|
|
|
|
|
|
Shiloh: The Battle That Changed the Civil War
written by Larry J. Daniel
Studio : Simon & Schuster
by Simon & Schuster
Publisher : Simon & Schuster
Released : 1998-06-12
Availability : Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Number of Items : 1
EAN : 9780684838571
Avg. Customer Rating: (based on 20 reviews)
List Price : $15.00
Our Price : $7.50
|
|
| |
|
Product Description |
|
The battle of Shiloh, fought in April 1862 in the wilderness of south central Tennessee, marked a savage turning point in the Civil War. In this masterful book, Larry Daniel re-creates the drama and the horror of the battle and discusses in authoritative detail the political and military policies that led to Shiloh, the personalities of those who formulated and executed the battle plans, the fateful misjudgments made on both sides, and the heroism of the small-unit leaders and ordinary soldiers who manned the battlefield. |
| |
|
| |
|
Inaccurate, poorly researched |
This tedious account of the Verdun of the Civil War is contradicted by first-person accounts of the period (see,for example, those in "Guide to the Battle of Shiloh" edited by Luvaas, Bowman, & Fullenkamp). Moreover, it is self-contradictory. On page 113, the Confederates burn down two 180-foot long bridges near Columbia, thus forcing the Union troops to cross a river "two hundred yards wide." (O.K., so those bridges wouldn't have been of much use anyway.) Those Union troops incidentally had "filed southwest from Nashville along the Central Alabama Railroad," a railroad that, alas, never came that far north.
In his turgid battle descriptions, the author confuses left and right, east and west, and fails to label the Kentucky and Tennessesse regiments as to which side they are fighting for requiring the use of a magic marker and a second or third reading to truly figure out what is going on. |
| |
|
The Pain of Shiloh |
Shiloh a small country church with a peach orchard in bloom spoke to the North and the South. Here the enormity of the war struck home, with a total of twenty-four thousand casualties. The nation was overwhelmed by the numbers. The western campaign to secure the river system was one small battle after another until Beauregard and Johnston attacked Grant's army. Grant was nearly defeated and only with the arrival of Buell's army during the night to turn this horrendous blood bath around. Daniel gives you some insight of the generals involved in Shiloh. This is not a fun book but a very interesting one. By Ruth Thompson author of "The Bluegrass Dream" and "Natchez Above The River"
Writing as a Small BusinessQualifying Laps: A Brewster County NovelSins of the Fathers: A Brewster County NovelTravelersThe Bluegrass Dream: A Wilderness Adventure of Early SettlersNatchez Above The River: A Family's Survival In The Civil War
|
| |
|
A Study of Shiloh |
Students of the Civil War have long recognized the importance of the battles in the West to the outcome of the conflict. The early stages of the war in the West, the battles of Fort Henry, Fort Donelson, and Shiloh were critical to the ultimate outcome.
Larry Daniel's "Shiloh: The Battle that Changed the Civil War" offers a detailed account of the bloody conflict that took place April 6-7, 1862 at Pittsburgh Landing in Tennessee. But the strength of the book lies more in Daniel's attempt to put the battle in its political context than in his description of the military actions.
Daniel argues that Jefferson Davis's policy in the West, which required a defence of every part of the Confederacy's large border, was based on highly dubious assumptions on how to garner support for the Southern war effort from European powers. Albert Sidney Johnston, a highly regarded general and a friend of Davis, received the unenviable task of commanding the Southern forces in the Western theatre. Militarily, Davis's policy stretched the Confederacy's available manpower very thin and made a breakthrough almost inevitable. Following the disaster at Fort Donelson, the way was opened into the Confederacy's heartland in Tennessee and further South including, ultimately, the control of the Mississippi River.
Johnstson, under severe criticism for the loss of Fort Donelson, was forced to evacuate Nashville. An ailing P.T. Beauregard was sent to assist Johnston and, it seems, Johnston allowed his junior to make many of the command decisions. Ultimately the Confederate troops concentrated in Corinth, Mississippi where the launched the surprise attack at Shiloh.
The Union forces had their own difficulties with a divided command structure, a great deal of personal jealousy and animosity among the generals, and suspicion of U.S. Grant. Grant ultimately sent his army to Pittsburg Landing with orders to wait until General Buell could join him before pushing South. The position was left unfortified and Grant did not expect a battle even though he knew the Confederates were only some 23 miles away.
Johnston and Beauregard hoped to launch their surprise attack on April 5 but difficulties in the march required its postponement until Sunday, April 6. Beauregard did not want to attack on April 6, but Johnston, at that point, pushed the action forward. The result was a grueling and bloody battle, full of missteps by commanders of both sides and fought largely by inexperienced troops. Johnston, leading his troops from the front, was killed on the right side of the Southern line at about 2:30 p.m. on April 6. Beauregard called off the attack at about 5:30 p.m., probably a correct decision but one that has been questioned by many. It is difficult to say whether the South could have, with a better battle plan, more troops, and firmer execution, prevailed on April 6 (or on April 5 if the attack had been brought as scheduled) in its bold gamble. But, reinforced by Buell, the Union drove the Confederacy back on April 7.
Grant himself said that Shiloh was the most misunderstood action of the Civil War. Shiloh is highly confusing in large part because the South's initial plan of attack broke down in short order and the battle became a series of uncoordinated engagements. Daniel's book compounds the confusion of the battle, as he writes in short overly-detailed sections without attempting to give an overview of the action. His account will likely be overwhelming to a reader coming to the battle for the first time. The maps in the book are widely spaced, and I didn't find them useful in understanding the text or the action on the field. I have been intruigued by the battle of Shiloh for many years. I read this book early in my study -- prior to a visit to Shiloh -- and then returned to it recently. I still found it difficult and frequently opaque.
Daniel's account makes a compelling case for the significance of Shiloh and he gives excellent accounts of many of the leaders involved in the battle, including Johnston, Beauregard, Grant, Sherman,Halleck, and Buell together with some figures whose names are not well-known. But readers wanting a basic account of the elements of a highly complex battle might be advised to start elsewhere.
Robin Friedman |
| |
|
You might be a redneck if... |
You thought this book was an accurate history of Shiloh.
This history of the Battle of Shiloh ignores the battlefield roles played by Sherman and Grant, and concentrates on the decisions made by the Confederate generals. The title is Shiloh: The Battle That Changed The Civil War... yet the book ignores the ways in which this battle gave rise to the two leaders that eventually won the Civil War!
The result is a bit one-sided, in a strange way. For example, at one point the author mentions a meeting, at 10 AM on Day One, between Sherman and Grant. The topics of discussion are never mentioned. A hundred pages later, we learn that Grant has formed a line of last resistance on his left wing... in between, nothing of his actions. In fact, the book seldom makes mention of any tactical decisions made by Sherman or Grant.
As a result, the author's legitimate criticisms of Grant and Sherman, for their actions taken before the battle, remain unbalanced with any attention to the energy and decisiveness shown by both during the battle. The ability of the Union to hold on Day One, and to take the offensive on Day Two, lack any grounding in an understanding of the actions of these two leaders.
This clear avoidance of any discussion of any action by Grant or Sherman for the entire first day of the battle gives the author license to depict Grant and Sherman as the true causes of the near-disaster, without any redeemable moments, decisions, or qualities. This may be fair, but other historians have also traced the rise of these two men to their energies in overcoming the Confederate advantages and yielding a Union victory. The author leaves the reader without a full understanding of the battle.
The writing is a bit muddled, with place names and the names of combatants mushed around just enough to cause some confusion. The best parts of this book come from the author's research into earlier and later lives of the combatants. The concentration on Confederate actions does yield a stronger sense of their strategies than might be found in some other histories of Shiloh. In the end, however, the author misses what made this battle seminal... among all other results, Shiloh forged in fire the two quite fallible leaders, Grant and Sherman, who went on to win the war. |
| |
|
honest picture of Shiloh |
The Battle of Shiloh was engaged in by both Union and Confederate amatures. It resulted in maturity for both sides. This is probably the best book on the battle to date. Rev. Daniels not only offers a well researched retelling of the battle and a reasoned evaluation of the strategy leading up to and following the battl, but a review that is amazingly free of hero worship. Some readers will find the book disquiting, some will thank the author for his work, but everyone interested in this battle and the war in general. Thanks to Larry Daniel.
|
| |
|
|
|
