Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Getting back to the west...

Expand Messages
  • josepharose <josepharose@yahoo.com>
    ... I m not sure whether you are referring to me, But I ll suggest one plan. As was learned over and over again later in the war, a broad frontal attack was
    Message 1 of 84 , Mar 2, 2003
      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "slippymississippi
      <slippymississippi@y...>" <slippymississippi@y...> wrote:
      >
      > I notice that nobody has accepted the challenge to define a battle
      > plan that would have rolled up the entire Union line at Shiloh.

      I'm not sure whether you are referring to me, But I'll suggest one
      plan. As was learned over and over again later in the war, a broad
      frontal attack was quite dangerous and often ineffective.

      If the Confederates concentrated their forces on either side of and
      on the road leading to Shiloh church--thus avoiding the ravine in
      front of Sherman's two westernmost brigades, the Rebels might have
      had the strength to penetrate far into the Union rear flanking
      Sherman and Prentiss along the way. The Union troops would have
      found it harder to form defensive positions and their inability to
      organize could have meant a rather quick defeat.

      In case Grant had thought to entrench, this might also have been a
      better plan to break through and flank any fortifications, rather
      than butting directly up against them over a wide front.

      > I also notice that certain stuck buttons have failed to address
      that
      > Sherman was not sweeping the roads with infantry because he was
      under
      > very strict orders not to bring on a general engagement.

      Grant's moving out far enough to sweep away two infantry regiments
      and a battery--all Sherman thought was there besides some cavalry--
      which were annoying his front should not have brought on a general
      engagement, as Grant thought that the Rebel army was back at
      Corinth. Marching to Corinth would have been, however, verboten
      under Halleck's orders.

      > I also notice that these posters have not addressed the fact that a
      > completely contiguous defensive line was impossible and unnecessary
      > due to the dense tangle between the camps at Shiloh.

      A "completely contiguous defensive line" was eminently possible and--
      as was distinctly demonstrated--quite necessary to a proper defense,
      in spite of the dense tangle between the camps at Shiloh.

      Joseph
    • bjer50010
      ... That s how I read his behaviour. His behaviour during the battle was abysmal. But even beforehand his constant chicken little routine appears to have
      Message 84 of 84 , Mar 19, 2003
        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, GnrlJEJohnston@a... wrote:
        > In a message dated 3/18/2003 10:05:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
        > bjewell@i... writes:
        >
        > > Appler made
        > > the decision to move his regiment forward, in contradiction of
        > > Sherman's orders. Read Sword. It was his own mistake, not Sherman's.
        > > And the collapse of his regiment resulted from his actions not
        > > Sherman's. The man simply wasn't competent to command a regiment in
        > > battle, as he clearly showed.
        >
        > Appler was not only incompetant, he was a coward only to be paralleled by
        > Gideon Pillow hiding behind a tree while his troops were going forward.

        That's how I read his behaviour. His behaviour during the battle was
        abysmal. But even beforehand his constant "chicken little" routine
        appears to have gotten on Sherman's nerves; hence the sarcastic
        replies. Of course Appler did turn out to be right, thereby proving
        the old adage about a broken clock being right twice a day. ;)

        Many
        > exhibited bravado before battle only to have to clean out their pants
        > afterwards.
        >

        But some of them actually stuck with the fight. To be afraid in combat
        seems normal, but Appler's behaviour defined cowardice.

        > JEJ

        Good to hear from you General.

        JB Jewell
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.