DOC Shiloh: Conquer or Perish (Modern War Studies) by Timothy B. Smith in History

Review

21 of 22 people found the following review helpful. This one meets all of the best expectations from a highly-accomplished author and historianBy Jedidiah SmithThis one meets all of the best expectations from a highly-accomplished author and historian. The coverage of Day 2 is unprecedented - Cunningham; McDonough; Sword; and Daniel all spend far less attention on that important combat; as if the battle really ended on April 6 and April 7 was a simple "mop up" operation by the Federals. Smith gives the second day almost equal attention; which alone warrants a purchase. He also provides a level of terrain analysis which is well beyond what the prior works have provided. Terrain was always critical in 19th century combat and Shiloh's had a significant influence on the battle. The author's background as a NPS ranger at the battlefield means that he has an intimate knowledge of the "lay of the land" which is evident throughout this book. Whether you have none; one; or all of the prior books; you won't regret adding this to the collection.6 of 6 people found the following review helpful. Detailed view of a major battle--nicely doneBy Steven PetersonThis is a well detailed telling of the fearsome battle of Shiloh; the first mega-battle of the Civil War. What had gone before included significant battles--Wilson's Creek and First Bull Run and Fort Donelson; for example. But none of those battles came close to approaching the ferocity and deadliness of Shiloh.Shiloh has the good fortune of being rendered nicely by several authors--such as Daniels; Cunningham; and Groom. What sets this volume apart is the detail. At the same time; some of the other volumes provided a more strategic perspective. Bottom Line; though? Shiloh is well chronicled by good historians. Thus; one can get a well grounded viewpoint on this sanguinary struggle by reading several volumes.The book begins with the collapse of the Confederate line with the fall of Forts Henry and Donelson. Under the overall command of General Albert Sidney Johnson; a number of units of Confederate forces from throughout the region began to gather in Corinth--with the intent to attack General Ulysses Grant's Army of the Tennessee at Pittsburg Landing in Tennessee. Grant positioned his divisions on the land above the Landing. Neither he nor his colleague; William T. Sherman; had any sense that the Confederate Army might move on them with the intent of attack. A major failure on their (and others') parts. Against all odds (with their troops firing rounds from their guns) the Southern forces attacked; surprising the Union forces.A strength of this volume is the detailed discussion of the role of many units--down to the regimental level--and the unfolding battle; hour after hour. Although stung at the outset; as the Union forces retreated; the width of the battlefield decreased; increasing their strength in terms of troops per mile. One gets a good view of decisions by division and corps commanders.The book also does a nice job of capturing key aspects of Day Two--when the Union forces began their own attack; after the Confederates had sputtered out the day before. There is a nice discussion of the role of the much maligned General Lew Wallace; whose flank attacks helped loosen the Confederate lines.The aftereffects of the battle are well told.Pluses: order of battle if helpful; the detailed accounting of the battle--down to the regimental level. Minuses: the maps are not as useful as they could be.All told; a fine volume on a bloody battle. . . .14 of 15 people found the following review helpful. Battle Among the Fields and DogwoodsBy Amanda WarrenThis is a thoroughly-examined; beautifully-told narrative of the Battle of Shiloh. We can only wish that more historians would take the approach of Timothy B. Smith who refreshingly refrains from repetitive blame; finger-pointing; slant and excessive partisanship. First; he assumes as a general rule that the major players did the best they could under stressful circumstances. Then he focuses on facts which have a way of dispelling many emphatic opinions and assertions canonized over the years. Aspects of the battle that others have overemphasized (for example; the Hornet's Nest and Bloody Pond) are shown not to be quite so significant. Other phases traditionally passed over are given a second look; such as the entire second day which; lo and behold; was much more than just a simple matter of the Yankees' overrunning the Confederates. And it will surprise you indeed whom he shows to be primarily responsible for that ultimate result!By refusing to adopt the caricatures and prejudices passed down from earlier authorities; commanders emerge as complex individuals; in many cases wrongly faulted. For example; General McClernand actively led alongside Sherman; and his troops consistently fought well both days. General Beauregard is shown to have been wrongly pilloried for calling off the first day's attack; instead; his shortcoming resulted from believing a false report on Buell's whereabouts and consequently failing to prepare adequately for the following day. In my opinion Smith is overly reverential of Grant; whose unjust destruction of Lew Wallace's career he attributes only to the "PR machine" of Grant's staff. But this kind of malice was a personal pattern of Grant's: witness Rosecrans; Warren; and Thomas and many other lesser luminaries. He refutes the notion of Buell's saving Grant's Army by a hair-splitting rationale that his timely arrival made no difference on the first day. However; it clearly did on the second; and that is when the battle was won.Smith wrote often of the "confusion" of Shiloh and does a beautiful job of dispelling it for us; but there was one matter that left me confused. He refers to a Confederate commander Jones on a couple of occasions such as p. 223. On p. 348 he associates Jones with the 17th Louisiana; but the Jones brigade on the map on p. 297 does not include the 17th Louisiana. The index was no help. So who was this Jones? (Interestingly; Charles Jones who commanded the 17th La. was involved in a long-running feud against General St. John Liddell and murdered him in 1870.) I also question why General Polk remained almost invisible throughout the book.I found one inaccuracy. Smith states that Albert Sidney Johnston was buried in Metairie Cemetery in New Orleans; but the Metairie Race Course did not become a cemetery until the 1870s. At the outbreak of War it was turned into a Confederate training camp. When Johnston's body was brought to New Orleans Mayor Monroe provided a tomb in St. Louis Cemetery; Johnston's resting place until disinterred in 1867 and moved to Austin; Texas. Years later an equestrian statue of General Johnston was erected atop the Army of Tennessee tumulus of Metairie Cemetery; but he was never buried there.In the first sentence of the book; Timothy Smith states that Shiloh holds a special place in his heart. This indeed is a heartfelt treatment of the battle; the earth on which it was fought; the men who fought it; and its history and legend. His work stands as a masterful tribute honoring the heroism and sacrifice of those two spring days in April. One participant said that for the rest of his life he would think of Shiloh whenever he saw dogwoods blooming. In that vein; Shiloh: Conquer or Perish conveys an unforgettable sense of the poignancy of this terrible; great event of history.