Jump to content
Shiloh Discussion Group

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/29/2019 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    Hi. I live in Tempe, Arizona I have been a student of the CW for 30 years. I have eight ancestors who fought for the Federals and a whole lot more for the Confederacy. Shiloh is one of many battles in which I have an interest. I am a member of the Scottsdale, Arizona CWRT, Battlefield Trust, Civil War Talk. I look forward to learning more about Shiloh
  2. 2 points
    Southern Bivouac Monthly (1882 – 1887) Much like the Union Veteran's National Tribune, the Southern Bivouac provided a forum for Southern Veterans wanting to air views on battles and leaders. Published by the Southern Historical Association of Louisville, Kentucky from 1882 until 1887 the monthly magazine benefited from the quality of its editors: Wm. N. McDonald, R. W. Knott and Basil Duke. All six volumes are available at HathiTrust at the below link: https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/002909878 Southern Bivouac Monthly Magazine And for SDG readers, these are some of the most interesting articles: Vol.1 – “General John H. Morgan” (pp.45 – 49; 149 – 151); Island No.10 (pp.55 – 62); Morgan's Men and the Camp Douglas Conspiracy (pp.65 – 67). Vol.2 – “General Joseph Wheeler” (pp.240 – 244); “General Cheatham” (pp.145 – 150); “General N. B. Forrest” (pp.289 – 298; 337 - 345 ); Shiloh by editor (pp. 150 – 162); Shiloh by Basil Duke (pp.201 – 216); “Bagwell vs. Hicks: Two Illinois men meet at Shiloh” (pp.270 – 1.) Vol.3 – “Grant at Shiloh” (pp.305 – 307); “Incident at Shiloh” (pg.418). Vol.4 – “Morgan's Escape” by Thos. Hines (pp.49 – 60); Grant as General (pp.60 – 62). “Liddell's Record of the Civil War – A.S. Johnston vs. President Davis” (pp.411 – 420). Vol.5 – “Grant vs. Lee: a comparison” (pp.279 – 283); A.S. Johnston (pp.320 – 325). Vol.6 – “INDEX” (pp.777 – 1050). N.B. The run of Southern Bivouac ended in 1887 by being sold to Century Magazine. Additional Note: To easily find a subject of interest, select a volume; SEARCH for topic in that volume (i.e. Shiloh, or Morgan, or Bragg); select one of the HITS returned. This will have to be done for each of the six volumes. [Alternatively, an INDEX is included in Volume SIX beginning page 777.]
  3. 2 points
    My name is Kristen Pawlak and I am very glad to now be a part of the Shiloh Discussion Group, especially it being the anniversary of the first day. A native Missourian, I am very interested in the Missouri troops of both sides that fought at Shiloh. I also have several ancestors with the 12th Tennessee and 47th Tennessee Infantry regiments. I am looking forward to meeting many other members of this group! Thanks for having me!
  4. 2 points
    Battlefield America prints a series of these maps. You can get them from www.trailheadgraphics.com. You can usually find them at the bookshop at the Shiloh VC (that's the Visitors' Center for those of us in the know). Don't leave home without one!
  5. 2 points
    Quite amusing. I learned a lot from that animation he was running. Despite my many visits and extensive (and extended) battlefield hikes there, I guess I just didn't understand the geography.
  6. 2 points
    Edward Jonas Tracking this man is difficult because there were two Edward Jonas, both accorded credit as belonging to the 50th Illinois, an Uncle (1817 - 1867) and his nephew, and it is obvious that researchers have combined the experiences of the two; and in some cases credit has been given to the wrong man for accomplishments of the other. The subject of interest is Edward Jonas, the nephew. Edward was born into one of the first Jewish families in Quincy: his father, Abraham is recognized as bringing Freemasonry from his native England to Illinois; and Abraham had many and varied business interests; and Abraham Jonas belonged to a circle of friends that included Senator Orville Browning and the politician Abraham Lincoln. Following the Inauguration of Lincoln as President, Abraham Jonas, with support from Orville Browning was installed as Postmaster of Quincy. And Edward Jonas was appointed as Principal Assistant to the Postmaster (and he was only 17 years old in 1861.) Later that year the 50th Illinois Volunteers began recruiting; and on September 12th the underage Edward got his father's approval and became a Private in Company C. About that same time in September 1861 Brigadier General Benjamin Prentiss was back in Quincy, cooling his heels, under arrest for failing to obey the lawful orders of his superior officer, Brigadier General U.S. Grant. The Court Martial expected by Prentiss failed to eventuate; and General Prentiss was returned to duty in Northern Missouri. And the 50th Illinois was sent to St. Joseph Missouri (in Prentiss' District) and operated between that Missouri River port and Hannibal, on the Mississippi River, from October through December 1861. And it was most likely during this period that Benjamin Prentiss, still short of staff, found a position for Private Edward Jonas as Orderly (some references record “Secretary.”) The 50th Illinois Infantry left Missouri in January and joined General Grant's operation in Kentucky at Smithland. And General Prentiss left Missouri mid-March and joined General Grant's operation on the Tennessee River no later than the First day of April 1862. The next time Private Jonas appears in the historical record is in the Madison Georgia Prison manifest on page 10, his name and Robert Porter's name just below the line entry for Brigadier General Prentiss; so Jonas, Porter and Prentiss were all captured on 6 April 1862. And they all remained confined together until the 7 OCT 1862 release of all the Shiloh Federal officers from Madison Prison, after which Private Jonas likely remained in company with General Prentiss to Illinois, enjoyed a welcome respite with his family at Quincy; and early in 1863 returned to duty (as Second Lieutenant) as Prentiss (promoted to Major General) gained assignment as commander of the District of Eastern Arkansas. The Battle of Helena was fought in July 1863; and soon afterwards General Prentiss resigned from the Army. Suddenly in need of employment, Lieutenant Jonas was initially incorporated on the staff of Major General Stephen Hurlbut. But in 1864 Lieutenant Jonas was taken onto the staff of Major General Grenville Dodge: Edward Jonas is 4th standing man from right. [Above image of Major General Grenville Dodge and his Staff in the Public Domain.] Performing the duties of ADC, Edward Jonas was promoted to Captain, and gained two brevet promotions before the end of the war. After the war, Edward Jonas briefly returned to Quincy. But, his father, Abraham, had passed away in 1864; and most of the Jonas family relocated to Louisiana. Edward soon joined them and settled in New Orleans, where he appears to have become a property developer. Edward Jonas died in New Orleans in 1918. But, for those of us at SDG the revelation with most potential interest was brought to my attention by Author and SDG contributor, Joseph Rose: Edward Jonas wrote a paper titled, “Reminiscence of Battle of Shiloh.” In 1889/ 1890 Mr. Jonas was contacted in New Orleans by Henry M. Cist, a former soldier in the Volunteer Army from Ohio (several different regiments; who rose from Private to Brigadier General) who at the time was corresponding secretary for the Society of the Army of the Cumberland. In response, Edward Jonas provided a 14-page paper (and it appears that document is on file with the Missouri Historical Society.) I will be in contact with them soon – COVID 19 permitting – in order to arrange to get a copy of Edward Jonas' recollection. [There is also indication of an early April 1862 (April1st?) Letter from Private Edward Jonas to his parents in Quincy. ] References: Madison Prison manifest Rosen, Robert N. “Jewish Confederates” ( 2000) Uni. South Carolina Press, page 152. https://civilwar.illinoisgenweb.org/r050/050-k-in.html 2/Lt Jonas to Co.K 50th Illinois. Dodge, MGen Grenville, “The Battle of Atlanta and Other Campaigns” (1911) page 137 for above Staff photograph. New York Times of Monday 21 APR 1862 page 8: “Edward Jonas, son of the Postmaster of Quincy was wounded and taken prisoner with Gen. Prentiss.” https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/89149678/edward-jonas Find-a-grave Edward's uncle (1817 - 1867). https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/82425289/edward-l-jonas Find-a-grave Edward Jonas b.1844 mohistory.org Civil War manuscripts. St. Tammany Farmer of 7 JAN 1905 pg.5 col.2 “Judge Bossier is now connected with Mr. E. Jonas of New Orleans, a brother of Mr. Jonas of the firm Farrar, Jonas & Kruttschnitt.”
  7. 2 points
    Andy Welcome to SDG. I grew up in Rock Island County, Illinois and the Civil War statues and street names are everywhere (especially across the river at Davenport.) Rock Island Arsenal was established during the Civil War: one of its first functions was as Prisoner of War Camp for thousands of men captured in the South, beginning 1863. And Abraham Lincoln's footprint is to be found at nearby Galesburg (site of one of the Lincoln-Douglas Debates) and on Rock Island (as a lawyer, Lincoln represented the railroad and bridge company against the steamboat owners that ran into the first bridge across the Mississippi River and destroyed it. It is still believed by many that then-Secretary of War, Jefferson Davis, had a hand in destruction of the bridge because he favored a more southern route for the Transcontinental Railroad, crossing the Mississippi River at Memphis.) And of course, Lincoln left his mark on Springfield, only three hours away, and a required pilgrimage for school students, year after year after... Hope you find participation in SDG a worthwhile experience. All the best Ozzy
  8. 2 points
    Wisconsin in the War Stumbled across this video while researching Pensacola in the Civil War... serendipity. Titled “ORNA Wisconsin in the Civil War” it runs for about 10 minutes; and the presenter, Lawrence Winkler, is both knowledgeable and engaging. Beginning at the 6-minute mark and running for a little over two minutes Winkler details the aftermath of the Battle of Shiloh from a Wisconsin perspective (and includes the contribution and tragedy of Governor Harvey.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rP5VyNFj3hs ORNA Wisconsin in the Civil War, Episode Four As indicated, this is Episode 4 of a five episode set. The remaining episodes run about 10 minutes each, but they do not mention Battle of Shiloh. Instead, they provide an excellent background to Midwestern attitudes and outlooks on the American Civil War; the actual fact that the Civil War was TWO conflicts (one that mostly took place in Virginia, and the other one that took place everywhere else); and a solid introduction to military terms, military life, wounds versus disease, treatment of POWs, and addresses “What caused Midwestern soldiers to enlist, and then re-enlist?” [Overall, a great set of videos to direct friends and family to watch, after they pose the question: “Why are you so caught up in the Civil War?” ] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCy7VpEkuHeIzDEIWSOd-iSQ Lawrence Winkler Home Page on YouTube (for all Five episodes.)
  9. 2 points
    In my dotage I realize that my former log-held belief that I understood the U.S. system was seriously flawed. For example, my local town council recently voted to allow retail sales of marijuana. At the start of the session they all rose and spoke, with hands over hearts, the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States...one nation, under God, indivisible... Two flags were in the room, one the Stars and Stripes, the other the State Flag of Illinois. They faced the former. The latter was not mentioned. Then they proceeded to pass an Ordinance that makes them all parties to a Federal felony (actually, it was a 6-5 vote). Eleven states have joined mine in this succession. We tried this States' Rights thing once before. That time it ended badly. We live in dangerous times, as also had been the case for our predecessors.
  10. 2 points
    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.
  11. 2 points
    From the Washington Post: http://www.washingto...36b8_story.html By Tony Horwitz, It’s often said that journalists write the first rough draft of history. But rarely do reporters draft history in quite so rough a fashion as Junius Browne and Albert Richardson did in the Civil War. (PublicAffairs) - ‘Junius and Albert's Adventures in the Confederacy: A Civil War Odyssey’ by Peter Carlson The two Northern correspondents narrowly escaped death in an artillery bombardment, only to be captured by Confederates. For 593 excruciating days, they skirmished with lice in Southern prisons as the real war raged on without them. Then, after a jailbreak and a harrowing trek through enemy territory, the reporters filed the story of a lifetime: their own. Peter Carlson narrates this tale of journalistic derring-do in “Junius and Albert’s Adventures in the Confederacy.” This title, which echoes the 1989 slacker film “Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure,” undersells the gravity of the reporters’ experience. But it’s also appropriate, because Carlson’s book unspools like a buddy flick: Two larkish fellows embark on a trip that goes desperately wrong and often veers into farce. At the start of the Civil War, Browne and Richardson belonged to the self-styled “Bohemian Brigade,” a journalistic troupe of insouciant thrill-seekers who gallivanted along the front. Like other reporters of that era, they made no pretense to objectivity and freely expressed the staunch abolitionism of their employer, the New York Tribune. Nor did they let the facts get in the way of a good story. At one point, to avoid being scooped by a competitor, Browne and a colleague composed “long, vivid, eyewitness accounts of a battle that occurred 200 miles beyond their eyesight,” Carlson writes. Their fabrications ran at length in the Tribune, a stunt that made the writers legendary among the Bohemian Brigade. But these cavalier “knights of the quill,” as Browne called them, also risked their lives to cover combat. In May 1863, Browne and Richardson tried to sneak past rebel cannon at Vicksburg aboard a Union barge filled with hay. An incoming shell burned and killed half the soldiers on board. The survivors were fished out of the Mississippi and jailed. It was customary at the time to quickly release or swap captured journalists. But Browne and Richardson wrote for the paper most hated in the South; the Confederate in charge of prisoner exchanges called them “the worst and most obnoxious of all non-combatants.” Also, soon after their capture, the warring parties suspended prisoner exchanges. So the men were shuttled among jails, including Richmond’s notorious Castle Thunder, before ending up at North Carolina’s Salisbury Prison, a mini-Andersonville where men perished in droves from exposure, disease and shootings by guards. Carlson’s story has so many twists, right up to the last page, that I won’t spoil it by telling more. But the exquisite plot is only one of the joys of reading this book. As a veteran journalist (including 22 years at The Washington Post), Carlson captures the competitive yet collegial world of reporters in the field and their tortured relationship with distant editors. He also has an ear for quotes and an eye for detail, and shares with the Bohemian Brigade a keen sense of the ridiculous. Though the Northern reporters were hated Yanks, they were also curiosities. So Southerners flocked to visit the inmates — and to declare their willingness to “die in the last ditch” for the Cause. This line was repeated so often, Carlson writes, that it became a running gag for the reporters: “Where is this ditch? How deep is it? They’re going to need a very big ditch to hold all these Rebels who keep promising to die in it.” He also quotes the absurd reports in Southern papers, including this one on Gettysburg: “The Confederates were repulsed but cannot, at present, with justice or candor, be said to have suffered defeat.” Carlson excels as well at drawing characters, particularly the odd couple at the heart of his book. Browne, the well-schooled son of a banker, was a bookish scribe who filled his florid dispatches with Classical allusions. Richardson, a rugged farm boy, was plainspoken and ingratiated himself with all he met. Yet the two became inseparable and sustained each other through hardships and despair that neither could endure alone. “The North for us is like the grave,” Richardson wrote, after letters stopped reaching inmates, “no voice ever comes back to us from it.” If there’s a flaw in this fine book, it’s that Carlson tells his story almost too well. He’s shorn away anything that might interrupt the flow of his taut, lively narrative. This makes for a rollicking read, but at times I wanted more context and reflection — on the telegraph, for instance, a technology that transformed the news business in the mid-19th century as dramatically as the Internet has changed the media in our own time. Also, while Carlson details his deep research in the book’s endnotes, his text doesn’t address whether Browne and Richardson were reliable sources in the telling of their own story. Given the flagrant bias and outright fictions that Carlson documents in the dispatches of the Bohemian Brigade, I doubted some of the witty repartee and incredible adventures that Browne and Richardson recalled, much of it in books they wrote after returning home. But even if the two men embellished, their ordeal has resonance far beyond its drama and drollery. The reporters were forced into close, extended contact with captured Northerners and Southerners of every stripe — deserters, slaves, brutish guards, mountain guerrillas — and they experienced the behind-the-lines horror of the conflict. As a result, they witnessed, and later exposed, a theater of the war that was barely known to their colleagues at the front or to the Northern public. This remains an aspect of the Civil War that is little known to most Americans. The journalists’ experiences of both battle and captivity also speak to the enduring challenge of war reporting. Upon seeing combat for the first time, Browne wrote, “No one here seems to have any knowledge of anything, the leading officers having little more information than the privates.” As Carlson acutely notes, Browne’s one-line observation “sums up the ‘fog of war’ so well that it could be included in nearly every battle dispatch in every war ever fought.” Tony Horwitz is the author of “Confederates in the Attic” and “Midnight Rising: John Brown and the Raid That Sparked the Civil War.” Jim
  12. 1 point
    For those who doubted it, in my research I have found proof of the Watson Battery at Shiloh, from Clarke's Diary of the War of Separation, which includes Alexander Walker's Shiloh report for the New Orleans Delta. He has the Watson Battery in the bombardment of Pittsburg Landing late on April 6. "The artillery were all hurried forward to complete the work. Thirty-six of our best guns were now brought into position on a ridge at a distance of three-fourths of a mile from the enemy's main body. There was the Watson heavy battery, of Breckinridge's Division, among the first to take its place, under the fearless and skilful Beltzhoover, who had already performed several brilliant feats in aid of Cheatham's movement. In this battery the liberal and patriotic gentleman after, whom it was named, who had been instrumental in putting it into the field with his own means, worked at the guns as an artillerist." Link: https://docsouth.unc.edu/imls/clarke/clarke.html
  13. 1 point
    For The Maps of Shiloh I am creating a “tactical” order of battle for April 7, as the Confederates and Grant's army had lots of units mixed here and there, and it helps to understand the fighting. In doing so, I have found a few units where it is hard to establish where they were. All but one is Confederate. 46th Ohio I have found nothing in Daniel, Smith, or Lanny K. Smith. You can bet if this regiment had so much as marched 100 yards, Thomas Worthington would have mentioned it along with a dig at Sherman. But there is nothing I have seen. 17th Alabama Jackson lost his brigade on the night of April 6 except for the Washington Light Artillery. He does mention coming upon the 17th Alabama towards the end of the day. (OR 10 1 555) Should be noted that Dunlop mentions Jackson going into battle and supporting him, although he possibly misidetfied the commander. (OR 10 1 625) 25th Alabama In Loomis' report he only mentions he was not with the brigade (one wing was led by Deas and the other by Moore) and that the regiment was engaged. Otherwise, nothing else is mentioned. Loomis in his second report indicates he was not in command on April 7 and mentions a report by Major George D. Johnston, that is not in the OR. (OR 10 1 540 and 544) One place to look is Johnston's papers: https://cdm17336.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p17336coll44 I also found this, but it is vague about the action on April 7: http://vcwsg.com/PDF Files/Wilson P Howell Co I 25th Alabama Regiment .pdf 31st Alabama (49th) The regiment is barely mentioned by Trabue, which is suspicious as his report is very detailed. He does praise them, but indicates their actions on April 7 could be found in their report, which is missing. (OR 10 1 617-619) 2nd Arkansas, 6th Arkansas, 7th Arkansas Shaver went forward with the 2nd and 6th Arkansas on April 7. The 7th Arkansas was left with a battery and the 3rd Confederate moved to Breckinridge's sector, joining with Trabue. Timothy B. Smith has Shaver advancing into Jones Field with Wood, while Daniel does not mention him. Reed places Shaver attacking with Cheatham around noon. Its a mess, made worse by a lack of regiment reports. My gut says, since Shaver mentioned going in with Cheatham and Wood never mentioned Shaver, that Reed is right. (OR 10 1 575 579 593 Daniel 280 Smith 349 Reed 70) 11th Louisiana What this regiment was doing is very hard to ascertain. Russell does not report seeing them. Barrow's report...well its better if I just quote it: “On Monday morning, April 7, I am informed, and have every reason to believe it to be the case, a portion of our regiment, consisting of about 200 men and the following-named officers, Adjt. J. G. White, Capts. J. H. McCann and J. E. Austin, and Lieuts. Beynon, R. L. Hughes, J. E. Hyams, Davis, A. Le Blanc, and Thomas S. Pierce, all of whom had remained on the field the previous night, formed a battalion, and attached themselves to General Anderson’s brigade, under the command of Capt. J. E. Austin, Captain McCann having turned the command over to him. Why the command was thus transferred to a junior officer I am unable to state. They were immediately ordered with the brigade of General Anderson to our extreme left and to assist General Breckinridge’s command; but, just before meeting the enemy, came up with the brigade of Colonel Russell; was ordered into it'; advanced with it, engaged the enemy, and under the most galling fire fell back with it, where they reformed, and, with General Anderson on their left and Colonel Russell on their right, made a desperate charge, driving the enemy from his position, capturing two of his guns, and driving him inch by inch until he became so strongly re-enforced that they were ordered to fall back. Here Lieutenant Pierce, who had fought so bravely and gallantly throughout the previous day, and who had command of Company F, Continental Guards, fell, it is supposed, mortally wounded, as his body has not been since recovered or heard from. The loss in men was also heavy at this juncture. From that time throughout the whole engagement that portion of our regiment, a part of the time, however, was under the immediate command of General Anderson, as the First Brigade had been greatly cut up and divided, and a portion of General Breckinridge’s command coming in on their right and between them and Colonel Russell’s brigade.” What I infer is they were going to meet with Anderson, only before they were engaged they joined up with Russell. I believe Anderson attacked right after Gibson did at Jones Field around 10:30 a.m. If correct, this report places Anderson in the attack with Wood, yet the reference to captured cannon has more in common with Gibson's attack. I think it possible the 11th Louisiana was involved in both attacks, but Barrow not being there, had to rely on second-hand reports. After that it gets weirder, with Russell being to the right of Breckinridge, although Austin's men being between Anderson and Breckinridge makes sense given Anderson and Trabue's reports. To make it even weirder, Barrow is mentioned by Henry Allen, who led an ad hoc brigade around Shiloh Church centered around the 11th Louisiana. No other report I have seen mentions Austin's force. (OR 10 1 418 422 490 500-501 617-618) 55th Tennessee (McKoin’s) Hardcastle mentions that he marched back to Shiloh with the 55th Tennessee, but they became separated. There is no report for the 55th Tennessee. Since Hardcastle’s 3rd Mississippi Battalion did not make it, I doubt the 55th Tennessee did. That said, Hardcastle did say he later saw the 55th Tennessee with the 16th Alabama, which went into the attack with Cheatham around noon, so maybe they did make it? Likely not with Cheatham’s attack, but arriving just as the army was preparing its last defense. (OR 10 1 597 603-604) 1st Alabama Cavalry The only lead I have is Chalmers, who praises Clanton and makes it clear he was almost always at Chalmers' side. Without any other evidence, I must conclude Clanton stayed with Chalmers. (OR 10 1 553) Kentucky Cavalry (Morgan’s) Basil Duke does not mention anything for April 7 save Morgan being in the final rearguard. If Morgan's men had even captured one man, I am 100% certain Duke would have reported it, complete with a colorful anecdote. In the absence of anything else, I think Morgan was like most of the cavalry on April 7, in the rear forwarding stragglers. (Duke 154) Kentucky Cavalry (Thompson’s) Reed merely says “do not appear to have been engaged.” This unit remains one of Shiloh's little mysteries. (Reed 86) Watson Artillery (Beltzhoover’s Louisiana) There is an entire forum post where this unit's role is debated. I think they were in the final artillery line organized by Shoup. More on that under “Shoups’s Battery.” Pettus Flying Artillery (Hudson’s Mississippi) Outside of the one April 6 battlefield marker, there is nothing. Reed's wording “No mention in the reports of either Hudson's or Watson's batteries” makes me think those reports are still somewhere. A man can dream.” My guess though is as Martin quickly shifted towards Dill Branch on April 6, Hudson's battery may have fallen in with Shoup. More on that below. (Reed 88) Shoup's Battery I think one reason a few batteries remain a mystery on April7 is they were with Shoup and the “grand battery” he formed on April 6. I think they remained under his command and due to the confusion were not committed until late on April 7. I do not think its coincidence that these batteries are “missing” and were with Shoup on April 6. In the case of Hudson, he could have joined on the night of April 6 while Watson was in the rear and may have just fallen in. References in Smith also lead me to this conclusion. Among the batteries were: Hubbard’s Battery (Jackson Light Artillery, Arkansas), Trigg’s Battery (Austin Artillery, Arkansas), Robert’s Battery (Clarke County Light Artillery, Arkansas), Lyon Battery (Cobb’s Kentucky) check Smith Warren Light Artillery (Swett’s Mississippi) (Reed 70, Smith 384 390, Shoup “Art of War in ‘62” 12) Last but not least, these Confederate units were not engaged. 18th Alabama, Tennessee Battalion (Crews’) Both were guarding prisoners. (OR 10 1 555 616 618) 6th Mississippi Cleburne sent them away from the battle, as the regiment was already thoroughly chewed up. (OR 10 1 582-583) 3rd Mississippi Battalion Was marching back to Shiloh only to be informed by fleeing men it was all over. (OR 10 1 603-604) Company E 2nd Battalion Alabama Artillery (Gage’s) Chalmers says were not on the battlefield on April 7. His report is fairly detailed so I trust him. (OR 10 1 552) Helena Artillery (Calvert’s Arkansas) This is based on a guess, but they are not included in the April 6 grand battery. Shoup mentions sending men back to Corinth with captured cannon and I suspect it was Calvert’s battery. (Shoup 8-9)
  14. 1 point
    Fifty years after the end of the Civil War, an astute author realized that the men who had made History, and their stories were in imminent danger of being lost forever. So, Mamie Yeary set out across Texas (and had manuscripts sent her) to record as many “average Johnnies” as possible. Their stories, brief and poignant, leave the reader “wishing for more” …which may be possible, because many kept diaries; and almost all wrote letters during the war. And, with a name (and combat unit designation) we now have a starting point… especially for the scores of Confederate Shiloh veterans who made these pages: https://archive.org/details/reminiscencesofbv1year/page/1 Reminiscences of the Boys in Gray (1912) by Mamie Yeary. https://archive.org/details/reminiscencesofb00year/page/n5 Reminiscences (Vol.2) [See pages 428 - 9 William Lee 6th Arkansas; pp.515 - 7 John Middleton 23rd Tennessee, for examples of what is available by searching for "Shiloh." Also, pp. 884 - 890 lists almost every skirmish and battle in Tennessee (and surrounding pages list almost every skirmish, action and battle in every State during the 1861 - 1865 War.)]
  15. 1 point
    Major Dudley Haydon reached Richmond end of April/ early May 1862. He carried with him 1) a Letter from Brigadier General William Preston to Johnston's son dated 18 APR 1862, 2) his Diary (from at least January, perhaps back to OCT 1861 when he joined General Johnston's Staff at Bowling Green) 3) eye-witness accounts of General Johnston's death from the other members of Staff, 4) knowledge of Staff meetings and Councils of War in the days leading up to Shiloh, 5) knowledge of General Johnston that he could share with Wm. P. Johnston (who had not seen his Father since SEP 1861). Either with the help of reporters, or on his own, Major Haydon's “Rough Notes of the Battle of Shiloh” appeared in 3 May 1862 edition of Richmond Daily Dispatch, Front Page, center column. General Beauregard's courier-delivered report was not printed by Richmond Daily Dispatch until 10 May (and was on page 2, running three columns in length.) [Shortly after placing Colonel W. P. Johnston "on his Staff," President Davis also gave the Colonel his own room in the Executive Mansion. Therefore, I believe anything Dudley Hayden shared with W. P. Johnston was shared with President Davis.] As for that June 1862 meeting between Colonel W. P. Johnston and General Beauregard in Mobile (after the General's removal from command, replaced by Bragg) ...THAT would have been one uncomfortable discussion.
  16. 1 point
    I read it today and thought "everything that is old is new." Outside of his harsh treatment of Lew Wallace, this very much reads like Tim Smith's argument. That adds to my contention that a lot of current scholarship, far from being unbiased, is a more detailed version of the Just Cause narrative of the Civil War. Before anyone chops off my head, Smith's work on Shiloh is first rate and I refer back to it all the time in my work. I also like Sword, Cunningham, and Daniel, and all three of them for different reasons. Hell, even Groom works as an introduction to the battle. Shiloh has been better served by historians and authors than most other battles of the war.
  17. 1 point
    Interesting... Do we know what Haydon delivered? In my Beauregard research I think Preston Johnston, at least in 1862, did not totally have it in for Beauregard. His report to Davis could have been harsher.
  18. 1 point
    Do you have the sources handy? It would explain why Duke is so quiet about April 7.
  19. 1 point
    As for Colonel Worthington's 46th Ohio: that officer had a “personality clash” with fellow Ohian William T. Sherman. And Worthington ultimately was subjected to Court Martial AUG 1862. I would not be surprised that Worthington submitted a report... that was never submitted by General Sherman (or which was presented at the Court Martial, and suppressed, by being included in the Court Martial file.) Also, Sherman wrote his official Shiloh report extremely quickly; finished it before Halleck arrived 11 April 1862, despite being actively engaged in the field thru 8 April. But, as regards the 46th Ohio: After the war, Colonel Thomas Worthington was able to provide a detailed account of Shiloh due to the fact he kept a detailed diary. See https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.hx4u5n&view=1up&seq=40 "History of 46th OVI" by Col. T. Worthington. Worthington indicates on 39th page of above work [marked as 11] that at 3 p.m. on 6 April he was ordered to deliver a report to General Grant, and found him at dinner aboard the Tigress. On the 40th page [marked as 12] Colonel Worthington indicates he was back at the Landing 5 p.m. and was ordered by General Grant to “return to the battle-line, and keep the troops well up in front.” There is no report from Worthington concerning location or action of 46th Ohio on Day Two; and McDowell's report indicates “fragments of regiments assigned to his brigade joined other commands on Day Two (April 7).” Atwell Thompson's 1900 map does not indicate location of the 46th Ohio on Day Two. None of the 46th Ohio killed, wounded or captured at Shiloh are indicated as anything besides “6 April 1862” in Adjutant General records for Ohio: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uiug.30112047586000&view=1up&seq=366&size=125 Other Thomas Worthington references: https://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=Worthington%2C Thomas%2C 1807-1884 The definite location of 46th OVI on Day Two remains undetermined. Likely locations: company-sized groups served in support of other regiments; shirkers hiding at Pittsburg Landing; battalion-sized unit acting as support for artillery on Grant's Last Line...
  20. 1 point
    Since writing that ECW post, it appears the 47th Tennessee website has uploaded an even better picture of Munson R. Hill. It seems likely he is our man.
  21. 1 point
    Thanks. I have concluded Duncan Field is where it happened, but the Review Field story got repeated and it went from there.
  22. 1 point
    Thanks. I watched the video and his maps are way off once the attack on Sherman's camp failed. When you say they "went dark" does that mean all their maps are gone? As to the above conundrum, what do you think? The more I think on it, the more I think Cleburne did not charge at Duncan Field. Reed places him there, apparently because some members of the 6th Mississippi were captured in Stewart's attack. My thinking is they were just some of the many who lost their units and joined up with others.
  23. 1 point
    And in addition to the above records, the Naval Records of the War of the Rebellion (which I abbreviate OR (Navy) vol.22 for Shiloh/ Tennessee River operations) are of value. Online, search for Gwin or Shirk to get most of the significant information (which is to be found mainly between pages 475 (Gwin assigned to the Western Rivers) and 786 (end of Abstract Logbook of USS Lexington.)
  24. 1 point
    The most valuable records I have encountered in the OR Supplements are a handful of Fort Donelson after-action reports found in possession of MGen C.F. Smith when he died 25 APR 1862 [in OR 52 (part 1) pp.7 – 13.] For Shiloh, important (and not so important) information is included: OR ser.1 vol.10 (part 1) [sometimes referred to as OR 10] OR ser.1 vol.10 (part 2) [sometimes referred to as OR 11] OR ser.1 vol 10 (part 2) [in back, beginning page 640 (late CSA correspondence) and 637-640 (late correspondence recovered by McCook)]. OR ser.1 vol.8 [because Halleck oversaw operations at New Madrid, Island No.10, Pea Ridge, and all off northern Missouri (as well as Grant's build-up at Savannah/ Pittsburg Landing) there is discussion of elements of the build-up of Grant's command contained in this OR 8 (Pope's/ Foote's operation against New Madrid/ Island No.10) pp.115-118; 123-125 (Buford's operations east of Hickman KY) and pp.121- 122 (Naval operations on Tennessee River) just a couple of examples OR ser.1 vol.51 (part 1)... Nothing. OR ser.1 vol.51 (part 2) [CSA communications IRT Thomas Jordan, Zollicoffer, John Floyd] OR ser.1 vol.52 (part 1) [pp.16 – 29 Shiloh-related; pp.30 -37 after Shiloh; pp.204 – 266 comms of Halleck, Buell, McClellan, Sherman, Cullum, pre-Shiloh and Shiloh; pp.222 – 242 most relevant to Shiloh; pp.704-718 Report of Lewis Parsons, Chief of Rail and River Transportation detailing 1861 – 1863 movements of men and supplies on Mississippi and Tennessee Rivers. OR ser.1 vol.52 (part 2) [CSA communications with pp.218, 238-275, 275-277, 282-298, 298-299 (death of ASJ lamented), 300-305+ (after Shiloh) and pp.816-820 most interesting. Papers of US Grant volumes 4 and 5 [much detailed Shiloh build-up, battle and post-battle.] Hope this helps... Ozzy
  25. 1 point
    Shortly after General Ulysses S. Grant captured Fort Donelson in mid-February 1862, his superior, Henry Halleck, ordered Grant’s main force on an expedition up the Tennessee River under a subordinate, General Charles Smith. Grant was to remain downriver at Fort Henry. He was certainly not, however, “virtually in arrest and without a command,” as claimed in his Personal Memoirs. Such noted biographers as Ron Chernow, Dr. Brooks Simpson, and Bruce Catton have repeated the story of Colonel John Thayer, who supposedly called to see General Grant at this point. A tearful Grant “said mournfully: ‘I don’t know what they mean to do with me…. What command have I now?’” The source of this account came from Hamlin Garland, one in the long line of biographers who have taken Grant’s side on issue after issue, despite clearly contradictory evidence. McClure’s Magazine lauded the “new and valuable material” that Garland found about Grant’s life and stated one reason that they chose Garland to write: “he has always loved and admired Grant.” Garland claimed that his intention was to “keep as closely to original sources as possible,” and he interviewed hundreds of people. Notwithstanding this assurance, he was dismissive of interviewees who were critical of Grant. A different problem existed with the narrative that Thayer provided Garland. The transcript reads: “I never shall forget the expression of sadness on Grant’s face as I called at his headquarters at Fort Henry to say goodbuy[sic] before going up the river. He was compelled to witness the departure of the Army of the Tennessee which he had organized and which was now under the command of General Smith. The army which he had handled so splendidly and so successfully at Henry and Donelson. [Next paragraph] In a couple of weeks, Grant came to see Smith at Crump’s landing. I saw he was in great depression of spirits. He referred to his humiliating position and drew from his pocket a dispatch which he handed to me to read. It was a curt message from Halleck which said: ‘Why don’t you report?’ As I handed the dispatch back, I raised my eyes and saw the tears coursing down his face, as he uttered these sorrowful words: ‘l don’t know what they intend to do with me. I have sent in my reports daily.’ and then he added: ‘But what command have I now?’” Therein lies a huge discrepancy. After having been instructed to remain at Fort Henry on March 4th, Grant had made explanations about his shortcomings to Halleck, who reversed his decision. Two weeks later, Grant was upriver and in command of the expedition. Any meeting with Thayer at Crump’s Landing—where part of Grant’s main force was stationed at this time—could not have Grant bemoaning, “what command have I now?” Thayer’s anecdote can not have happened as he described it to Garland. More dismaying is how Garland did not let this obvious inaccuracy get in the way. His book, Ulysses S. Grant: His Life and Character, twisted Thayer’s text so that Grant was apparently left behind downriver when he complained of having no command: “One of his subordinates called to see him at Fort Henry, and was much moved by the expression of deep sadness on the face of his general. He was in great dejection. The army he had organized and led so splendidly was passing out of his hands. ‘After alluding to his position, the general took from his pocket Halleck’s curt despatch. When his friend looked up from reading it he saw tears on General Grant’s face. He said mournfully: “I don’t know what they mean to do with me.” Then he added with a sad cadence in his voice: ‘What command have I now?’” Catton and Simpson cited Ulysses S. Grant: His Life and Character in this matter and may have been fooled by Garland’s falsehood. Ron Chernow, on the other hand, cited USC’s Hamlin Garland Papers. With the transcript—and a basic knowledge of the chronology between the Battles of Fort Donelson and Shiloh—he should have understood the utter implausibility of Thayer’s rendering. So, unless other evidence exists showing otherwise, this episode should be considered mythical.
  26. 1 point
    basil duke became editor of this publication..
  27. 1 point
    ok i have gone to the Park..t. Arnold and T Smith helped me..both the 5th oh cav and 72nd oh inf were involved in a skirmish on the 4th with rebel cav...location?? maybe they used crump landing as they only knew of that location where they were based out of at that time? buckland does mention action with the rebels in his or report on the 4th..
  28. 1 point
    Thanks, everyone! I have been digging into Wiley Sword's Bloody April, which has been a good read thus far. Cannot wait to read more!
  29. 1 point
    Just received this recent book written by Benson Bobrick about union general George H. Thomas. I had high hopes it would be interesting and educational because there are few books on Thomas and I think he was a very capable general. I am sadly disappointed, not only are there a number or factual errors but the book runs heavily to maligning Grant and Sherman. Interesting to read reviews of the book on Amazon.com. I would not recommend this book to anyone. I waisted my money.
  30. 1 point
    Interesting. John F. Reynolds, George Meade, and Ord were all brigade commanders in the Pennsylvania Reserves in the fall of 1861 -- quite a bit of talent there. Two future army commanders, and the third probably should have been. I know Meade was ticked that Ord was promoted after Dranesville.
  31. 1 point
    As concerns the United States Gen Web project (https://www.usgenweb.org/ ) here are a few different State resources: http://iagenweb.org/ Iowa Civil War military records found under "Special Projects." And each County has its own GenWeb site: [such as http://iagenweb.org/allamakee/ for Allamakee County records.] https://www.algenweb.org/ Alabama http://www.msgw.org/index2.html Mississippi https://www.ohgenweb.org/counties.php Ohio Using the GenWeb project is the quickest way to reach County Historical records in each State. Cheers Ozzy
  32. 1 point
    Two key players in the Picket Skirmish 4 April 1862 There were two men intimately caught up in the Picket Skirmish of 4 April 1862 who, despite direct involvement somehow get little mention by historians. The first of these is James H. Clanton. Born in Georgia in 1827, Clanton migrated to the State bordering on the west with his family as a child, attended the University of Alabama, but suspended his studies in order to participate in the War with Mexico. The military veteran returned to Alabama in 1847, studied law, and passed the bar and by 1850 was living and practising in Montgomery. Gravitating towards politics, James Clanton served in the Alabama State Legislature in 1855 and was involved in the Presidential Election of 1860 (as supporter of John Bell and the Constitutional Union coalition.) Following the November election, and subsequent eruption of the Secession movement, James Clanton organized a company of horsemen and in early 1861 rode to the Florida coast (where a protracted standoff involving Federal occupation of Fort Pickens denied Southern control of Pensacola Harbor.) Captain Clanton's Company was joined over subsequent months by other horse enthusiasts; but in a location requiring infantrymen and artillerists, there was not much to occupy cavalry on the white sand beaches except to act as orderlies for senior officers; act as mounted pickets and conduct patrols; and perform courier duties (Major General Bragg's district initially stretched from Pensacola City west to the Navy Yard, Fort Barrancas and Fort McRee, a distance of twenty miles; and over time that territory extended one hundred miles west to include Mobile.) And over time, the growing number of independent cavalry companies in Bragg's Department of the Gulf led to their amalgamation, and creation of the First Alabama Cavalry, with James Clanton elected as Colonel. The relatively relaxed assignment on the Gulf Coast came to an abrupt end with the arrival of news that Fort Donelson had fallen. Bragg's Army of Pensacola was ordered north; and Clanton's Alabama Cavalry found itself in Corinth Mississippi. And appears to have been assigned patrol of territory extending north from Corinth. When the decision was taken in early April to march Johnston's Army north, Clanton's Cavalry was already familiar with Pea Ridge and Monterey; and loosely assigned to Brigadier General James Chalmers, the cavalry outfit extended its reach further north, northeast, northwest... screening the advance... approaching to within pistol distance of the sprawling Union encampment supplied from Pittsburg Landing. Safe houses with welcoming locals were identified, and some of those safe houses acted as base of operations for daily patrols. Unbeknownst to Clanton's Cavalry, at least two of those safe houses were detected, and subsequently surveilled by Union scouts. And that unwitting detection led to an operation launched pre-dawn of April 3rd in an attempt by Federal cavalry to surprise Rebel cavalry at a safe house, and scare it away to the east... into an ambush mounted by companies belonging to the 54th Ohio. The attempted ambush failed because the horsemen rode away to the northwest, instead. But the Federal operation bagged one wounded horseman; and one captured. And Colonel Clanton made his report in person to BGen James Chalmers. The other man deserving of discussion is Leroy Crockett of "New York." Born in 1831 in Ohio, Crockett was raised on a farm; and as a young man went to work in grain buying and storage. With eruption of War due to Rebel attack on Fort Sumter, Leroy Crockett joined a military unit that promised “honor, prestige, and a good-looking uniform,” the 1st U.S. Chasseurs of New York. Mustered into the unit (also known as 65th New York Infantry) the men performed drill in their distinctive, French-inspired uniform until a high proficiency had been achieved... and then were called south for duty protecting the National Capital, where they arrived in August, not long after the embarrassment of Bull Run. A battalion of the Chasseurs saw action during the September 11, 1861 Battle of Lewinsville; and the regiment is recorded as involved with the October 1861 Reconnaissance to Lewinsville (but it is unknown, at this time, whether First Lieutenant Crockett was present at either, neither or both, of those engagements. Regardless, he knew military drill and basic infantry tactics (according to Hardee.) The 72nd Ohio Volunteer Infantry was recruited during OCT/ November 1861 and had Ralph Buckland as Colonel and Herman Canfield as LtCol; and neither man knew military drill. When the man tentatively selected as Major decided to withdraw his name from consideration, Colonel Buckland seized the opportunity and poached Lieutenant Crockett from the New York unit, and installed him in the 72nd OVI as Major on 26 NOV 1861. Records at the time indicate Major Crockett “was a strict, stern disciplinarian; and he took military drill seriously. But, it was also acknowledged that the Major exhibited a fine balance of care and concern for the welfare of soldiers under his charge, making sure they had adequate provisions and shelter. His men may not have loved him; but they respected him” [extract of a recollection of then-Captain John Lemmon 72nd OVI.] References: https://archive.org/details/alabamaherhisto00brewgoog/page/n684/mode/1up Brewer pp.677, 475 Party Politics in Alabama, 1850 – 1860 by Lewy Dorman (2014) pp.202 -204. The Struggle for Pensacola, 1860 – 1862 by Mike Maxwell (2020) Appendix One. OR 10 pp.86 – 87. Reports of Taylor and Chalmers. https://www.nps.gov/civilwar/search-soldiers-detail.htm?soldierId=B45C3A8D-DC7A-DF11-BF36-B8AC6F5D926A James Clanton's entry at NPS site. Clanton's Alabama Cavalry https://www.nps.gov/civilwar/search-battle-units-detail.htm?battleUnitCode=CAL0001RC POW Prison Record for Madison Georgia, 1861 – 1865. https://www.rbhayes.org/collection-items/local-history-collections/crockett-leroy-colonel/ bio and list of letters sent and received by Union army officer Leroy Crockett, 72nd OVI. http://dan-masters-civil-war.blogspot.com/2018/06/honoring-lieutenant-colonel-leroy.html bio. 72nd OVI history. https://www.ohiocivilwarcentral.com/entry.php?rec=1136 https://www.nytimes.com/1861/09/02/archives/letter-from-the-first-united-states-chasseurs.html Cincinnati Daily Press 15 SEP 1861 page 1 col.4 “The Fight at Lewinsville” details action of 1st U.S. Chasseurs at Lewinsville near Washington, D.C. on 11 SEP 1861 https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84028745/1861-09-15/ed-1/seq-1/#date1=1861&sort=date&rows=20&words=Chasseurs&searchType=basic&sequence=0&index=12&state=Ohio&date2=1861&proxtext=Chasseur&y=0&x=0&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1 Another Chasseur/ Battle of Lewinsville connection https://sites.google.com/site/wppricememoir/home/1861---1865-the-war-years/1861-battle-of-lewinsville from 1905 Dahlonega Nugget. Major Crockett's record of muster with 72nd OVI on 26 NOV 61 https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uiug.30112047586026&view=1up&seq=95 Ohio Regimental Rosters vol.6 https://dmna.ny.gov/historic/reghist/civil/rosters/Infantry/65th_Infantry_CW_Roster.pdf Original muster in with 1st U.S. Chasseurs (65th NY Inf) on 15 July 1861 (page 491). https://www.nps.gov/civilwar/search-soldiers-detail.htm?soldierId=5942EB91-DC7A-DF11-BF36-B8AC6F5D926A Leroy Crockett's entry at NPS site.
  33. 1 point
    Head-quarters Military Division of the Mississippi Prof. Henry Coopee, Philadelphia Dear Sir: In the June # of the United States Service Magazine I find a brief sketch of Lt. General U S Grant, in which I see you are likely to perpetuate an error, which Gnl Grant may not deem of sufficient importance to correct. To Gnl Buell's noble, able and gallant conduct, you attribute the fact that the disaster of April 6th., at Pittsburg Landing, was received, and made a victory of the following day. Ad Gnl Taylor is said, in his latter days, to have doubted whether he was at the battle of Buena Vista at all, on account of the many things having transpired there, according to historians, which he did not see, so I begin to so doubt whether I was at the battle of Pittsburg Landing of April 6th & 7th, 1862. Gnl grant visited my division about ten A. M., when the battle raged fiercest. I was then on the right, After some general conversation, he remarked that I was doing right in stubbornly opposing the progress of the enemy; and in answer to my inquiry as to cartridges, he told me that he had anticipated their want, anfd given orders accordingly; he then said his presence was more needed at the left. About two P.M. of the 6th, the enemy materially slackened his attack on me, and about four P. M., I deliberately made a line behind McArthur's drill field, placing batteries on chosen grounds, repelling easily a cavalry attack, and watched the cautious approach of the enemy's infantry, that never dislodged me there. I selected that line in advance of a bridge across Snake Creek, by which we had all day been expecting the approach of Lew Wallace's division from Crump's Landing. About five P. M., before the sun set, Gnl Grant again came to me, and after hearing my report of matters, explained to me the situation of affairs on the left, which was not as favorable; still the enemy had failed to reach the landings of the boats. We agreed that the enemy had expended the furore of their attack, and we estimated out loss, and approximately our then strength, including Lewis Wallace's fresh division, expected each minute. He then ordered me to get all things ready, and at daylight the next day to assume the offensive. That was before Gnl Buell had arrived, but he was known to be near at hand. Gnl Buell's troops took no essential part in the first day's fight, and Grant's army, though collected together hastily, green as militia, some regiments arriving without cartridges even, and nearly all hearing the dread sound of battle for the first time, had successfully withstood and repelled the first day's teriffic onset of a superior enemy, well commanded and well handled. I know I had orders from Gnl Grant to assume the offensive before I knew Gnl Buell was on the west side of the Tennessee. I think Gnl Buell, Col Fry. and others of Gnl Buell's staff, rode up to where I was about sunset, about the time Gnl grant was leaving me. Gnl Buell asked me many questions, and got off me a small map, which I had made for my own use, and told me that by daylight he could have 18,000 fresh men, which I knew would settle the matter. I understood grant's force was to advance on the right of the Corinth Rd and Buell's on the left, and accordingly at daylight I advanced my divison by the flank, the resistance being trivial, up to the very spot where the day before the battle had been the most severe, and then waited till near noon for Buell's troops to get up abreast, when the entire line advanced and recovered all the ground we had ever held. I know that with the exception of 1 or 2 severe struggles, the fighting of April 7 was easy, as compared with that of the 6th. I never was disposed, nor am I now, to question anything done by Gnl Buell and his army , and know that, approaching our field of battle from the rear, he encountered that sickening crowd of laggards and fugitives that excited his contempt and that of his army, who never gave full credit to those in the front line, who did fight hard, and who had at four P. M., checked the enemy, and were preparing the next day to assume the offensive. I remember the fact better than Gnl Grant's anecdote of the Donelson battle, which he told me then for the first time - that, t a certain period of the battle, he saw that either was ready to give way if the other showed a bold front, and he determined to do that very thing, to advance on the enemy when, as he prognosticated, the enemy surrendered. At four P.M., on April 6th, he thought the appearance the same, and he judged, with Lew Wallace's fresh division and such of our startled troops as had recovered their equilibrium, he would be justified in dropping the defensive and assuming the offensive in the morning. And I repeat, I received such orders before I knew Gnl Buell's troops were at the river. I admit that I was glad that Buell was there, because I knew his troops were older than ours, and better systemized and drilled, and his arrival made that certain which before was uncertain. l have heard this question much discussed, and must say that the officers of Buell's army dwelt to much on the stampede of some of our raw troops, and gave us too little credit for the fact that for one whole day, weakened as we were by the absence of Buell's army, long expected; of Lew Wallace's division only 4 miles off, and of the fugitives from our ranks, we had beaten off our assailants for the time. At the same time our Army of the Tennessee have indulged in severe criticism at the slow approach of that army which knew the danger that threatened us from the concentrated armies of Johnston, Beauregard and Braggs that lay at Corinth. In a war like this, where opportunities of personal prowess are as plenty as Backberries to those who seek them at the front, all such criminations should be frowned down; and were it not for the military character of your journal I would not venture to offer correction of a very popular error. I will also avail myself of this occasion to correct another common mistake in attributing to Gnl grant the selection of the battlefield. It was chosen by the veteran soldier Maj Gnl C F Smith, who ordered my division to disembark there, and strike the Charleston Railroad. This order was subsequently modified by his ordering Hurlbut's division to disembark there, and mine higher up the tennessee to the mouth of Yellow Creek, to strike the railroad at Burnsville. But floods prevented our reaching the railroad, when Gnl Smith ordered me in person also to disembark at Pittsburg, and take post well out, so as to make plenty of room, with Snake and Lick Creeks the flanks of a camp for the grand army of invasion. It was Gnl Smith who selected the field of battle, and it was well chosen. On any other we surely would have been overwhelmed, as both Lick and Snake creeks forced the enemy to confine his movements to a direct front attack, which new troops are better qualified to resist than where flanks are exposed to a real or chimerical danger. Even the divisions of that army were arranged in that camp by Gnl Smith's orders, my division forming as it were, the outlying pickets, whilst McClernand's and Prentiss' were the real line of battle, with W H L wallace in support of the right wing, and Hurlbut of the left; Lew Wallace's division being detached. all these subordinate dispositions were made by order of Gnl Smith, before Gnl Grant succeeded him to the command of all the forces up the Tennessee - headquarters at Savannah. If there was any error in putting that army on the W side of the Tennessee, exposed to the superior force of the enemy also assembling at Corinth, the mistake was not Gnl Grant's - but there was no mistake. It was necessary that a combat, fierce and bitter, to test the manhood of the two armies, should come off, and that was as good a place as any. It was not then a question of military skill and strategy, but of courage and pluck, and I am convinced that every life lost to us that day was necessary; for otherwise at Corinth, at Memphis, at Vicksburg, we would have found harder resistance, had we not shown our enemies that, rude and untutored as we then were, we could fight as well as they.
  34. 1 point
    Ozzy, I think that McClernand gets a bum rap, and the charge of disloyalty, at least during this period seems seriously misplaced. Apart from offering detailed suggestions for the move on Fort Donelson (whether desire or not), what evidence exists that he was disloyal? On the 10th, McClernand wrote to Washburne: "Having entire confidence in Gen Grants representation I take great pleasure in concurring in his recommendation." The Papers of US Grant relate that, after the trip to Nashville: "a letter to USG was prepared at hd. qrs., 1st Div., Pine Landing, Tenn. 'We have heard with deep regret of your having been deposed from your authority as Commander in the field of the forces in this district. Whether, in fact, this be true, we do not pretend to say; much less to make it occasion for censure or reflection upon any. On the contrary, we disclaim not only the feeling but the purpose to do so. Our object is far different—it is simply and singly to perform an act which justice to ourselves as well as to you, equally, requires. Not to perform it would prove ourselves wanting in the sympathy and generosity which become fellow soldiers, who have fought and suffered together. This is our explanation and apology for this hasty note. Reverting to the past, we cannot forbear the expression of our thanks for the uniform urbanity and kindness you have extended to us. Nor in the sterner realities of war are we wanting in reason for awarding you our gratitude and respect. As our Commander at Belmont and Forts Henry and Donelson, besides in numerous mere skirmishes, you were successful. Under your lead the flag of the Union has been carried from the interior further towards the seaboard than by any other hands. You have slain more of the enemy, taken more prisoners and trophies, lost more men in battle and regained more territory to the Union than any other leader. If we have born a part in achieving these results we are proud of it, and are, therefore, naturally concerned in what may darken or disparage them. We place this spontaneous tribute at your disposal for such use as you may think proper to make of it.' LS, DNA, RG 94, Generals' Papers and Books, Ulysses S. Grant. This letter was signed by McClernand, Col. William H. L. Wallace, Col. Leonard F. Ross, and eight officers of McClernand's staff." A few days later, McClernand wrote Grant: "'Allow me to congratulate you upon your reported restoration to the functions, incident to your rank and command. I hope soon to see you with us.'" Joe
  35. 1 point
    Ozzy et al., Although there was talk of Grant abusing alcohol on the trip to Nashville, I haven't seen any specific evidence for it. Have you? Boynton in the NY Sun of 1/23/87 wrote that, "There are living witnesses of the excesses of that river trip to Nashville, but Gen. Grant was brought out of it, first by Gen. Rawlins's discretion, and next and mainly, by the forebearance of Gen. Halleck, who deemed it best to withhold from the people the knowledge of this affair, and give the officer who had won such a notable victory another trial. . . . There is no more glaring instance of ingratitude in our history than the attacks of the friends of Gen. Grant upon Gen. Halleck for his action in connection with this affair on the Cumberland." E.D. Kittoe wrote to J.H. Wilson [LoC - Wilson Papers 7/15/85] that Rev. Knowlton told Kittoe he had read the letter from Halleck to Grant, "written in the most friendly Spirit [sic], and reminded Grant of his former drunken habits causing his resignation from the US Army, and told him that now (i.e. at the time of the Nashville fiasco) the country was looking to him for great things and that if he would give him his pledge to abstain from drink that there would be no further action in his case, but that he would be reinstated in command, Mr[?] Knowlton read the pledge Grant sent to Gen[sic] Halleck and says it is a remarkable paper evidently written in a maudlin condition. Of course I know but little of this matter ....
  36. 1 point
    Civil War Seniority When first confronted with the above statement, something “felt off” about the claim; but without proof and confirmation, any response was merely an alternative claim or assertion. And without evidence, one false claim is equal to any other false claim... The problem: the above statement appears to imply that “an officer commissioned via West Point prior to the Civil War outranked, and enjoyed seniority, over EVERY officer NOT a graduate of West Point.” Therefore, according to logical extension, a Captain who was a graduate of West Point outranked a Brigadier General who was not a graduate of West Point... Quite an interesting state of affairs, if true. But, it is not true: according to U.S. Army Regulations of 1861, Article 9 (on page 10) “Officers serving by commission from any state of the Union take rank next after officers of the like grade by commission from the United States.” [Bold inserted for emphasis.] Translation: a Brigadier General of Volunteers outranked every Colonel and Major and Captain and etc regardless of source of commission. A Brigadier General of Volunteers with date of rank 17 May 1861 was senior to a Brigadier General of Volunteers with date of rank 18 May 1861. However, a Brigadier General with Regular Army rank was superior to EVERY Brigadier General of Volunteers regardless date of rank. Further: “ex-rank” held NO significance. This was a Furphy... a mirage perpetuated by ex-captain U.S. Grant and others, to intimidate “non-Regular officers” of the same rank into believing they were junior to West Point graduates, when they were not. [Grant successfully played this gambit against Colonel Turner of the 15th Illinois in Missouri, but was thwarted when he attempted the same ruse against BGen Prentiss on 17 August 1861.] Two steps had to take effect: General Orders of the Army had to be promulgated (G.O. No.62 were issued on 20 AUG 1861) AND Major General Fremont had to inform Colonel Grant of his appointment to Brigadier General of Volunteers, PENDING Grant's acceptance of that promotion. NOT UNTIL all these conditions were met was U.S. Grant a Brigadier General of Volunteers, senior to Brigadier General of Volunteers Benjamin Prentiss. Reference: https://archive.org/details/101556516.nlm.nih.gov/page/n15/mode/1up Army Regulations of 1861.
  37. 1 point
    I believe that I found it in Don Carlos Buell - Most Promising of All by Stephen D. Engle that as a "parlor trick" Buell would pick up his wife and place on the mantle of a fire-place to demonstrate his strength.
  38. 1 point
    The expression "white anting" is new to me but clear from the context. One can check the Wikipedia article for more details. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_anting
  39. 1 point
    I am currently working on my book on Shiloh firearms. The book, The Life of Albert Sidney Johnston, by his son W. P. Johnston includes a Chapter on the issues of arming and raising Regiments in A. S. Johnston's Dept. No. 2. In the text are several quoted letters from different Governors and Richmond Officials detailing the lack of firearms. The message was, "we have no arms to give." The question I have is where are these letters stored or not. Trying to compare similar communications from the O.R.'s leaves me scratching my head. What Johnston's son presents as correspondence I cannot find. I am not saying it does not exist, but to be historically correct I have to verify them in my footnotes. Does anyone out there know they are, Tulane?, National Archives?. Thank You in advance. Tom
  40. 1 point
    I found my reference regarding date of rank. The ranking officers, with dates of rank, are Winfield Scott Major General Regulars 25 June 1861 George B McClellan Major General Regulars 14 May 1861 John C Fremont Major General Regulars 14 May 1861 Nathaniel P Banks Major General Volunteers 16 May 1861 John A Dix Major General Volunteers 16 May 1861 Benjamin F Butler Major General Volunteers 16 May 1861 That's an impressive list of officers and shows great perspicacity on the part of the Administration in their selection.
  41. 1 point
    Must be Ben Butler who would have out-ranked those two naval officers. As I recall (but don't my reference have readily available), Butler was one of the early war commissioned major generals, causing great headaches for the Federals later in the war when their seniority entitled them to commands despite their evident incapacity.
  42. 1 point
    I just saw this website and thought you guys might enjoy it. http://www.civilwar.org/maps/animated-maps/
  43. 1 point
    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?
  44. 1 point
    The Call for Volunteers -- 1861 [From America's National Game by Albert G. Spalding (1911) and in the Public Domain.]
  45. 1 point
    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.]
  46. 1 point
    The above review of “Junius and Albert's Adventure” is pretty good... as far as it goes. Unfortunately, no one bothered to actually read the book (which was gifted to me a few days ago by my daughter, who found it in a bookshop in Castlemaine, Victoria.) Pages 25 – 41 detail Junius Browne and Albert Richardson reporting in the West, beginning in General Fremont's Missouri during Autumn of 1861. And the first revelation of significance to readers at SDG: the two reporters were present during the Fort Henry operation (Browne accompanied the marching infantry belonging to McClernand, while Richardson found a large tree, climbed high into its branches, and observed the fort vs. ironclads gunnery duel.) Afterwards, Albert Richardson returned to Cairo to send off his story; Junius Browne (despite injury due to accidental powder keg explosion) accompanied Grant's Army to Fort Donelson, and continued to report from the field, detailing actions of soldiers, and incidental meetings with local people and their views on the war. After the surrender of Buckner, Browne interviewed Confederate prisoners, and then returned to Cairo to send away his story (which was published over two PAGES in the New York Tribune of February 22, 1862.) Neither Browne nor Richardson was present for the Battle of Shiloh: Browne heard of an operation taking place in Arkansas, and hurried south to observe the action, but had only reached southern Missouri when the Battle of Pea Ridge took place. Not allowing lack of facts to get in the way of a good story, Junius Browne collected enough rumors concerning the battle, and “borrowed” information from rival reporter Thomas Knox, and in cooperation with Richard Colburn concocted a story of how “Siegel saved the Day at Pea Ridge” (and beat rival reporters to publish the full page report on Pea Ridge, first.) Afterwards, learning that “the next big event” was to take place at Island No.10 Browne rejoined Richardson and gained passage aboard a steamer bound for that Mississippi River confrontation... and both men missed the Battle of Shiloh. However, as mentioned in SDG post “Drawings” of 27 MAR 2018 Henri Villard met Richardson at Cairo on April 10 (Villard had travelled with Buell's Army of the Ohio, and observed much of Day Two firsthand.) After learning details from Henri Villard, Albert Richardson journeyed south, met with members of General Grant's staff, and was able to concoct a report on the Battle of Shiloh, which was submitted to the New York Tribune in late April. Browne and Richardson are next recorded aboard USS Benton on the Mississippi River, observing the Battle of Memphis of 6 June 1862...
  47. 1 point
    67th Tigers Thanks for providing clarity and documentation supporting Confederate troop numbers and identity of units assigned to Fort Donelson before the surrender of 16 FEB 1862. Another source of information: Prisoner of War records. The approximately 12000 Rebel prisoners were progressively shipped north after February 16th to Camp Douglas, Illinois (about 8000 men), Camp Morton, Indiana (3000) and Camp Chase, Ohio (800). These records are accessible at Family Search via the link https://www.familysearch.org/search/collection/1916234. [Click on "Browse through 51108 images" for record access. Free account with Family Search required for access to their records -- takes two minutes.] In addition, it appears one unit was assigned to Fort Donelson, but for some reason was posted opposite the fort, on the east bank of the Cumberland River. Scott's Louisiana Regiment (of cavalry) may have been kept on the other side of the river, on the orders of General Buckner, due to a recent outbreak of measles in the regiment. The location proved fortuitous, because the regiment was not surrendered; after February 16th Scott's Louisiana made its way east, passed through Nashville, and is next reported ahead of Buell's Army of the Ohio in March, likely responsible for destroying the bridge over Duck River near Columbia. Cheers Ozzy
  48. 1 point
    Right..I didnt put all this in my comment.I guess Grant thought he didnt want that valuable timepiece to become lost/captured.
  49. 1 point
    Below I have shared the Diary of Samuel K. Cox, a young lieutenant in the 17th Kentucky Infantry, while the regiment was at Pittsburg Landing. Cox and the 17th fought at Fort Donelson, and so, were some of the veteran troops Grant had at Shiloh. He offers key details that are corroborated by other accounts, which helps understand the complex movements of Lauman's brigade on April 6th and 7th, 1862. The combined 17th/25th Kentucky Infantry regiments are the only Kentucky regiments that fought both days for the Union, as the rest were marching with Buell's army. The 17th was from my town, so I have loved diving into what Lt. Cox says he experienced. His Fort Donelson entries are also very interesting and I will post those some day soon! Lauman's brigade was the 3rd Brigade in Hurlbut's division, so they were encamped by the "information shelter" on the Mounds and the parking lot adjacent to that. Their first line was facing west on the edge of Larkin Bell's Cotton Field, and they then moved back to the fence near the house and Peach Orchard, and then just north and east of Bloody Pond where they made a 5 hour stand before falling back toward the siege guns. I really wish there was more on these guys!29 MarchThis is again Sunday. How time flies by. We had Sunday inspection. I received some cigars and tobacco today, sent me from home, and also received a letter from Sister Jennie which I answered immediately.We had new jackets issued today. 5 AprilLast night about 7 o'clock, we heard for the first time the "long roll" and our boys immediately responding to the call and were formed in line in ten minutes. We were then informed that our lines had been attacked some two miles from here, to which point we marched immediately. We did not reach the scene of action as it was only a skirmish and lasted only a few minutes. We then returned to camp and slept one more night in peace. 6 AprilWe have heard today that the enemy intended to attack us at this point. How true the report is we will soon know. We were brushing up for Sunday morning inspection when, to our very great surprise, the cannon and small arms opened not a mile distant and in ten minutes that everlasting long roll was beaten and we gathered our guns and formed in line. In a few minutes we were seen winding our way to the point from whence the music of musketry came.We arrived there in a few moments, and found our forces falling back gradually. Our Brigade, consisting of the 17th Kentucky, 44th Indiana, 31st Indiana regiments were formed in line of battle close to the edge of a field. We had been there but a few moments when the enemy opened a "G" and wounded several. While this was going on, a continual roar of musketry both on our right and left proved the battle was raging at every point. In a few moments, the enemy attacked the 31st and 44th Indiana, which was on our right. We could easily see the fight, it being but a few rods away, but not close enough for us to participate. We had to wait but a short time, however, as they appeared in front of us in the field spoken of above. Our order was not to fire until the command was given, which was obeyed almost to the letter. They had probably gotten halfway across, when General Hurlbut gave the command, "Now, boys, give it to them." Our regiment opened and "Great God!" I never saw men lie down faster when not skirmishing than they did. It seemed to me that the whole line fell. Every man in forty yards of the flag was either killed or wounded. The flag bearer, however, walked coolly across the field waving his color. He excited the admiration of all for bravery and coolness. I suppose he had at least five hundred shots fired at him, but Providence seemed to be on his side as no person touched him. At this point, we had one or two of Company A wounded. One ball struck Captain Morton squarely in the breast, but being a spend ball, it did no damage. We remained at that place some two hours and the Brigade which was fight on our left, from some cause or other, gave way and we had to leave our position which we had so nobly held to hold them in check at that point.Soon arriving on the ground, the enemy made its appearance and a most desperate struggle ensued. For five long, weary hours, did we stand under a terrific fire both from musketry and shell. We advanced inch by inch on the enemy and man a poor soldier "bit the dust" trying to maintain his position. We gained on them gradually until nearly every cartridge in the regiment had been sent on his mission of death, when we were outflanked by ten times our number and compelled to fall back, which was done, thank God, in good order. At this point, a few minutes before our ammunition gave out, our gallant Captain Morton fell, mortally wounded. I was close by his side and took him on my back and started for the landing which was a mile distant. By the time I had arrived, the Regiment had taken a position behind some heavy siege guns, which had been mounted as a last resort to hold Pittsburg Landing. In a very short time, they were belching forth their missiles of death which held the enemy in check until night closed and put a stop to the butchering of human lives.I have no idea of the number killed and wounded but know the loss was heavy on both sides. I was of the opinion that we would never see a harder fight that we had at Donelson, but that was nothing in comparison to this. There has been one continual roar of musketry and big guns ever since the commencement this morning. I will now quit and hope for the best. General Buell's forces are now crossing the river by the thousands so we may expect war times tomorrow morning.7 AprilLast night it rained all night and the men were compelled to lie down on the cold, wet earth while they enemy had possession of our camps and were sleeping comfortably. Our boys, being very tired and hungry, went to sleep, notwithstanding the rain, which was descending in torrents. They lay anxiously awaiting the return of daylight so that they might know the result. At last it came. The rain, however, had held up and directly after day light, General Buell's forces opened the fight. They crossed all night; soon afterwards, General Grant's command went in. The firing was tremendous, I believe equal to yesterday, although the artillery was not so heavy. Our brigade, at least the remainder, was ordered on the right a distance of three miles where we arrived and soon were engaged. We fought at this point until about four o'clock in the afternoon when the enemy gave way, and soon afterwards was in full retreat toward Corinth. Our soldiers sent up cheer after cheer.I firmly believe that General Hurlbut's Division saved the day on yesterday and gained it today. They outflanked the enemy which caused them to retreat in great disorder. Our troops were too much exhausted to follow up their retreat and consequently, did not capture a great many prisoners.After the battle closed, I took a stroll over the field. It was horrible. The men were thick, some wounded and some in the cold arms of death. I could tell from the dead where the battle had raged more fiercely. Federal and Confederate soldiers were lying in the agonies of death.8 AprilWe area again in camp, but how changed the scene! Only two days ago we were in high spirits and confident of getting home soon without any more hard fighting; but alas, we were mistaken and many brave man in that short time has found a grave in the soil of Tennessee. Among the killed is our brave and kind Captain Morton. He died that night at 9:30 PM. It is useless for me to undertake to do him justice for I cannot. My pen is inadequate to the task. He was, however, a brave, cool man, always at his post and more especially when danger was high. He fell while leading his company gallantly on to battle. He was kind to his men and they all loved him and were willing to obey his command. They stood by him like heroes during the day when he fell. They seemed to fight more desperately to avenge his death. I cannot force his words to me when he fell. He put his arm around my neck and said, "Well, Sam, they have killed me at last." I immediately took him on my back and carried him through a perfect shower of cannon balls. I was determined to take him from the field or perish in the attempt, and, had the enemy overtaken me, I was resolved to remain a prisoner with him. But kind Providence seemed to favor me, and I arrived at the Landing where I had his wound dressed and immediately moved him on a steamer which was at the Landing. He talked to me freely on the road and told me what disposition he wanted to make of his property. He also remarked that "Many a better man had fallen that day." I told him that a better man never lived, and I am sure there was never a better man.This regiment has lost its brightest ornament, and one, too, that can never be replaced. His remains started home today in charge of his faithful servant, Horace. He will be buried in the church yard of the village of Hartford, Kentucky, his home. There, he will repose amid the scenes of his early labors and triumphs, away from the busy hum of life far away from the thunder and conflict and not clarion note will ever more disturb his slumbers or call him forth to battle. Peace to his ashes, and may the undying laurel of glory grow green over his grave.
  50. 1 point
    Oh please dont get Jim started again!
×
×
  • Create New...