On the east side of the Tennessee River, where is the Savannah- Hamburg Road? [This route would have been marched by Jacob Ammen's men if the Battle of Shiloh had not intervened.] 7) How come no marshes or swamps are indicated? 8 ) Where is the Shunpike? In 1889, the average person would make use of this map included in Sherman's Memoirs, likely have no better map with which to compare, and "trust" that the narrative was correct. No wonder we still disagree on "what took place during the Battle of Shiloh."
  21. I am working on a Shiloh project and always go back to the original sources for guidance to start. I was reading in Battles and Leaders, General Buell's Shiloh Reviewed article written in 1884. He slammed Grant and Sherman for re-writing history, their maps, and anyone else who formed an opinion on what Buell called misleading anecdotes and folly. It was very interesting and explains a little more the confusion, the side ways opinions of both Officers and men who fought at Shiloh. One soldier made the statement that if you got two Shiloh Veterans together they could never agree on anything associated with that Battle, and they were there! Professor Tim Smith and other Historians of note tell of the mystique of Shiloh. I say it is a good story from start to finish with a lot of twists and turns. It was victory the Western Confederates needed. That the approach of General Sherman to Richmond-Petersburg in 1865, began in the West. A march that included Shiloh as a Union Victory. Has anyone else read an old book on Shiloh and sees the same, "what ifs"-- and "maybe's" we get all the Shiloh mystique from?
  22. I had an interest in such a question on Grant years ago. I was researching US Grant and the Battle of Belmont, MO. fought on November 7th, 1861. I have not been able to get a definitive answer, but at one point, post WW 1, that the Staff at West Point tried to put together basically, a class or study on what makes a great and successful General. What traits are shared, what attributes, what brain power, what cognitive gift do they have and can it be taught to others. I do not think it went anywhere, but the attempt to try and understand US Grant as a Commander was done. What I saw in Grant was how he would listen to others. Get their views on a subject, attack, retreat, move and how to move-- then take a break, come back, and using all he heard give a succinct order that all had part in. Another was ability to write an order that was to the point and easy to understand. That he would rise at dawn, work all day, writing orders etc., then in the evening eat something and sit around the campfire and listen to jokes and bantering, he loved it. His War Secretary was asked what made Grant successful. His answer, "success?, we followed Grant because he was successful." He just did it---
  23. It can be safely assumed that the battle exploits of successful leaders are studied at the United States Military Academy at West Point in order to identify positive traits, skills and attributes as deserving of emulation by future leaders. What traits and skills do you believe Ulysses S. Grant possessed that should be taught to cadets and officer-candidates? To start the conversation, here is one that I believe we can all agree upon: Persistence. Because there is no failure until one gives up the attempt. U.S. Grant was noted for aggressive, dogged, determined pursuit of goals. And if a roadblock was encountered in his chosen path, General Grant quickly scrutinized the situation and determined upon greater exertion; a detour; or an entirely new route, to reach his goal.
  24. Just a couple more references to add to this McNairy County site: http://www.mcnairytnhistory.com/images/-_looking_back_ii.pdf "Looking Back at McNairy County" by Nancy Wardlaw Kennedy (2004) especially Page 3 (Table of Contents), Page 24 (Stantonville History) and Page 43 (Isham Forsythe connections). Names of interest, due to proximity to Hardin County and Pittsburg Landing include Duncan, Bell, Crump, Harrison, Adams, Chambers, Wright and Michie (Mickey). Locations mentioned include various ridges, church cemeteries and roads. Investigating one of the Church cemeteries led to discovery of: https://www.findagrave.com/cemetery/10240/memorial-search?firstName=&lastName=Michie&page=1#sr-54445076 Carter Cemetery (with Michie family burials). This cemetery is just east of Michie Tennessee, and about three miles south of Pebble Hill Cemetery (Pebble Hill Cemetery was adjacent to, or in close proximity to site of "Mickey's White House.") Because Carter Cemetery pre-dates the Civil War, there are likely burials of interest to SDG members.)
  25. For those interested in "what Civil War records are held at the National Archives?" the Guide to Civil War Records (1962) provides over 600 pages of detail. Some records (such as individual soldier CMSR -- combined military service records) are readily available (for a fee, ranging from $35 - $100). Others are only accessible by patrons and researchers fronting up to the National Archives at Washington D.C. Recommend begin pages 250 - 266 and expand enquiries from that explanatory segment. https://books.google.com.au/books?id=z8XhAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA490&lpg=PA490&dq=naval+historical+center+william+w.+McKean&source=bl&ots=famnoNNACR&sig=ACfU3U3sQ0wmtWOcWmHdqD8ISZe2fmmKLA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiC0cuWmp3mAhVo6nMBHZruCtsQ6AEwBnoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=fishing&f=false
  26. Over 900 pages long (including photographs and maps and “additional references”) this library desk reference with Forward written by James M. McPherson is designed to “quickly answer basic questions regarding people and places involved with the Civil War,” and for those interested in Battle of Shiloh, the most significant pages: 401 U. S. Grant 415 Albert Sidney Johnston 405 Braxton Bragg 402 Henry Halleck 251 Shiloh (included in segment, “Federal Penetration up the Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers” The Library of Congress Civil War Desk Reference (2002) edited by M. E. Wagner, Gary Gallagher and Paul Finkelman (Simon & Schuster of New York) is available on Google Books at https://books.google.com.au/books?id=7svFnyOLknUC&pg=PA572&lpg=PA572&dq=lieutenant+cash+u.+s.+marine+corps+civil+war&source=bl&ots=ZLcfgsyDxk&sig=ACfU3U2rgUb2yg9q-jI0RHlaj-RvnDTqzw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj68fHphKLmAhWYIbcAHUo3Ai4Q6AEwDXoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=Shiloh&f=false
  27. 14th Wisconsin Dresden Suhl Rifles-- class A weapons 15th Illinois-- a hodge podge-- Companies A, B, G, and E- Enfield Rifles-- the rest .69 cal smoothbores, Co. C of all things old British Tower Muskets 77th Ohio- Armed in the Field, Austrian-Belgian conversions .69 cal smoothbores... Prussian Muskets 70th Ohio- 264 Austrian rifles-- Belgian Conversion smoothbores-- then Regimental History says Enfields right before Shiloh.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...