When did the battle start being called Shiloh?

[BelleBlackburn]

And not Pittsburg Landing? I have searching this but must not use the right terms.

 

[Lefty]

Shiloh Church.

 

[diane]

I think it's because the Union used the nearest physical feature, like a creek, and the Confederates used the nearest town. Like the Union calls it Antietam for the creek and the Confederates call it Sharpsburg for the town. But some, like Gettysburg and Shiloh, came to have the same name for both sides. (Shiloh was quicker for the press, too.)

 

[BelleBlackburn]

So it was Shiloh just a couple of weeks after the battle? For both sides?

 

[huskerblitz]

Browsing Chronicling America I found several papers both Northern and Southern referring to the Battle at Shiloh (although spellings vary) days after the fighting.

 

[AndyHall]

"Battle at Shiloh" seems to have gained currency more quickly in the South, but it spread rapidly regardless:

Macon Telegraph, April 9.
Baltimore Sun, April 23.
New London, Connecticut Daily Chronicle, April 24.

 

[huskerblitz]

As a brief side note: Trying to research battles with multiple names is frustrating as heck. I'm still gathering information on Chickasaw Bayou but I'm finding so many different ways to look that it leads to many dead ends after spending hours looking. Chickasaw Bayou, Chickasaw Bluffs, Walnut Hills but also simply searching for just Vicksburg has led me to more leads in newspapers than any other. And of course all the ways to put a regimental name: Twenty-second Kentucky, 22nd Kentucky, 22d Kentucky, 22nd Ky, 22d Ky...etc. Tiresome....

 

[ole]

Had Ed Bearss tell me that Mill Springs had more names than any other. I thought Frazer's Farm had more.

But it is true that, early on, Confederates called a battle after a location and Unionists called it after a geographic marker. Hence, Manassas vs. Bull Run, Sharpsburg vs. Antietam. Shiloh vs. Pittsburg Landing. After a while, they agreed on a name, more or less. Vicksburg and Gettysburg being two examples. Atlanta being another.

 

[JPK Huson 1863]

So interesting! Although does drive beginners a little crazy, battles called different names. Shiloh/Pittsburgh Landing is more obvious, maybe because it's referred to so frequently, the others become really confusing.

Does make you wonder- if Gettysburg were called something else, what on earth would it have been? Couple of creeks/runs. TWO ridges, 10 roads, how many landmark farms? OH! And a bridge, well, several of those too, only one appears to be still covered, were any others 150 years ago? ( and haunted...., 'nother thread )

 

[BelleBlackburn]

Thanks, guys. Somebody here always knows.

 

[diane]

Multiple names drove me nuts, too! Every battle was named at least twice.

So interesting! Although does drive beginners a little crazy, battles called different names. Shiloh/Pittsburgh Landing is more obvious, maybe because it's referred to so frequently, the others become really confusing.

Does make you wonder- if Gettysburg were called something else, what on earth would it have been? Couple of creeks/runs. TWO ridges, 10 roads, how many landmark farms? OH! And a bridge, well, several of those too, only one appears to be still covered, were any others 150 years ago? ( and haunted...., 'nother thread )

Think that might be the real answer for battles with one name. (Sometimes you find they actually do have another name, too, but nobody uses it.) Perhaps it's the sheer scale of these battles. Gettysburg, Atlanta, Vicksburg - huge! In fact, I often get surprised at how much area was involved. No mountains. Those same Civil War officers who came out West to fight Indians were comfortable enough on the plains and valleys but the mountaineers beat them almost every time. (Then Little Phil thought up something else...) It's one of the lesser appreciated curses of being a farmer - every belligerent will march into your field because you've cleared it and they have fighting room!

 

[ErnieMac]

Correspondence sent by Beauregard to Grant and included in Grant's Official Report of the battle:

HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE MISSISSIPPI,
Monterey, April 8, 1862.

SIR: At the close of the conflict of yesterday, my forces being exhausted by the extraordinary length of time during which they were engaged with yours on that and the preceding day, and it being apparent that you had received and were still receiving re-enforcements, I felt it my duty to withdraw my troops from the immediate scene of conflict.

Under these circumstances, in accordance with usages of war, I shall transmit this under a flag of truce, to ask permission to send a mounted party to the battle-field of Shiloh for the purpose of giving decent interment to my dead.

Certain gentlemen wishing to avail themselves of this opportunity to remove the remains of their sons and friends, I must request for them the privilege of accompanying the burial party, and in this connection I deem it proper to say I am asking only what I have extended to your own countrymen under similar circumstances.

Respectfully, general, your obedient servant,

G. T. BEAUREGARD,
General, Commanding.

 

[Lefty]

I don't reckon we give enough credence to the direction in which the opposing armies initially entered the battlefield as far as how both armies eventually labeled them.

For instance Lee basically placed his army units to take advantage of the high ground surrounding the small town of Sharpsburg. Very few soldiers were actually place along the Antietam Creek. (Toombs few Georgians being the exception on the heights above "Burnside's" Bridge.) So, in essence, the CSA was aligned defensively surrounding the town of SHARPSBURG while strategically placing the Potomac River against their backs at the same time guarding the main Ford at Shepherdstown to their rear.

When McClellan attacked the first geographic opposition he faced (and continued to face) was the ANTIETAM Creek a waterway and not the town of Sharpsburg itself.

Likewise in Tennessee. Where Sherman first disembarked and where he encamped was in the whereabouts of PITTSBURG LANDING eventually being joined by Grant, Buell etc. The few landing buildings themselves being burned down in a skirmish in the beginning of March '62 but the place itself was known as a fairly deep steamboat "landing" along the Tennessee River as well as the Indian Burial Mounds nearby.

Therefore........the first thing the Federal Army saw and where they encamped was referred to by them as PITTSBURG LANDING.

The initial CSA avenue of approach was from the southeast and the first discernible battlefield feature they saw was the 20X30 sq ft log church/meetinghouse structure known as SHILOH Church. Much of the battle took place in this vicinity and Beauregard even established his headquarters there. Likewise Lee's HQ was strategically just on the outskirts of SHARPSBURG.

 

[bankerpapaw]

Correspondence sent by Beauregard to Grant and included in Grant's Official Report of the battle:

HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE MISSISSIPPI,
Monterey, April 8, 1862.

SIR: At the close of the conflict of yesterday, my forces being exhausted by the extraordinary length of time during which they were engaged with yours on that and the preceding day, and it being apparent that you had received and were still receiving re-enforcements, I felt it my duty to withdraw my troops from the immediate scene of conflict.

Under these circumstances, in accordance with usages of war, I shall transmit this under a flag of truce, to ask permission to send a mounted party to the battle-field of Shiloh for the purpose of giving decent interment to my dead.

Certain gentlemen wishing to avail themselves of this opportunity to remove the remains of their sons and friends, I must request for them the privilege of accompanying the burial party, and in this connection I deem it proper to say I am asking only what I have extended to your own countrymen under similar circumstances.

Respectfully, general, your obedient servant,

G. T. BEAUREGARD,
General, Commanding.

What was Grant's reply?

 

[ErnieMac]

What was Grant's reply?

In a word, no.

HEADQUARTERS ARMY IN THE FIELD,
Pittsburg, April 9, 1862.

Your dispatch of yesterday is just received. Owing to the warmth of the weather I deemed it advisable to have all the dead of both parties buried immediately. Heavy details were made for this purpose, and now it is accomplished. There cannot, therefore, be any necessity of admitting within our lines the parties you desire to send on the ground asked.

I shall always be glad to extend any courtesy consistent with duty, and especially so when dictated by humanity.

I am, general, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

U. S. GRANT,
Major-General, Commanding.

 

[JPK Huson 1863]

Thanks Ernie! One of the unidentified Illinois there is my uncle, Samuel Huson, 14th Illinois. We have the letter his fellow corporal wrote to his parents- horrible to read, but tells of how this man had just returned from burying Sam on the battlefield. In all the chaos, his marker must have become lost- he's now ' missing' despite that letter, must remain forever unknown. I've frequently wondered if perhaps the 14th Illinois's records wouldn't contain something helpful- he was buried by his regiment, near where he fell in the first wave through the camps.

 

[ErnieMac]

Thanks Ernie! One of the unidentified Illinois there is my uncle, Samuel Huson, 14th Illinois. We have the letter his fellow corporal wrote to his parents- horrible to read, but tells of how this man had just returned from burying Sam on the battlefield. In all the chaos, his marker must have become lost- he's now ' missing' despite that letter, must remain forever unknown. I've frequently wondered if perhaps the 14th Illinois's records wouldn't contain something helpful- he was buried by his regiment, near where he fell in the first wave through the camps.

Diary of Lieutenant Colonel William Camm follows. Pages 843 - 861 cover Shiloh. Sam Huson is not mentioned, but the colonel gives a very descriptive account of the fighting. With some good maps of the battlefield it might be possible to trace some of the regiments movements from Camm's descriptions.
http://lincoln.lib.niu.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.2929:4.lincoln

 

[AUG]

This thread on the multiple names for battles was posted a while back.
http://civilwartalk.com/threads/battles-with-two-names.87668/

 

[James N.]

And not Pittsburg Landing? I have searching this but must not use the right terms.

What seems distracting to me when reading newspaper accounts of the battle is the reference to the battle at PITTSBURG - no "landing", just Pittsburg.

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

Diary of Lieutenant Colonel William Camm follows. Pages 843 - 861 cover Shiloh. Sam Huson is not mentioned, but the colonel gives a very descriptive account of the fighting. With some good maps of the battlefield it might be possible to trace some of the regiments movements from Camm's descriptions.
http://lincoln.lib.niu.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.2929:4.lincoln

Thanks for the link.
I enjoyed reading Lt. Col. Camm's diary entries.