Posted on 04/10/2022 7:59:35 AM PDT by Homer_J_Simpson
CAIRO, Wednesday, April 9.
Further advices from Pittsburgh Landing give the following about the battle:
first engaged. The attack was successful, and our entire force was driven back to the river, where the advance of the enemy was checked by the fire of the gunboats.
Our force was then increased by the arrival of Gen. GRANT, with the troops from Savanna, and inspirited by reports of the arrival of two divisions of Gen. BUELL's army.
Our loss this day was heavy, and, besides the killed and wounded, embraced our camp equipage and 36 field guns.
The next morning our forces, now amounting to 80,000, assumed the offensive, and by 2 o'clock P.M. had retaken our camp and batteries, together with some 40 of the enemy's guns and a number of prisoners, and the enemy were in full retreat, pursued by our victorious forces.
Our casualties were numerous, and include:
Gen. GRANT, wounded in the ankle, slightly.
Gen. W.H. WALLACE, killed.
Gen. SMITH, severely wounded.
Col. HALL, Sixteenth Illinois, killed.
Col. LOGAN, Thirty-second Illinois, wounded severely.
Col. DAVIS, Forty-sixth Illinois, wounded, severely.
Major HUNTER, Thirty-second Illinois, killed.
Col. PEABODY, Twenty-fifth Illinois, severely wounded.
Our killed, wounded and missing are not less than 5,000.
CHICAGO, Wednesday, April 9.
The Times' account of the battle at Pittsburgh Landing on Sunday and Monday, says that the enemy surprised Gen. PRENTISS' Brigade, which was in the advance, five miles beyond Pittsburgh, at 5 o'clock on Sunday morning, taking two regiments prisoners and capturing the General. The fight continued during the entire day, the enemy driving our forces back to Pittsburgh with fearful loss.
Gen. BUELL, with Gen. NELSON's Division, arrived at 4 o'clock, and turned the tide of battle.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
First session: November 21, 2015. Last date to add: May 2025.
Reading: Self-assigned. Recommendations made and welcomed.
Posting history, in reverse order
https://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:homerjsimpson/index?tab=articles
To add this class to or drop it from your schedule notify Admissions and Records (Attn: Homer_J_Simpson) by reply or freepmail.
Link to previous New York Times thread
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4053606/posts
The Battle of Pittsburgh: Important Particulars of the Terrible Struggle – 2-5
Operations on the Mississippi: Commodore Foote’s Official Report of what he Found at Island Ten – 5-6
News from Washington: Order from Secretary Stanton Regarding the Late Victories – 6-7
News from Fortress Monroe: Everything Progressing Satisfactorily at Yorktown – 8
From the Lower Potomac: Particulars of the Late Reconnoissance to Stafford Court-house – 9
Editorial: The Coming of the Merrimac – 9-10
The Siege of Yorktown – 10
Editorial: The Battle on the Tennessee – 10
Editorial: Naval Ordinance-A Word of Caution – 10-11
Departure of Mr. Russell – 11
The First-Honor Man at Pittsburgh – 11
The Rebel Need of Artillery – 11
A Bounty for Southern Valor – 11
Whip em tomorrow
Thank you. I had forgotten about this battle in that area.
The Corinth road was at certain seasons a branch of the Tennessee River. Its mouth was Pittsburg Landing. Here in 1862 were some fields and a house or two; now there are a national cemetery and other improvements. - Ambrose Bierce, What I Saw of Shiloh
As you can see from their map, the NY Times thinks a battle on the Tennessee River should have taken place in Tennessee. Over time they should figure out that it was really in Mississippi, and will adjust their reporting. They may also add “Landing” to Pittsburg, and drop the “h”. I’ve noticed that they invariably add an “h” to any locale that ends with burg. Drives my spellchecker nuts.
They spelled it with an -h? Nowadays it’s with a -g, and only that one in PA is spelled with an -h.
See my reply #8.
Georgia 1862 Engagements
| Date | Engagement | Military Units | Losses | Victor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| April 10-11 | Fort Pulaski, GA | Union Dept of the South, S. Atlantic Squadron (DuPont, Hunter ~10,000 +51 ships) & Confederate Dept of SC, GA, FL, Savanah River Squadron (RE Lee, Tatnall ~385 + 5 ships) | Union 5-total (1-killed), Confederate 368-total (5-killed) | USA |
It was the war's 94th engagement, bringing total casualties to nearly 73,000 including over 8,200 killed in action.
Summary of Civil War Engagements as of April 10, 1862:
Engagements in Confederate states:
| State | Union Victories | Confederate Victories | Inconclusive | Total Engagements |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| South Carolina | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Virginia | 5 | 11 | 7 | 23 |
| North Carolina | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Florida | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Louisiana | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Tennessee | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Arkansas | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Georgia | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total Engagements in CSA | 15 | 13 | 9 | 37 |
Engagements in Union states/territories:
| State | Union Victories | Confederate Victories | Inconclusive | Total Engagements |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maryland | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| West Virginia | 9 | 2 | 2 | 13 |
| Missouri | 11 | 9 | 1 | 21 |
| New Mexico | 2 | 7 | 0 | 9 |
| Kentucky | 4 | 3 | 2 | 9 |
| Oklahoma | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| Total Engagements in Union | 27 | 24 | 6 | 57 |
| Total Engagements to date | 42 | 37 | 15 | 94 |
So this is different from the Pittsburg Landing at Shiloh, TN?
Holy crap. I have taken it as an article of faith for years that Shiloh was in MS, like Corinth. It’s in Tennessee! I’ve read numerous accounts and pored over many maps. How could I be so steadfastly ignorant of this basic fact? I am troubled.
https://www.nps.gov/state/ms/index
Part of Shiloh National Military Park is in Mississippi - but not Pittsburg Landing.
I posted 4 or 5 American Battlefield Trust maps of the battle. Every one says “SHILOH, TN”. In retrospect, that should have been a clue that I was not looking at maps of Mississippi.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.