Jump to content
Shiloh Discussion Group
Sign in to follow this  
Ozzy

Scott's Louisiana Regiment

Recommended Posts

Ran across the following Shiloh report in the New Orleans Daily Crescent of 30 APR 1862:

Scott A (2).png

Scott B (2).png

Scott C (2).png

Scott D (2).png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The above article attributed to "S.R." of Scott's Louisiana Regiment holds surprising claims... one of which, "we made a forced march of 90 miles in two days," seems implausible... until it is realized that Colonel John S. Scott's unit was a Regiment of Cavalry.

In addition to riding 90 miles, it appears that twelve of those miles were covered during the morning of April 6th.

Given the above distances, Scott's Louisiana Regiment of Cavalry was likely on the line of the Memphis & Charleston Railroad, in vicinity of Decatur, Alabama, when orders were received on April 4th 1862 to, "Come west to take part in the fight."

Of especial interest: Scott's Louisiana Regiment is not mentioned in the official Shiloh Confederate Order of Battle. Yet, the author of the above article indicates that his cavalry unit was present at the battle, both days.

How can that be?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the above excerpt from the New Orleans Daily Crescent, the "additional comment" continuing beyond the bottom of the Louisiana Cavalry article was left attached, to provide tangible evidence of European visitors to the Confederate Capital at Richmond, all intent on celebrating a promised Rebel Victory in the field... somewhere (which would then justify according President Davis's Government with Official Recognition.) The presence of these European observers helped inspire Confederate leaders to "gild the lily," and claim Shiloh as a Victory... and persist with that claim, despite evidence to the contrary, until the argument was made moot... by the Federal Occupation of New Orleans.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scott's Cavalry regiment was the 1st Louisiana Cavalry and from what I found on the net, it shows they were operating under Forrest at Shiloh.  Very odd that they are not independently listed in the OR's, that I can see.  Did a little research and found the obituary, plus another online source, showing one Martin Costley, 1st Louisiana Cavalry, Company L, wounded at Shiloh.  So, they were there it seems.

The original article you posted is very odd and hard to follow.  Very generic "history" of the battle, almost written as if the writer was not there, just rehashing the Shiloh battle story.  If they were with Forrest, it leads one to wonder if they followed Forrest away from guarding bridges and joined in the attack near the Sarah Bell cotton field?  

costley_la_cv_03_14_ob.jpg

costley_la_cv_03_14_ob_1.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://tcc230.tripod.com/

 

The following short history was taken from the website above:

 

In February, 1862, Brigadier General Buckner ordered the 1st Louisiana Cavalry to operate on the north side of the Cumberland River, opposite Fort Donelson, to prevent any Union artillery from establishing across from the Fort. From this assignment until April, 1864, the 1st Louisiana Cavalry Regiment fought exclusively outside of their home state.

After the fall of Ft. Donelson, the regiment was ordered back to Nashville and remained there until Union forces started showing up on both sides of the river. The regiment was then ordered Franklin, Tennessee and to serve as the rear guard. While in route, Capt. G. Scott and a detachment of 40 men were sent to halt the harassment of a Union cavalry unit that was following. At Granny White's Pike, Capt. Scott and his detachment attacked the 100 man detachment of the 4th Ohio Cavalry, killing 12, routing the troopers and burned their tents. The 1st La. Cavalry detachment lost 1 killed and 1 mortally wounded. The remainder of the trip to Franklin was uneventful and marked the first engagement of a long record of engagements for the regiment.

At Shiloh, the 1st La. Cavalry was a part of Col. Nathan B. Forrest's Cavalry on the extreme right of the Confederate line. Repulsed the opening attacks on the 7th of April but had to finally give way to reinforcements of fresh troops of the Union forces.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stan

Thanks for having a look, and researching facts behind the First Louisiana Cavalry. A week ago, I had never heard of this unit, commanded by John Sims Scott... and doubted whether the 1st Louisiana Cavalry was present at Shiloh (even Major David W. Reed indicated uncertainty, on page 88 of The Battle of Shiloh and Organizations Engaged.) However, the more research is done, the more evidence is found. To summarize what I have found, to date:

1st Louisiana Cavalry

Spending the early months of the war in Virginia with General Magruder, John Sims Scott of East Feliciana Parish, Louisiana returned home with authority to recruit a cavalry regiment. In short order, the First Louisiana Cavalry (also known as Scott’s Regiment, or Scott’s Cavalry, or “The Louisiana Cavalry”) was organized, effective 11 SEP 1861, and was based at Baton Rouge. Called to Bowling Green, Kentucky in the Winter of 1861/2, the cavalry unit was initially prevented from engaging in demanding duties, due to an outbreak of measles. Then, having survived that epidemic, Scott’s Louisiana Cavalry rode west to take part in the Fort Donelson defense… only to have General Buckner assign the unit to the opposite bank of the Cumberland River (some said “to prevent Union artillery from occupying that position,” while others believed, “it was to make sure the measles did not get spread.”) Whatever the reason, Colonel Scott’s Cavalry was outside, across the river from Fort Donelson when that stronghold was surrendered on 16 FEB; and the unit returned east, made its way to Nashville, and became a part of General A.S. Johnston’s redeploy south towards Huntsville.

On March 9th a battalion of Scott’s Cavalry took part in a skirmish against elements of the 4th Ohio Cavalry (belonging to Ormsby Mitchel’s Division, Buell’s Army of the Ohio) at Granny White’s Pike. After holding that Federal force at bay, the 1st Louisiana Cavalry moved south to Columbia Tennessee (and was likely responsible for burning bridges in vicinity, which slowed the advance of General Buell, delaying his join with General Grant at Savannah.)

Racing away from Columbia, the Louisiana Cavalry appears to have ridden south (and probably took up the line of the Memphis & Charleston Railroad, heading west) and next shows up for the Battle of Shiloh (as indicated in the Letter of 13 April published in the New Orleans Daily Crescent of 30 APR 1862.) Major David W. Reed in Battle of Shiloh and the Organizations Engaged, page 88, also indicates the “Louisiana Cavalry” was somehow involved with the Battle (listed as “unattached,” but likely part of Breckinridge’s Reserve Corps, acting in cooperation with Forrest’s Cavalry against the Union left.)

After Shiloh, Scott’s Louisiana Cavalry took station at Burnsville; but by the end of April, the unit was heading east… and on May 1st harassed General Ormsby Mitchel (the man responsible for cutting the M & C R.R.) in vicinity of Huntsville.

For the remainder of the war, the 1st Louisiana Cavalry went from strength to strength: sometimes operating closely with Nathan Bedford Forrest; and at other times, operating as a Brigade of Cavalry, under Colonel John Scott. Significant campaigns include Bragg’s Kentucky Invasion (operating with Kirby Smith); Pegram’s Kentucky Raid; Tullahoma Campaign; Chickamagua; Chattanooga. Recalled to Louisiana early in 1864, Scott’s Cavalry spent the entire year harassing Union troops across the State; then rode into Mississippi to disrupt Union operation of the Mobile & Ohio Railroad.

Active mostly in Louisiana for the remaining months of the war, the 1st Louisiana Cavalry was surrendered as part of General Richard Taylor’s Army (to Union General Canby) on May 5th 1865. John Simms Scott survived the war… but passed away in 1872. Perhaps his untimely death contributed to the omission of the 1st Louisiana Cavalry from Confederate Order of Battle for the Battle of Shiloh?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

References:  OR 10 Pages 7 – 8; and 878

D.W. Reed’s Battle of Shiloh and the Organizations Engaged, page 88.

First Louisiana Cavalry at <tcc230.tripod.com>

New Orleans Daily Crescent of 30 APR 1862

 [In addition, an image of Colonel John S. Scott, 1st Louisiana Cavalry, is to be found on Pinterest.]

 

Scott's Louisiana Cavalry.docx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is rather intriguing.  The first question that comes to my mind is wondering how many men were in the 1st Louisiana Cavalry at the time of Shiloh.  This is all speculation as I do not have access right now to the OR's for guidance.  Lots of what if's.  I know many Alabama cavalry soldiers were "farmed out" as scouts, couriers, etc., and did not act together as a unit for all intents and purposes.  I wonder if the same could be said of the 1st Louisiana Cavalry.  If they operated as a solid whole unit, under Forrest, however, I do not see how they could be neglected in records; nor do I see how they could not be mentioned in Forrest's operations at Shiloh, particularly if they numbered over 100 men. 

The verbiage or rather how the story is articulated in the original article leads me to think they were on the Confederate right flank, near the river, the entire time.  They may have not joined Forrest in his movements near the Sarah Bell cotton field.  The story seems to mix "general Shiloh history" with the actions of the regiment. 

Although not as good as Fold3, civilwardata.com only lists one member of the regiment as being wounded.  IF, again, IF, they only lost one man wounded, that does not seem to indicate they were in any thick fighting.  One way or another, it seems to indicate that there were a lot of Confederate horsemen "operating" on the Confederate right and/or Forrest had more men under him than I thought.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×