Jump to content
Shiloh Discussion Group

Recommended Posts

On April 26th 1862, after the dust had settled a bit on the momentous contest that had taken place in vicinity of Pittsburg Landing, E. G. Squier, editor of Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, made use of previously published reports by Whitelaw Reid and William C. Carroll -- and eyewitness statements provided by his own reporter on the scene -- and constructed the following article:

The Great Battle in the South-West 

"The long-anticipated great battle in the South-West was fought on the 6th and 7th of April, at a point called Pittsburg Landing, on the Tennessee River, in the south-western portion of the State of Tennessee, near the northern boundary of Mississippi. As regards the numbers engaged, and equally as regards the number of killed and wounded on both sides, this battle ranks as the most serious struggle of the war. It commenced on the morning of Sunday, the 6th, and was protracted over two days, ending on the night of Monday the 7th with the flight of the rebel army, which left its Commander-in-Chief, Maj.-Gen. A.S. Johnston, dead on the field.

Considered as a whole, the Battle of Pittsburg Landing may be described as a repetition of Bull Run on a larger scale, but with its results reversed. The enemy here made the attack in superior force, gained an undoubted success on the first day, but were overpowered by reinforcements of the National army on the second day, and driven from the field. Either because the National army was very much cut up, from lack of efficiency in its commanders, or from causes yet to be explained, the retreat of the enemy was little molested -- thus completing the parallel with Bull Run, where the rebels permitted the National forces to fall back undisturbed to their entrenchments.

There is much that is unintelligible and unsatisfactory about the affair at Pittsburg Landing, and much which reflects unfavorably upon the generalship displayed by the National commanders. The Union forces on the left bank of the Tennessee River, under Gen. Grant, numbered about 35,000 men. Advancing to his support, from the direction of Nashville, by easy stages, and with that slow deliberation which characterizes all his movements, was that remarkably intelligent and enterprising officer, Gen. Buell, at the head of 40,000 men. In front of Gen. Grant, on the same side of the river, and less than twenty miles distant, were Generals Johnston, Beauregard, Bragg, Polk, and Evans, with the combined rebel forces from Bowling Green, Columbus, Memphis, Pensacola and Mobile, with large augmentations from Virginia, in all at least 100,000 men, massed together with the obvious and avowed purpose of crushing the Northern army by the weight of numbers. All this was known for weeks, and yet Grant's comparatively little army was left at Pittsburg with a river behind it, and Buell loitering by the way, while Maj.-Gen. Halleck, whose duty it was to be with his army, lingered in St. Louis.

It was under these circumstances that Johnston, having rapidly concentrated his forces, resolved upon the very natural expedient of massing his army on Grant, overwhelm him, and then cut off Buell the Tardy. It is astounding that Gen. Grant did not anticipate and in some way provide against a movement which the smallest modicum of common sense, to say nothing of military knowledge, pointed out so clearly as the true one to be made. Yet it is a fact, that the attack on Sunday morning was in every sense a surprise. It does not seem that the ordinary precaution of posting pickets in the direction of the enemy had been adopted. The Pittsburg Landing correspondent of the Chicago Times states positively that our officers were informed by rebel prisoners that an attack would be made on Sunday, "but that no extra measures were taken to guard against surprise." The prevailing impression seems to have been, that the rebels would strengthen their entrenchments at Corinth, and there await the attack of the combined National army. Halleck appears to have been of this belief, Grant certainly acted as if he thought any other policy impossible, and Buell seems to have cared very little about the matter.

This blindness, supineness and lack of energy proved nearly fatal to the National cause in the South-West. Had not Johnston been prevented by storms from making his attack earlier, Gen. Grant's division must have inevitably been cut up and captured. As it was, the rebel force, estimated at 90,000 strong, swooped down on Gen. Grant, on Sunday morning, with such rapidity and impetuosity, that the outlying camps were captured almost at the instant; "so quickly," says one correspondent, "that many of the soldiers were taken or slaughtered in their tents." Gen. Prentiss' brigade, on the advance, seems to have been captured bodily. Desperate efforts were made by the National commanders to retrieve themselves, and they and their men fought all day with desperate energy, against the overpowering force of the rebels, flushed with the successes of the morning. But in spite of all their exertions they were gradually driven from their positions back to the river, losing battery after battery, and were only saved from annihilation at nightfall by getting under the protection of the gunboats on the river. The rebels occupied the Union camps, leaving to the morning the consummation of their victory. Their Commander-in-Chief had fallen during the day, but his place was more than filled -- in the rebel estimation -- by Beauregard, who, during the night, telegraphed to the insurgent Government that, under Almighty God, he had "gained a complete victory." His dispatch was as follows: "Battlefield of Shiloh, April 6, via Corinth and Chattanooga -- General S. Cooper, Adjutant-General -- 'We have this morning attacked the enemy in a strong position in front of Pittsburg, and after a severe battle of ten hours, thanks to Almighty God, gained a complete victory, driving the enemy from every position. The loss on both sides is heavy, including our Commander-in-Chief, Gen. Albert Sidney Johnston, who fell gallantly leading his troops into the thickest of the fight.' -- G.T. Bearegard, General-Commanding."

During the night, however, Gen. Buell's division appeared on the banks of the Tennessee River, behind the shattered Union army, and the work of crossing was commenced. When morning broke, the astounded Beauregard found, to his alarm, that a new army had sprung up as from the ground before him. No time was left him for reflection or preparation, for now it was his turn to be attacked. His reserves were ordered up, and before 10 o'clock the battle became general. At half-past eleven it was at its height, and raged furiously. The commanders on both sides flew to the front and headed the charges of their respective commands. Wallace, Grant, Nelson and McClernand were everywhere, inspiring their men by word and example. At noon the rebels began to fall back, slowly at first, but gradually hastening their movements, abandoning battery on battery more rapidly than they had gained them the day before, until at three o'clock they were in full retreat for Corinth, abandoning their dead and wounded on the field, failing, as we have already said, to carry off the body of their Commander-in-Chief.

That the victory rested with the National army is indubitable. How far it may prove to be decisive remains to be seen. That Gen. Grant's division was in imminent danger of being cut to pieces is certain, and that this danger was due partly to blind confidence and want of ordinary provision on his part, but mainly to the inexcusable delay of Gen. Buell in reinforcing him, is clear -- clear, unless additional facts, unknown to the public, shall entirely change the aspect of the whole affair.

The losses on both sides were very heavy -- much heavier than in any previous battle of the war. The first reports were vague and exaggerated:  "25,000 killed and wounded on the side of the National forces; 30,000 on the part of the enemy." Later reports put the Union loss in killed, wounded and prisoners at 7000; those of the rebels, in killed and wounded alone, at about the same figure. Absurd censorship, or some other cause, has prevented us, at the end of a week, from knowing the exact state of facts. We, however, do know that the rebel Commander-in-Chief was killed; that Gen. Gladden lost an arm; that Gen. Prentiss of the National army was captured; and the gallant Wallace severely wounded. Late reports, vouched for by Gen. Banks, represent Beauregard as severely wounded, and since dead. It will take time to resolve all the conflicting statements and rumors into a consistent and truthful whole. Meantime, it is enough, perhaps, to know that the eagle of victory still perches on our standard! And it only remains for us to add the Proclamation of the President, and the Order of the Secretary of War, called out by the bloody achievement at Pittsburg Landing, and the really great victory won by Com. Foote and Gen. Pope on the Mississippi..."

[President Lincoln's Proclamation of Thanks and Secretary Stanton's Summation attached.]



[Just a few observations, to go with the above article: although written by E.G. Squier, significant input was provided by the sketch artist, Henri Lovie, who sent along his observations (while remaining at Pittsburg Landing, continuing to sketch.) The above article appears on Page One... of the Supplement [a two-volume edition published as No.337 and No.338 on April 26th 1862]. The entirety of Frank Leslie's Illustrated, Edition No.337 is devoted to the Victory at Island No.10 ...with all aspects of that Campaign discussed and sketched. The War Supplement (Edition No.338) has "The Great Battle of the South-West" on its cover, above a sketch of the Victory at Island No.10 -- and on the 4th page of the Supplement, another sketch of a significant operation at Island No.10 (Colonel Robert's Night Raid against the Guns at Fort No.1) attributed to Henri Lovie. In all of the two volumes of the April 26th Edition, the only illustration with a connection to Battle of Shiloh is inadvertent: "F. Munson of Chicago, the Volunteer Nurse (aboard City of Memphis steamer)." The City of Memphis was used as Hospital Boat at Shiloh, after April 6th.]

Reference:  http://archive.org/stream/franklesliesilluv1314lesl#page/n393/mode/2up  "The Great Battle of the South-West" in the War Supplement [Edition No.338] of April 26th 1862 Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, page 396 [401 on page].



  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

War Supplement.jpg 


Just a few more observations IRT the April 26th article by E.G. Squier:

  • Para 1)  This paragraph attempts to be a "just the facts" lead in to the report on the Battle of Shiloh, but it contains a significant flaw: the body of Confederate commander Albert Sidney Johnston was not left behind by the Rebel army. [And although this detail was initially believed by Federal participants of the Battle, it was known to be false before this report was published in Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper.]
  • Para 2)  An interesting comparison is made, of Shiloh as "Bull Run in reverse." [My own suggestion: Shiloh has closer comparison to "Fort Donelson in reverse" (see SDG "Ft Don vs Shiloh" post of 30 October 2016.)]
  • Para 3)  The victors at Shiloh -- the National commanders -- [read US Grant, DC Buell and Halleck] come in for scathing criticism... which did not happen to the victors at Bull Run. And this disapprobation is asserted without revealing that General Grant arrived late at the Battlefield...
  • Para 4)  "Everybody knew Grant was waiting for Buell." [This is a theme discussed to the present day: how could the Federal leaders be so blind as to allow the Confederate army to sneak up on them?]
  • Para 5)  Although containing flaws, this paragraph succinctly outlines the initial success of the Confederate onslaught (and offers three major reasons for the lack of ultimate success: delay due to weather; unknown impact due to death of General Johnston; and the decision by General Beauregard to call a halt and "wrap things up in the morning.")
  • Para 6)  "The tables turned." General Beauregard's intention to wrap things up in the morning thwarted by Buell.
  • Para 7)  This paragraph addresses the unsatisfying, yet-to-be realized, aspects of the Union victory... not complete, due no pursuit to Corinth. "What was Grant thinking, to allow this engagement to be thrust upon him? And why did Buell take so long to complete a relatively short march from Nashville?" Unless further facts become evident... [such as, "Believe it or not, it was all Lew Wallace's fault."]
  • Para 8)  Exaggerated losses. Coupled with the estimate of "90000 Confederate attackers," was this an attempt to "pave the way" for the real casualty figures? Also, the contrast of 100000 Rebel attackers to just 35,000 Federal defenders (with approximate ratio of 3-to-1) ...was this an effort to address the Confederate claim that "one of ours is worth ten of yours" ?  Consequently, paragraph 8 presents as a contrivance -- offering rumor, innuendo and hope -- designed to entice the reader to purchase the next copy of Frank Leslie's... to find out the rest of the story.



Reference:  http://archive.org/stream/franklesliesilluv1314lesl#page/n394/mode/1up  Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper for April 26th 1862 -- War Supplement.




  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whither Henri Lovie? 

Much is made of Whitelaw Reid's 22,000-word tome on The Great Battle at Pittsburg Landing... including claims by some that "he was never on the battlefield" [see SDG topic Crump Wharf, started by WI16thJim].

But, what about Henri Lovie? We assume that Lovie -- "who always followed General Grant" -- and who published sketches in Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, was present at Pittsburg Landing and generated a portfolio of Battle of Shiloh sketches while there. Yet, it is obvious, from reading Frank Leslie's edition for April 5th 1862 that Henri Lovie was (along with fellow artist, Alex Simplot) away with the forces of Foote and Pope, recording the operation against Island No.10. Lovie produced the cover sketch for April 5th, and two credited full-page works that appear inside, all featuring scenes related to Flag-Officer Foote's activities above New Madrid Bend. In addition, Henri Lovie created an iconic sketch of Colonel Robert's Night Raid against the guns of Fort No.1 at Island No.10 (which took place on April 1st, and appears in the April 19th Frank Leslie's.) And Alex Simplot, who remained in vicinity of Island No.10 until Federal victory on April 8th, arrived at Hamburg, Tennessee well after Shiloh took place.

Again: when did sketch artist Henri Lovie arrive?

On page 18 of the May 3rd edition of Frank Leslie's Illustrated, a four paragraph article attributed to Henri Lovie reveals the following:

  • "Nothing could exceed the perilous position of Grant's Army at this moment [the moment Henri Lovie arrived at Pittsburg Landing]"
  • "The stragglers were [thick as fleas] and attempted to force their way aboard the Hannibal [which arrived loaded with an abundance of stores]"
  • "So desperate were these men [and so potentially dangerous our situation] that the Hannibal was cut loose from the bank, and backed into the stream..."
  • "At that same moment, Nelson's Division appeared on the bank opposite Pittsburg Landing, immediately boarded waiting steamers, and were ferried across." [Nelson arrived at Pittsburg Landing at 5pm... so must have arrived on the bank opposite and loaded steamers between 3 o'clock and 4:30 on Sunday afternoon. This is also the time that Henri Lovie arrived at Pittsburg Landing aboard the steamer, Hannibal.]
  • As further confirmation of the above, a sketch appears across pages 20 and 21 in the May 3rd edition, that depicts much of what is described in Henri Lovie's brief article (including the appearance of Nelson's men in the distance, far right.)

An attempt at clarity...


Henri Lovie.jpg Frank Leslie's May 3rd 1862, pages 20- 21

[The War in the West -- Pittsburg Landing, Sunday afternoon, April 6th 1862 by Henri Lovie.]


References:  OR 10 page 323 [Report No.103 -- BGen William Nelson]

http://archive.org/stream/franklesliesilluv1314lesl#page/20/mode/2up  Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Lovie rode the Hanibal to Pittsburgh Landing arriving around 3:00 on the afternoon of April 6th?  You wrote before that Reid was present at Pittsburgh Landing at the time of the battle. I have a description of two Chicago 'newspaper men' on the deck of a steamer interviewing wounded men as they were being brought on board and getting fantastic and exaggerated accounts of the battle. Did Reid stay at the landing or immediately set off downriver to file his 'story '?


  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agate at Pittsburg: a Very Brief History of Whitelaw Reid 

In the Life of Whitelaw Reid by Royal Cortissoz (1921) on page 84 is advanced this reason why Reid joined with the Army of U.S. Grant: having witnessed the unsatisfying campaign of McClellan in western Virginia [June 1861]; and having been disappointed by the brag and bluster of Rosecrans [at Carnifex Ferry in September]; Whitelaw Reid was heartened by Grant's occupation of Paducah (which countered the Confederate possession of Columbus Kentucky.) And Reid was "drawn to General Grant" after the Conquest of Fort Donelson in February 1862.

Reid is said to have gone up the Tennessee River in March 1862; made contact with Grant's Staff officers, John Rawlins and William Hillyer; and was "all over the campground" of Pittsburg Landing -- and Crump's Landing -- expecting to have good in-depth details on individuals and their units, [in order to flesh out the report of the anticipated move (and victory) against Corinth]. "More than once," recalls Cortissoz, on page 85, "Whitelaw Reid was a guest of Lieutenant Colonel Kyle's Regiment, of General Sherman's command." 

After Shiloh, Whitelaw Reid's next assignment was at "the seat of War" in Washington, D.C. as Correspondent of the Cincinnati Gazette [page 99].

A report written by Reid (under his callsign Agate) is to be found in the Gallipolis [Ohio] Journal of March 27th 1862. Titled "The Great Tennessee River Expedition," [dateline Tyler's Landing, Mississippi, March 15th] Reid reports on Sherman's failed raid against the Memphis & Charleston R.R. and makes mention of his acquaintance with the 71st Ohio under Rodney Mason.

Links provided below...



Resources: http://archive.org/stream/lifeofwhitelawre01cortuoft#page/84/mode/2up  The Life of Whitelaw Reid (1921)

http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn85038121/1862-03-27/ed-1/seq-3/#date1=1862&index=0&rows=20&words=AGATE&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=Ohio&date2=1862&proxtext=Agate&y=8&x=15&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1  Gallipolis Journal of March 27th 1862 [page 3 Column 1] at LOC site "Chronicling America"

SDG topic Crump Wharf (begun by WI16thJim on 11 April 2017)




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing...

In Roger's post above, mention is made of "where reporters were physically when concocting their stories."  Consider this: as Roger suggests, a reporter could be miles away, get sufficient information from an eyewitness or two, and race off the first report without ever being physically present. Even in the case of reporters who claimed to have "roamed across the battlefield at Pittsburg Landing" there is often no hard evidence when that roaming occurred. (In the case of Whitelaw Reid, he was in vicinity of Pittsburg Landing several weeks before the Battle of Shiloh; in the case of Henri Lovie, he arrived on Sunday afternoon... and spent the next several weeks "roaming" and collecting information and sending that information to Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper.)

The above concern brings us to "sketch artists." As can be easily proven by sketch books that all sketch artists possessed, "quick sketches" were made [at the scene, at time of the occurrence, if possible] and fleshed out later with detail and "factual, undeniable occurrences" that provided credibility to the artist's work. Henri Lovie's sketch (above) "The War in the West -- Pittsburg Landing, Sunday afternoon, April 6th" is one example: Lovie was aboard the Hannibal, in the middle of the Tennessee River, and could not provide this sketch from the vantage point claimed, at the moment it occurred: the details were recorded, and some time later -- perhaps days later -- Henri Lovie took position south of Pittsburg Landing and constructed that sketch from memory, and from his "quick sketch." Was Lovie there? Yes. Is the sketch accurate? Pretty close, but "poetic license" could be taken in placement of Nelson's Division, and the "volume of men arriving at the Landing" at that moment in the afternoon. In effect, a sketch could be "massaged" to tell a story... as effectively as the report of a correspondent working only with words.

Which brings us to photo-journalism: the introduction of the camera to the battlefield provided instantaneously recording of events as they occurred, from the vantage point where the camera happened to be; no "fudging" of time and location allowed... or so it would seem. [Years after the Battle of Gettysburg, it was discovered that bodies there had been moved around, re-positioned, and photographed in order to achieve a more compelling effect. "The camera does not lie" has been a furphy from the very beginning.]

The message: no single source can be trusted to provide "the whole story." Claims must be verified -- double checked and triple checked -- to determine not only accuracy, but fact from fiction.

My two bob...



References:  http://www.post-gazette.com/life/civilwar/2013/12/08/Frick-Art-and-Historical-Center-presents-Civil-War-brought-to-life-by-woodcut-engravings/stories/201312080025  Pittsburgh Post Gazette December 8th 2013 "The Civil War brought to Life by Woodcut Engravings" by Frank Reeves.

http://www.loc.gov/collections/civil-war-glass-negatives/articles-and-essays/does-the-camera-ever-lie/the-case-of-the-moved-body/  "The Case of the Moved Body" discussed/on file at Library of Congress.




  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an example of "how a sketch can be adjusted" scroll down the attached link for comparison of Henri Lovie's original sketch... and how it was presented in Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper (May 24th 1862).



Reference:  http://bcm.bc.edu/issues/summer_2009/features/picturing-america.html  BCM Summer 2009 "How the News was reported" [comparison of Henri Lovie quick sketch with finished work].


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Returning to Agate for a moment...

One difficulty encountered when tracking the Civil War reports of journalists is their use of a variety of identifiers: in the case of Whitelaw Reid, he was rarely identified as W. Reid; often labelled as "Agate" ...but most often "identified" merely as "Special Correspondent of the Cincinnati Gazette." Because many reporters contributed to the Gazette, the only method to be employed to determine authorship of an article is to read it, and analyze the writer's style: in the case of Whitelaw Reid, he was a man of impatience, who suffered fools lightly; he believed "he could predict future Rebel moves... why not the Generals?" And he was very blunt (to the point of abrasive) in his assessment of military preparations and actions.

That being said, I believe the following is an article written by Whitelaw Reid on April 1st 1862 with dateline of Savannah, Tennessee. It appeared in the Cleveland Morning Leader of Friday, April 4th on page 2, column 3, and is attributed to "Special Correspondent of Cincinnati Gazette."

"Important from the Upper Tennessee -- The Situation at Corinth" 

The expedition has accomplished nothing as yet that can be laid before the public -- Beauregard's advanced camps are within six miles of our advance from Pittsburg Landing, and the Rebel advanced camps from Purdy are within five from ours in front of Crump's Landing.

At Purdy and Bethel the rebels still have only an outpost of four or five regiments with a small force of artillery and cavalry. At Corinth they may have sixty thousand, including the ten thousand without arms. -- They claim 100,000... and from that on up indefinitely.

There seems to be no doubt that they mean to make a stand at or near Corinth. They cannot yield that without yielding their whole line of defenses along the northern border of the Gulf States.

A portion of General Buell's army was on Sunday morning last within a day's march of Savannah. Gen. Grant is understood to outrank Gen. Buell, the latter having been confirmed Major General some weeks after Gen. Grant. In this case, therefore, General Grant will command the entire force.

There are rumors, however, that General Halleck will take the field here in person, as soon as the Island No.10 agony is over, and that there will be four or five Corps d' armee organized, Potomac army fashion; with the Major Generals Grant, Smith, Wallace, Buell and McClernand as commanders. Take them (the rumors, not the Generals) with a discount.

The wooden gunboats continue dropping occasional shells into the rebel batteries at and above Eastport, Mississippi. Little importance is attached to their river defenses.

General Grant is to take the field in person at Pittsburg Landing to-day, unless the plans should be changed.

The weather is sultry: delightful mornings and evenings, but decidedly too hot for Northern constitutions at noon. The roads are admirable, and the country toward Corinth is a high upland, about half under cultivation, the rest wooded, through which there are few obstacles to the easy movement of a large army.

Some cotton is being brought in from the country under escort of our troops, to prevent the rebels from burning it. Seventy-five bails came in that way yesterday.

Briefly, that's all the news that ought to get into print. I've sent it all by telegraph, but think it as likely as not the dispatches are still floating around in Government steamboats on their way to Cairo. We're having a telegraph built from here to Nashville, across the country, that will be done before long, but it is exclusively for military purposes.


Upon review of the above article (of April 1st), the following points are of interest:

  • This reporter knows that Confederates from Corinth are within six miles of the Federal pickets;
  • The Rebels at Purdy are known to be within five miles of the Federals at Crump's Landing;
  • The reporter claims "sixty thousand rebels are at Corinth" (and knows that they exaggerate their numbers)
  • "The rebels cannot yield Corinth without yielding their whole line of defenses." [This being true, what can they do about it? -- Ozzy]
  • "A portion of Buell's army [Nelson -- not identified] was within a day's march of Savannah."
  • The reporter is alert to the fact that Grant outranks Buell... if that should become important;
  • The intended arrival of Henry Halleck is reported as "a rumor"
  • "The Island No.10 agony..." Having commenced mid-March 1862, shortly after the Abandonment of Fort Columbus by the rebels, the newspapers and General Pope were impatient with the progress of Flag-Officer Foote's naval operation against New Madrid Bend. Never mind that a canal had to be dug (which took time and manpower); and after Foote sent a gunboat through the gauntlet of seventy powerful guns (USS Carondelet) Pope then demanded a second gunboat be sent -- risking the same danger -- "before he could commence his crossing of the Mississippi River from New Madrid." [This impatience may be what led Henri Lovie to abandon reporting the affairs at Island No.10 and make his way to Pittsburg Landing... where he arrived just in time to make a comprehensive report and portfolio of sketches.]
  • The intention to form "an army of corps" for the Operation against Corinth was known;
  • "General Grant will take the field at Pittsburg today... unless plans change." This seems like a backhanded slap at Grant by the reporter (who perhaps had knowledge that Grant "was fixin' to move" for some time, but never quite made it happen.)
  • "The terrain provides few obstacles to movement of a large army."
  • The reporter indicates awareness that the nearest telegraph office "is at Cairo." [Actually, it was at Fort Henry, as proven by reporter William C. Carroll a few days later.]
  • The reporter also knows that General Buell is extending the telegraph line from Nashville to Savannah (but only military personnel will be given access to it.) [This erecting of poles and creation of an extended telegraph line (as directed by Henry Halleck) as well as rebuilding bridges, may have contributed to Buell's delay in reaching Savannah.]

Just a few thoughts...



References:  OR 10 and OR 8 (Island No.10)

OR (Navy) volume 22 (Navy operations at Island No.10)

http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83035143/1862-04-04/ed-1/seq-2/  Cleveland Morning Leader of April 4th 1862 page 2 "Important from the Upper Tennessee... by a Special Correspondence of the Cincinnati Gazette" 



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not just Pictures... Henri Lovie 

This post bears its title, because:

frankleslie map (2).jpg

Henri Lovie did more than sketch... and he produced more than maps. He also created one of the first narratives: an effort to explain his sketches, and to make sense of the Battle of Shiloh, Day One. [Above Shiloh map found in Frank Leslie's of May 17th 1862 and War Supplement.]

The Great Battle of Pittsburg Landing 

"This great battle, extending over the 6th and 7th of April, the greatest as far as numbers are concerned, and the bloodiest ever fought on this continent, is very fully illustrated in our present issue, by our Special Artist, Mr. Henri Lovie, who also furnishes us with a very clear and impartial account.. [ E.G. Squier, editor.]"

The Battle of Sunday 

"Before the enclosed sketches can reach their destination, you will undoubtedly be in possession of carefully compiled and elaborate accounts of the numerous engagements constituting the great battle of Pittsburg. I shall therefore confine myself to a mere outline of the battle, and such details only as will be necessary to explain the sketches and maps enclosed. These sketches I selected from a large number of notes, made in every part of the extensive territory over which the battle raged, with a view of not only putting before your readers the most prominent actions, but also of illustrating most effectually the varied characteristics of the fight. I have been laboriously careful in getting the scenery, locality and actions accurate, believing that future events will place this battle amongst the most prominent of the war.

The map of the roads and positions of our camps will greatly facilitate a clear understanding of events, and a few topographical explanations will be sufficient to acquaint the reader with the battle-grounds. The entire country, between Lick and Snake Creeks, consists of low, rolling hills, covered with open timber, perfectly practicable, even for artillery, which can traverse it in every direction without meeting any serious obstacle, the brush and undergrowth being light, except in a few spots. A small number of open fields and log-huts are the only signs of civilization. The descent to the river is sudden, a steep bluff about seventy feet high forms the bank, leaving only space for a single road at its foot, and an opening of about fifty acres, known as Pittsburg Landing.

The map will show the disposition of our forces before the attack, and reference to it will make the subsequent movements clear.

The enemy advanced along the two branches of the road leading to Corinth, and fell suddenly, almost simultaneously, on General Prentiss's and General Sherman's divisions, which held these roads, Gen. Prentiss the left and Gen. Sherman the right. Both of these divisions being taken by surprise, evidently on account of a defective system of scouts and pickets, were forced back in disorder, not, however, without making a resistance sufficiently vigorous to alarm the whole camp. Gen. McClernand's division, being encamped close behind Gen. Sherman's, parallel with the Corinth Road, had found time, thanks to the stubborn defence of Taylor's Battery, and others holding a position near Shiloh Church (see map), to form for battle. Gen. McClernand immediately changed front to meet the advancing enemy, and formed along the crossroad leading to Purdy. Gen. Hurlbut rapidly advanced from his position near the river to the front on the left wing, where Colonel Stuart, with his brigade, held an isolated position, and closed up the gap along the front, while Gen. Sherman, quickly rallying his men, after falling behind McClernand, appeared on the right of that commander, strengthened by General Smith's division, commanded by Gen. WHL Wallace. General Hurlbut rallied the remainder of Gen. Prentiss's division on his right, and thus an unbroken battle-line was thrown against the enemy, reaching from Lick Creek on the left to Snake Creek on the right. And thus they fought, disputing every inch of ground, holding positions for three or four hours at a time, gradually and slowly falling back, from morning until night. The details of the brave deeds performed here will fill the newspapers for weeks. The splendid and stubborn defence of our men, and the desperate and determined efforts of the rebels, made the forest resound with the uninterrupted thunder of artillery and unceasing rattle of small arms, which gradually grew nearer and nearer to the river, as the sun went down. Suddenly, at half past 5 pm, the cannonading and firing increased. The enemy had met our line of artillery which had been formed on the ridges about one mile from the Landing. Generals McClernand and Sherman had successfully checked the enemy on the right by a combined effort. Gen. Nelson's division had arrived, crossed the river, and gained a position in front, amidst the enthusiastic cheers of our reanimated soldiers. The gunboats had also opened fire upon the enemy's right wing, which was endeavoring to gain a position on the river bank, and were driving them back in confusion. For an hour there was a most terrific roar of artillery and musketry, when the enemy, foiled in every attempt to break our lines and dismayed by the indomitable perseverance of our troops, fell back, to await the morning to complete the victory. Thus ended this bloody Sunday: the enemy having full possession of our camps, while our little army, or what remained of it, was huddled together in the narrow space remaining, without shelter, without food, in a pelting rain, wearied with their terrible exertions but full of hope, for Buell had finally arrived, bringing fresh troops. Would to God that he had started a day earlier, or had marched a day faster! -- [Henri Lovie.]"

[There is more to Lovie's narrative, including "The Battle at the Peach Orchard," and "McClernand's Second Line of Defence." These, along with more maps and sketches, can be found in the War Supplement to Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper of May 17th 1862.]

http://archive.org/stream/franklesliesilluv1314lesl#page/66/mode/2up  Frank Leslie's of May 17th 1862







Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...