Shiloh

[8thvacav]

jimbos,
Read Lew Wallace's book. He tells exactly what happened at Shiloh. I think Lew was a scape goat for Grant And Sherman because they got there butt kicked.
http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~rcadams/
http://www.crawfordsville.org/benhur.htm

You can order Lew Wallace's book from the last site. It was around $20 and is a paper back. Its a good read.
Martin (8thvacav)

[mobile_96]

Ole,
"the contention that Grant ordered Confederates buried where they fell" ??
I flipped thru Swords, Daniels, and Grants memoirs earlier today and don't see any reference to how Grant or anyone else in fact, ordered the Confederates buried, but do indicate the removal of Soldiers in wagons. Where do you find or what prompts you with this 'contention'.
Looking at the Trailheads Graphics maps does show 4 Confederate burial trenches on the Left half the the Shiloh battlefield, indicating possible heavier casualities on that end of the field. To better understand the positioning of these trenches I wonder where the original burial trenches were located for the Union troops.
PS. Interested in that Vicksburg trip in later June?? If so, maybe we could squeeze in a day for Corinth and 1 or 2 full days for Shiloh?
Chuck

[ole]

Jimbo:

It may appear that Johnston was quite overrated. He had more seniority than Lee, and only one ancient had more than him. But it is fairly apparent that he surrendered his command to Beauregard.

It would also appear (weasel words) that Beauregard handed over the planning to a staffer with Napoleonic pretensions -- hence, the complications.

You did mention one thing that at first have my hackles rise, but I considered and it fit. You said Beauregard and Johnston agreed that the Yanks needed to be peeled away from the river. Now, there is plenty of evidence that Bo's actions were designed to drive the Yanks into the river, but there is a sliver -- an opinion, if you will -- that gives some credence to that. In speaking with the chief ranger at Shiloh, he opined that Bo believed that the Yank line stretched north to south facing west. Hence, straight north would serve the purpose of driving them away from the river.

My reaction at the time was, "reasonable theory, but why would Bo suppose that?" Well, in dry weather, the Snake Creek drainage was flat. Sherman would likely dig in facing that avenue. As it happened, Sherman was more than happy to spread his lines and the dispositions of other corps' lines in preparation to move south along the few roads available.

Today, the terrain across which Johnston's effort advanced was no better nor worse than that crossed by the advances ****her west. The swamps mentioned were at the bottom of a bluff. Sherman's left was on the top of that bluff. Of course, the bottom of every ravine was very swampy, if not filled with running water on that first day.

Do try abebooks.com. There are plenty of local booksellers, and you would have a wide choice ranging from pristine first editions to complete "reading copies." Check Wiley Sword and Larry Daniel -- "Shiloh Bloody April" and simply "Shiloh" respectively. Larry Daniel's work is quite a bit newer and, presumably, has newer sources. One of these are required. You can work out from there.

[ole]

Chuck, you snuck one in whilst I was composing my missive to Jimbo.

This was something Stacey had in his observations and reprints of articles. Forget which one, but never forgot the import of that supposition.

When is the Vicksburg muster? Committed during first half of July. Maybe could work something out in May. Da Momma want's to go to Memphis somewhere in there. We could drop her off. Have to take the dog with, though. It would take a week and be a hard push.

[8thvacav]

ole, Your the second person that has mentioned thathere isn't artifacts and the graves at the Hornets Nest to support that there was a big battle fought there. I wonder why thay is?
Martin

[wt_jimbos]

I can't help but laugh everytime I hear about Johnston riding the battlefield and leading charges with his tin cup!

Similarly so with Jackson and his rusted sword and scabbard.

[johan_steele]

a note on the hornets nest... I recall a tree that was cut nearly in half at about 6 feet up, it had bent but not broken and continued to grow. I don't recall the type of tree or even if it is still there.

There is plenty of evidence of one brutal fight at the Hornets Nest, the unit histories of almost every Iowa Regt that was there speaks of the heavy fighting and the casualties.

I recall one of the Rangers (he may well have been just pulling our legs) telling of a brush clearing party finding a dozen or so sets of remains when an old tree fell over and it's upended roots tore up a good bit of the ground.

Also the CS troops had enough time to detail men to gather the wounded & dead from around the Hornets Nest, this would explain why there aren't the graves there one would expect.

[8thvacav]

Shane, I'm not disputing you. Thats just something I heard from a friend on another board. He said a ranger at Shiloh told him that. He said they metal detected the site and there wasn't much there.

[ole]

Shane, the time could explain policing up their own casualties. Why wasn't that done elsewhere? Are all the gravesites in areas that forbid that consideration? Or are we talking sensibilities of commanders.

Makes an interesting question posed by the head ranger. He's not published on that comment, probably because it's a theory. There can be no question that the fighting was very hot in that sector. I suppose the question is: was it as hot as the history books have it?

Not quarreling; questioning. It's an answer I don't have but would like to. You make good points, as does 8thvacav. Would like to hear more upon which to base a conclusion.

[johan_steele]

Union troops that had surrendered in the Hornets nest and elsewhere were used as stretcher bearers to pick up the CS dead & wounded.

CS troops had enough time to gather up all of the arms from the dead & wounded... a fact that is often overlooked is that Bragg (IIRC) ordered Enfield Rifles to be carried instead of the wounded men who had carried them. This is part of the reason the reports of captured & policed arms don't reflect the numbers of CS prisoners also that a higher than normal percentage of the CS POWs were wounded and died in US care. Union surgeons ended up dealing w/ a lot of the CS casualties while the CS ambulances & wagons that should have carried them carried their arms instead. I had a very difficult time believing this until I saw several sources that confirmed it.

I think on the first day there is a concentration of casualties around the Hornets Nest, the use of Union POWs to police the area as well as CS details both watching over them and doing the same job might explain the smaller number of CS graves there, especialy if they had been gathered into a central collection point.

It's an interesting point and question; one I'm not sure there is really a concrete answer for only educated guesses.