What do you think?
Rate this book
Modern War Studies
Shiloh: Conquer or Perish
A critical moment in the Civil War, the Battle of Shiloh has been the subject of many books. However, none has told the story of Shiloh as Timothy Smith does in this volume, the first comprehensive history of the two-day battle in April 1862 a battle so fluid and confusing that its true nature has eluded a clear narrative telling until now.
Unfolding over April 6th and 7th, the Battle of Shiloh produced the most sprawling and bloody field of combat since the Napoleonic wars, with an outcome that set the Confederacy on the road to defeat.
Contrary to previous histories, Smith tells us, the battle was not won or lost on the first day, but rather in the decision-making of the night that followed and in the next day's fighting. Devoting unprecedented attention to the details of that second day, his book shows how the Union's triumph was far less assured, and much harder to achieve, than has been acknowledged. Smith also employs a new organization strategy to clarify the action. By breaking his analysis of both days' fighting into separate phases and sectors, he makes it much easier to grasp what was happening in each combat zone, why it unfolded as it did, and how it related to the broader tactical and operational context of the entire battle.
The battlefield's diverse and challenging terrain also comes in for new scrutiny. Through detailed attention to the terrain's major features most still visible at the Shiloh National Military Park Smith is able to track their specific and considerable influence on the actions, and their consequences, over those forty-eight hours. The experience of the soldiers finally finds its place here too, as Smith lets us hear, as never before, the voices of the common man, whether combatant or local civilian, caught up in a historic battle for their lives, their land, their honor, and their homes.
"We must this day conquer or perish," Confederate General Albert Sidney Johnston declared on the morning of April 6, 1862. His words proved prophetic, and might serve as an epitaph for the larger war, as we see fully for the first time in this unparalleled and surely definitive history of the Battle of Shiloh."
Unfolding over April 6th and 7th, the Battle of Shiloh produced the most sprawling and bloody field of combat since the Napoleonic wars, with an outcome that set the Confederacy on the road to defeat.
Contrary to previous histories, Smith tells us, the battle was not won or lost on the first day, but rather in the decision-making of the night that followed and in the next day's fighting. Devoting unprecedented attention to the details of that second day, his book shows how the Union's triumph was far less assured, and much harder to achieve, than has been acknowledged. Smith also employs a new organization strategy to clarify the action. By breaking his analysis of both days' fighting into separate phases and sectors, he makes it much easier to grasp what was happening in each combat zone, why it unfolded as it did, and how it related to the broader tactical and operational context of the entire battle.
The battlefield's diverse and challenging terrain also comes in for new scrutiny. Through detailed attention to the terrain's major features most still visible at the Shiloh National Military Park Smith is able to track their specific and considerable influence on the actions, and their consequences, over those forty-eight hours. The experience of the soldiers finally finds its place here too, as Smith lets us hear, as never before, the voices of the common man, whether combatant or local civilian, caught up in a historic battle for their lives, their land, their honor, and their homes.
"We must this day conquer or perish," Confederate General Albert Sidney Johnston declared on the morning of April 6, 1862. His words proved prophetic, and might serve as an epitaph for the larger war, as we see fully for the first time in this unparalleled and surely definitive history of the Battle of Shiloh."
583 pages, Hardcover
First published November 3, 2014
34 people are currently reading
160 people want to read
About the author
Timothy B. Smith
37 books22 followersA former NPS ranger at Shiloh, Timothy B. Smith teaches history at the University of Tennessee at Martin.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
April 5, 2025
Timothy Smith's Study Of Shiloh
The Battle of Shiloh, fought on April 6-7, 1862, in south central Tennessee, was the largest engagement of the Civil War up to its time and remains one of the most important and pivotal in that conflict. The Union Army, commanded by U.S. Grant, defeated an attacking Confederate force let by Albert Sidney Johnston and P.G.T. Beauregard. Johnston was killed leading his troops early in the afternoon of April 6. There is a substantial literature about the battle, including book length studies by Sword, Daniel, Cunningham, and McDonough, even if not as extensive as the writing about Gettysburg or a small number of other Civil War engagements.
"Shiloh: Conquer or Perish" (2014) by Timothy Smith is the latest book that studies the battle in detail. Smith, a former Park Ranger at Shiloh, teaches history at the University of Tennessee at Martin. He has written essays and prior studies about Shiloh and the battlefield from which I have learned a great deal. His new book lays claim to becoming the authoritative account of the battle. The book is detailed, closely-written and scholarly. It will be of most interest to readers with prior specific knowledge of the battle as opposed to those coming to the Battle of Shiloh for the first time. The book includes an extensive bibliography which shows the breadth of the literature about the battle. The book also includes twenty maps which cover specific aspects of the battle together with a good insert of battle-related photographs.
U.S. Grant wrote that no battle of the Civil War had been so misunderstood as Shiloh. Smith's book shows why the battle is difficult to follow and to understand while at the same time he clearly leads the reader through the thicket. Smith emphasizes the critical role the thicket of Shiloh -- or more broadly its tangled geography of hills, underbrush, forests, ravines, rivers, and more -- played in the way the Battle was fought and in its outcome. The April 6 fighting, in terms of the Confederate attack and the subsequent fighting was disjointed and poorly coordinated, largely as a result of geography. Smith discusses separately and at length the actions on the left, center, and right of the Union line early in the battle. He continues this discussion of the separate fronts of the battle as the April 6 action developed. I found his discussion helpful in understanding the flow and nature of the fighting in comparison to the other accounts I have read. I found it increased both my strategical and tactical awareness of the way the battle was conceived and fought. Most recent studies of Shiloh, including Smith's earlier work, emphasize the fighting on the right and left of the line and tend to minimize the importance of fighting in the center at the famous Hornet's Nest. Smith's book continues this trend; but, as I understand it, balances some of the recent studies to give back to the stand at the Hornet's Nest some of the importance denied in earlier revisionist studies of Shiloh.
In addition to giving a clear account of the confusing fighting on April 6, Smith's book spends a great deal of time exploring the fighting on April 7. Most prior studies deal in a cursory way with the second day of Shiloh, which resulted in the Confederate retreat from the field. Smith examines April 7 and detail and offers many insights. Most importantly, Smith argues that the battle had not been fully decided by the action on April 6. He argues that Grant carefully prepared on the evening of April 6 for the actions of the following day while Beauregard did little. As a result, the Union recaptured much of the most challenging terrain of the field without a contest. Smith also examines the fighting on April 7 and concludes that the Confederates fought well and aggressively once they were organized. Smith gives much credit to Lew Wallace for his role in turning the flank on April 7. Lew Wallace, frequently maligned for his role at Shiloh, emerges as one of the heroes in Smith's account.
Smith offers his own carefully considered views on issues that will be familiar to students of Shiloh. For example Smith explores thoroughly the extent to which the Union Army and its top leadership was surprised by and unprepared for the Confederate attack on the morning of April 6. I found his treatment of this question fair and judicious. Smith explores the relationship between Johnston and Beauregard, the impact of Johnston's death on the subsequent course of the battle, Beauregard's decision to halt the Confederate attack on the evening of April 6, Lew Wallace's tardy arrival on the battlefield, the relative importance of the Hornet's Nest, mentioned above, and more. Late in the book, Smith considers the impact of Johnston's death on the future war fortunes of the Confederacy. He sees Johnston's injunction to his troops to "conquer of perish" emblematic of the battle and of Johnston's and the Confederacy's own fates. The more familiarity a reader brings to Shiloh and to the Civil War, the more the reader will be able to engage with Smith's book.
There are many ways to study history and the American Civil War. Some writers focus on broad political and military trends while others take a smaller area of study and explore it in detail. Smith has taken on the whole the latter course. He is in love with Shiloh and the battlefield and has spent his career exploring and writing about it. He has written an outstanding book for readers interested in Shiloh, the western theater of the Civil War, and the Civil War in its entirety.
Robin Friedman
The Battle of Shiloh, fought on April 6-7, 1862, in south central Tennessee, was the largest engagement of the Civil War up to its time and remains one of the most important and pivotal in that conflict. The Union Army, commanded by U.S. Grant, defeated an attacking Confederate force let by Albert Sidney Johnston and P.G.T. Beauregard. Johnston was killed leading his troops early in the afternoon of April 6. There is a substantial literature about the battle, including book length studies by Sword, Daniel, Cunningham, and McDonough, even if not as extensive as the writing about Gettysburg or a small number of other Civil War engagements.
"Shiloh: Conquer or Perish" (2014) by Timothy Smith is the latest book that studies the battle in detail. Smith, a former Park Ranger at Shiloh, teaches history at the University of Tennessee at Martin. He has written essays and prior studies about Shiloh and the battlefield from which I have learned a great deal. His new book lays claim to becoming the authoritative account of the battle. The book is detailed, closely-written and scholarly. It will be of most interest to readers with prior specific knowledge of the battle as opposed to those coming to the Battle of Shiloh for the first time. The book includes an extensive bibliography which shows the breadth of the literature about the battle. The book also includes twenty maps which cover specific aspects of the battle together with a good insert of battle-related photographs.
U.S. Grant wrote that no battle of the Civil War had been so misunderstood as Shiloh. Smith's book shows why the battle is difficult to follow and to understand while at the same time he clearly leads the reader through the thicket. Smith emphasizes the critical role the thicket of Shiloh -- or more broadly its tangled geography of hills, underbrush, forests, ravines, rivers, and more -- played in the way the Battle was fought and in its outcome. The April 6 fighting, in terms of the Confederate attack and the subsequent fighting was disjointed and poorly coordinated, largely as a result of geography. Smith discusses separately and at length the actions on the left, center, and right of the Union line early in the battle. He continues this discussion of the separate fronts of the battle as the April 6 action developed. I found his discussion helpful in understanding the flow and nature of the fighting in comparison to the other accounts I have read. I found it increased both my strategical and tactical awareness of the way the battle was conceived and fought. Most recent studies of Shiloh, including Smith's earlier work, emphasize the fighting on the right and left of the line and tend to minimize the importance of fighting in the center at the famous Hornet's Nest. Smith's book continues this trend; but, as I understand it, balances some of the recent studies to give back to the stand at the Hornet's Nest some of the importance denied in earlier revisionist studies of Shiloh.
In addition to giving a clear account of the confusing fighting on April 6, Smith's book spends a great deal of time exploring the fighting on April 7. Most prior studies deal in a cursory way with the second day of Shiloh, which resulted in the Confederate retreat from the field. Smith examines April 7 and detail and offers many insights. Most importantly, Smith argues that the battle had not been fully decided by the action on April 6. He argues that Grant carefully prepared on the evening of April 6 for the actions of the following day while Beauregard did little. As a result, the Union recaptured much of the most challenging terrain of the field without a contest. Smith also examines the fighting on April 7 and concludes that the Confederates fought well and aggressively once they were organized. Smith gives much credit to Lew Wallace for his role in turning the flank on April 7. Lew Wallace, frequently maligned for his role at Shiloh, emerges as one of the heroes in Smith's account.
Smith offers his own carefully considered views on issues that will be familiar to students of Shiloh. For example Smith explores thoroughly the extent to which the Union Army and its top leadership was surprised by and unprepared for the Confederate attack on the morning of April 6. I found his treatment of this question fair and judicious. Smith explores the relationship between Johnston and Beauregard, the impact of Johnston's death on the subsequent course of the battle, Beauregard's decision to halt the Confederate attack on the evening of April 6, Lew Wallace's tardy arrival on the battlefield, the relative importance of the Hornet's Nest, mentioned above, and more. Late in the book, Smith considers the impact of Johnston's death on the future war fortunes of the Confederacy. He sees Johnston's injunction to his troops to "conquer of perish" emblematic of the battle and of Johnston's and the Confederacy's own fates. The more familiarity a reader brings to Shiloh and to the Civil War, the more the reader will be able to engage with Smith's book.
There are many ways to study history and the American Civil War. Some writers focus on broad political and military trends while others take a smaller area of study and explore it in detail. Smith has taken on the whole the latter course. He is in love with Shiloh and the battlefield and has spent his career exploring and writing about it. He has written an outstanding book for readers interested in Shiloh, the western theater of the Civil War, and the Civil War in its entirety.
Robin Friedman
September 23, 2018
Smith's Shiloh is being hailed as the new standard on a battle that is among the most scrutinized of the war. In terms of research Smith cannot be beat, his bibliography is vast. However, does he say anything new? Certainly, although his conclusions will likely still be debated.
Smith's highlights are his extensive coverage of the fighting on April 7, his understanding of the terrain, and his tactical insights, such as how Lew Wallace's turned Beauregard's flanks on April 7. The final paragraph is among the best closings to a battle history I have ever read.
April 7 is extensive, but April 6 is patchy in places. The main fighting on April 7 lasted roughly five hours, as compared to the 12 hours of battle on April 6. In that sense, this book is imbalanced since page wise both get equal time. Smith declares that April 7 has never been more appreciated by others, or at least not considered that important. The point is highly dubious; Smith's achievement is not making April 7 important but rather explaining how the fighting unfolded in a detailed manner.
On the generals, Smith is far less critical overall, particularly of Grant. Smith does take Grant to task for failing to oversee the attacks on April 7 and for later unfairly blaming Wallace (Grant's staff instead gets most of the blame though). On my end, I rate Grant highly for his overall defensive plan on April 6, but I find him negligent before the battle and on April 7.
Now for a quibble. Smith compares Grant's pugnacity to William Rosecrans staying in place at Corinth and Stones River. However, Grant received at least 20,000 troops on April 6-7. He could afford to attack. Rosecrans received nothing comparable. Later, Smith contradicts his praise of Grant by pointing out how the Rebel army managed to hold together despite overwhelming pressure. If Rosecrans had attacked at Stones River with his exhausted men, he likely would have lost.
Yet, before anyone thinks I dislike the book, I will say it is the second best on Shiloh. I really appreciated Smith's nuance. For instance, he argues that the Army of the Tennessee was not surprised on April 6 but makes it clear that Grant was surprised. His take on the generalship of Johnston and Beauregard is the best of any book on the battle I have so far read (I still need to look at Sword). If Smith is right, the Rebels lost more than the Union, possibly as many as 14,000 men.
In the end, I still prefer Daniel due to his maps, prose, analysis of the commanders, fairness, and extensive discussion of the six weeks leading up to the battle. Smith though is a very close second. He fills in the holes in Daniel's book, particularly on April 7 (Daniel is good on April 7 too just not as detailed)
All of that said, neither Daniel, Smith, Cunningham, or the rest have written the last word. I for one would argue that Shiloh was not a major Union victory, but a Pyrrhic one. The bloodshed relegated Grant to the backbench all the way until Vicksburg. Halleck was so spooked he called John Pope to Pittsburg Landing, which compromised the thrust down the Mississippi River. Furthermore, the desire to avoid another Shiloh created an atmosphere of extreme caution in the Union army which arguably did not break until the victory at Corinth. Also, with Buell so close at hand, Shiloh was a battle that was likely to be a Pyrrhic victory if the Confederates ever did manage to win. Arguably, the battle was less about if the Rebels would win and more about how much damage they could inflict before Halleck concentrated.
Shiloh was not decisive, but it was an important battle, filled with drama and pathos. Of the over 100,000 men who fought the battle, only roughly 15,000 had been in a major fight before April 6. The rest were green to the ways of battle. Shiloh was the Civil War's most horrendous baptism of fire. As such, it will continue to draw historians. Yet, for the time being Smith's book will be the standard. In part it is his superb research, but also his analysis fits our time, in particular his positive take on Grant and more Union centered view of the battle's importance, where it is less about Johnston's death and lost opportunities and more about the rise of the Union's western armies to prominence.
Smith's highlights are his extensive coverage of the fighting on April 7, his understanding of the terrain, and his tactical insights, such as how Lew Wallace's turned Beauregard's flanks on April 7. The final paragraph is among the best closings to a battle history I have ever read.
April 7 is extensive, but April 6 is patchy in places. The main fighting on April 7 lasted roughly five hours, as compared to the 12 hours of battle on April 6. In that sense, this book is imbalanced since page wise both get equal time. Smith declares that April 7 has never been more appreciated by others, or at least not considered that important. The point is highly dubious; Smith's achievement is not making April 7 important but rather explaining how the fighting unfolded in a detailed manner.
On the generals, Smith is far less critical overall, particularly of Grant. Smith does take Grant to task for failing to oversee the attacks on April 7 and for later unfairly blaming Wallace (Grant's staff instead gets most of the blame though). On my end, I rate Grant highly for his overall defensive plan on April 6, but I find him negligent before the battle and on April 7.
Now for a quibble. Smith compares Grant's pugnacity to William Rosecrans staying in place at Corinth and Stones River. However, Grant received at least 20,000 troops on April 6-7. He could afford to attack. Rosecrans received nothing comparable. Later, Smith contradicts his praise of Grant by pointing out how the Rebel army managed to hold together despite overwhelming pressure. If Rosecrans had attacked at Stones River with his exhausted men, he likely would have lost.
Yet, before anyone thinks I dislike the book, I will say it is the second best on Shiloh. I really appreciated Smith's nuance. For instance, he argues that the Army of the Tennessee was not surprised on April 6 but makes it clear that Grant was surprised. His take on the generalship of Johnston and Beauregard is the best of any book on the battle I have so far read (I still need to look at Sword). If Smith is right, the Rebels lost more than the Union, possibly as many as 14,000 men.
In the end, I still prefer Daniel due to his maps, prose, analysis of the commanders, fairness, and extensive discussion of the six weeks leading up to the battle. Smith though is a very close second. He fills in the holes in Daniel's book, particularly on April 7 (Daniel is good on April 7 too just not as detailed)
All of that said, neither Daniel, Smith, Cunningham, or the rest have written the last word. I for one would argue that Shiloh was not a major Union victory, but a Pyrrhic one. The bloodshed relegated Grant to the backbench all the way until Vicksburg. Halleck was so spooked he called John Pope to Pittsburg Landing, which compromised the thrust down the Mississippi River. Furthermore, the desire to avoid another Shiloh created an atmosphere of extreme caution in the Union army which arguably did not break until the victory at Corinth. Also, with Buell so close at hand, Shiloh was a battle that was likely to be a Pyrrhic victory if the Confederates ever did manage to win. Arguably, the battle was less about if the Rebels would win and more about how much damage they could inflict before Halleck concentrated.
Shiloh was not decisive, but it was an important battle, filled with drama and pathos. Of the over 100,000 men who fought the battle, only roughly 15,000 had been in a major fight before April 6. The rest were green to the ways of battle. Shiloh was the Civil War's most horrendous baptism of fire. As such, it will continue to draw historians. Yet, for the time being Smith's book will be the standard. In part it is his superb research, but also his analysis fits our time, in particular his positive take on Grant and more Union centered view of the battle's importance, where it is less about Johnston's death and lost opportunities and more about the rise of the Union's western armies to prominence.
December 26, 2014
This 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 decision 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. . . .
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 decision 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. . . .
April 10, 2024
I visited the Shiloh battlefield last year. It is upheld really well and I was very much impressed. I would certainly recommend it to any fan of American history
I asked the clerk at the bookshop what book he would recommend and he said this one.
This is a pretty in depth look at the battle that seemingly from its notes is a pretty important new perspective.
For me, I found it fascinating though the claim it perfectly balances the highly readable and in depth didn’t quite reflect to me, more latter than former.
That said, I do love the details and that it really gives a sense of what happened during the battle in a relatable way.
There is an incredible list of people who show up here- Grant, Sherman, Albert Sidney Johnston, John Breckridge, Braxton Bragg, PGT Beauregard, Nathan Bedford Forest, Ben Hur author Lee Wallace and others.
Conventional wisdom always held a thought that it was a bloody war that Grant simply had more men.
The book does a good job of the ebb and flow and the final result, which took time to show some perspective to. The confederates did make some strategic mistakes and they are detailed here. Reputations are made- including the battle for its bloodiness and the generals with Grant initially getting criticized. The battle itself also not necessarily considered a Union triumph though with perspective, it certainly was as important as General Albert Sidney Johnston (whose quote of conquer or perish makes the books subtitle) made it to be.
I would recommend this for someone interested in the Civil War. The more causal the reader, the more challenging it is. But the details are fascinating and it’s not so dense that it would be unenjoyable. I love the numerous quotes and diary passages that it pulls from. I am glad I read it.
June 3, 2021
Ironically on the first week of April of this year, I found myself in the area of the Shiloh Battlefield. Just happened to be there while coming home from a work related trip and stopped to see it. I walked into the Shiloh Book Store prior to touring the grounds and said to the gentleman who works there "What is the best book you have on The Battle of Shiloh? Do you have Winston Groom's book?" He told me Winston Groom's book was not that great and handed me a copy of this book by Timothy B Smith.
This book is a very through read. I am not really a fan of reading every aspect of troop movements. As thick of a read that this book can be at times, I didn't think I would understand it with all the detail. Surprisingly I actually understand it very clear and I am glad that I read this book. One of the best Civil War book that I have ever read. Out of the 10 books that I have read on Shiloh, this is my favorite.
I remember holding the book as I stood at the location where Albert Sidney Johnson perished. The plaque at the location of his death at the on the bottom of the ravine was missing. A bare metal post remained. I thought to myself "I wonder if this book will tell me what happened to Sidney Johnson and maybe I will return with a better idea". This book did not disappoint. It ended up being one of the most interesting points of the book and I can return with a clearer idea.
Timothy B Smith has a great passion for what happened at Shiloh. I truly respect his hard work and dedication on writing this. A million pages could be written about The Battle of Shiloh. I cannot believe the Author was able to pack so much detail in so few pages, with an outcome of a remotely easy read. Winston Groom's book was a good one to read also. If you haven't read books on Shiloh before, it would help to know an overview of the battle before reading this one.
I will return to Shiloh one day and if I could find the gentleman at the bookstore that recommended this book, I would thank him.
This book is a very through read. I am not really a fan of reading every aspect of troop movements. As thick of a read that this book can be at times, I didn't think I would understand it with all the detail. Surprisingly I actually understand it very clear and I am glad that I read this book. One of the best Civil War book that I have ever read. Out of the 10 books that I have read on Shiloh, this is my favorite.
I remember holding the book as I stood at the location where Albert Sidney Johnson perished. The plaque at the location of his death at the on the bottom of the ravine was missing. A bare metal post remained. I thought to myself "I wonder if this book will tell me what happened to Sidney Johnson and maybe I will return with a better idea". This book did not disappoint. It ended up being one of the most interesting points of the book and I can return with a clearer idea.
Timothy B Smith has a great passion for what happened at Shiloh. I truly respect his hard work and dedication on writing this. A million pages could be written about The Battle of Shiloh. I cannot believe the Author was able to pack so much detail in so few pages, with an outcome of a remotely easy read. Winston Groom's book was a good one to read also. If you haven't read books on Shiloh before, it would help to know an overview of the battle before reading this one.
I will return to Shiloh one day and if I could find the gentleman at the bookstore that recommended this book, I would thank him.
August 13, 2023
A good, workman-like account of the battle. Filled with personal accounts, but rich in detail this is a first class rendition of not only the tactical subtleties but the strategic implications of this conflict. The author also spends a a lot of time on the second day of the battle, usually left out or summarized in other accounts of this battle.
Shiloh broke the back of the Western Confederacy; it just took another three years of fighting to drive that point home.
Shiloh broke the back of the Western Confederacy; it just took another three years of fighting to drive that point home.
June 14, 2018
Shiloh has been a much written about topic. Wiley Sword and Larry McDonough gave us the first modern works on the battle in the 1970s. Larry Daniel added his own in 2008. Edward Cunningham's long-unpublished manuscript from 1966 finally saw print in 2007. Winston Groom even added to the mix with perhaps the most widely accessible work on the subject, but which was really just a synthesis of existing works.
Into this crowded field comes Timothy Smith, probably the person most qualified to write a full-length treatment of the subject. A former Shiloh NPS ranger turned academic, Smith was one of the two editors of the Cunningham manuscript and has written two essay compilations related to the battle, another work about the establishment of the park, and several other non-Shiloh works.
The main text is 422 pages long. 76 pages cover events leading up to the battle, 160 pages cover the first day of fighting, 150 pages the second day, and the remainder cover reinforcements, overnight events, and post-battle actions including Fallen Timbers. Additional pages cover the Order of Battle, Endnotes, lengthy Bibliography, and Index. Full-page maps are placed throughout.
Smith is a good writer and doesn't get down in the weeds too much. The maps could be improved with clear elevation markings, but are otherwise pretty good and helpful. In an effort to give the second day of battle a full and proper treatment the first day seems to have been skimmed a little in parts and that may prevent this from being the long-awaited definitive Shiloh history. However, it seemed a fair treatment of the events using all the available information.
The two previous essay works are referenced in the introduction with the suggestion that they cover some topics related to the battle in more detail and I am rather curious about them. One question I was left with was the impact of the gunboats (Tyler and Lexington) on the battle. Their shelling is referenced in passing in several places, but Smith never clearly states whether he thinks their overall impact was great or marginal.
A must-read for any Civil War buff.
Into this crowded field comes Timothy Smith, probably the person most qualified to write a full-length treatment of the subject. A former Shiloh NPS ranger turned academic, Smith was one of the two editors of the Cunningham manuscript and has written two essay compilations related to the battle, another work about the establishment of the park, and several other non-Shiloh works.
The main text is 422 pages long. 76 pages cover events leading up to the battle, 160 pages cover the first day of fighting, 150 pages the second day, and the remainder cover reinforcements, overnight events, and post-battle actions including Fallen Timbers. Additional pages cover the Order of Battle, Endnotes, lengthy Bibliography, and Index. Full-page maps are placed throughout.
Smith is a good writer and doesn't get down in the weeds too much. The maps could be improved with clear elevation markings, but are otherwise pretty good and helpful. In an effort to give the second day of battle a full and proper treatment the first day seems to have been skimmed a little in parts and that may prevent this from being the long-awaited definitive Shiloh history. However, it seemed a fair treatment of the events using all the available information.
The two previous essay works are referenced in the introduction with the suggestion that they cover some topics related to the battle in more detail and I am rather curious about them. One question I was left with was the impact of the gunboats (Tyler and Lexington) on the battle. Their shelling is referenced in passing in several places, but Smith never clearly states whether he thinks their overall impact was great or marginal.
A must-read for any Civil War buff.
May 1, 2022
Timothy Smith has written a series of books covering campaigns in the Western Theater of the Civil War. This is another well written, well researched book, this time covering Shiloh.
One thing that stood out for me about this book is that Smith is looking to correct what he feels are widely held misconceptions about the battle. One is that while Confederates achieved strategic surprise at Shiloh, per Smith they did not achieve tactical surprise - Union forces under Sherman were surprised that Confederates were on the offensive, but Smith points to the Union force's ability to get into line to receive the attack - Smith points to an underappreciated hero of Shiloh, Everett Peabody's whose unauthorized reconnaissance discovered and delayed the Confederate advance.
Smith also argues that while Prentice's stand at the Hornets Nest is commendable, the defenses by Sherman and McClernand's forces were likewise stout and commendable.
Smith also looks to clarify Lew Wallace's role - explaining the issues that led to Wallace's zig-zagging approach to the battle on the first day, while acknowledging some of Wallace's decision such as to allow his men to stop for a meal. He also argues that the limited casualties in Wallace's division on the 2nd day were due to Wallace using maneuver rather than brute strength to achieve objectives. Smith also argues that Wallace's maneuvering onto Beauregard's flank twice caused the Confederate line to dislocate, the second time leading to Confederate withdrawal from the battlefield.
A well written, well researched account that offers a different perspective on the battle.
One thing that stood out for me about this book is that Smith is looking to correct what he feels are widely held misconceptions about the battle. One is that while Confederates achieved strategic surprise at Shiloh, per Smith they did not achieve tactical surprise - Union forces under Sherman were surprised that Confederates were on the offensive, but Smith points to the Union force's ability to get into line to receive the attack - Smith points to an underappreciated hero of Shiloh, Everett Peabody's whose unauthorized reconnaissance discovered and delayed the Confederate advance.
Smith also argues that while Prentice's stand at the Hornets Nest is commendable, the defenses by Sherman and McClernand's forces were likewise stout and commendable.
Smith also looks to clarify Lew Wallace's role - explaining the issues that led to Wallace's zig-zagging approach to the battle on the first day, while acknowledging some of Wallace's decision such as to allow his men to stop for a meal. He also argues that the limited casualties in Wallace's division on the 2nd day were due to Wallace using maneuver rather than brute strength to achieve objectives. Smith also argues that Wallace's maneuvering onto Beauregard's flank twice caused the Confederate line to dislocate, the second time leading to Confederate withdrawal from the battlefield.
A well written, well researched account that offers a different perspective on the battle.
June 10, 2022
This is a superbly written history of a civil war battle that had a lasting impact on the nation. The maps were excellent and although I could always use more maps, there were enough to make it easier to follow the flow of the battle. This is not my first foray into Shiloh battle history. I’ve read Daniel’s and Sword’s but this one has much more unit detail that is appreciated. For the first time I was able to follow Shaver’s brigade throughout the first and second day. Except for a little confusion about why they just disappeared at one point). In the past I’ve had to do a lot of guess work with many assumptions about where they were and what they were doing after their opening attack. Thank you for that Dr. Smith. Speaking of the second day, the detailed treatment here was the best I’ve ever read. Wow! Just wow! I always believed that April 7th was a rout with the Confederates almost immediately retreating. That was apparently not so!
I will probably read this again (or at least study it more deeply - with more attention to the bibliography) but for now, I feel like I can go to Shiloh battlefield with a much clearer view of where my guys (the 2nd Arkansas) were. And isn’t that the point of a battle history? I’m looking forward to reading the next one in the series …Corinth 1862)
I will probably read this again (or at least study it more deeply - with more attention to the bibliography) but for now, I feel like I can go to Shiloh battlefield with a much clearer view of where my guys (the 2nd Arkansas) were. And isn’t that the point of a battle history? I’m looking forward to reading the next one in the series …Corinth 1862)
December 26, 2025
Tim Smith is the contemporary expert, and that knowledge and insight is evident throughout this narrative. The linear manner in which he tells the story is as well done as can probably be done.
In addition to the his strength as a a narrator of the the events, Smith also offers supported interpretation throughout, mostly about generals and their roles and/or influence. He defends and critiques and offers his take on long standing debates about Grant, Sherman, and Johnston, among others. This adds needed depth and dimension.
Two things to consider if picking up this book: first, this is not an entry level book for the battle. A reader new to the story will quickly get lost in names and locations. It also difficult to remember who is with what army when, especially when reading about units from Kentucky, Missouri, and even Tennessee. Seconds, while each chapter has a map, it’s not enough considering the level of descriptive details offered by Smith. Again, some familiarity with the battle and the players makes evil’s less of a problem. But this is not a book to introduce the curious reader to what happened in April 1862.
Smith is good and this book fits the bill. A must read for any serious student of the war in the West.
In addition to the his strength as a a narrator of the the events, Smith also offers supported interpretation throughout, mostly about generals and their roles and/or influence. He defends and critiques and offers his take on long standing debates about Grant, Sherman, and Johnston, among others. This adds needed depth and dimension.
Two things to consider if picking up this book: first, this is not an entry level book for the battle. A reader new to the story will quickly get lost in names and locations. It also difficult to remember who is with what army when, especially when reading about units from Kentucky, Missouri, and even Tennessee. Seconds, while each chapter has a map, it’s not enough considering the level of descriptive details offered by Smith. Again, some familiarity with the battle and the players makes evil’s less of a problem. But this is not a book to introduce the curious reader to what happened in April 1862.
Smith is good and this book fits the bill. A must read for any serious student of the war in the West.
August 1, 2017
Tim B. Smith delivers an exceptionally detailed account of the Battle of Shiloh. While Smith provides solid, if succinct, insights into the strategy and personalities of the events surrounding the battle, the core of the book is a virtual blow by blow micro-history of the events of the two day battle. Smith's mastery of the terrain at Shiloh as a former National Park Ranger is evident as he describes the ebb and flow of the actions at every creek, field and tree. While there can never be enough maps, each chapter does contain a reference map for the actions described therein. However, to truly get the most out of the text I would recommend a highly detailed battlefield map to follow along as you read.
July 29, 2018
The main thing to enjoy about this book is the author's treatment of day two of the battle, a topic that other books on Shiloh skimp on. Here, day two is given the attention it deserves and we learn, for the first time really, just how well the Confederates fought that day. It was anything but a rollover.
That said, the book slogs along with way too much detail about troop movements combined with way to few maps. The included maps show enough detail to be useful, there are just too few of them.
I recommend this book for Civil War buffs. But that's it. For the general reader you'll never get through it, heck, I barely did and I have professional reasons to be reading it.
That said, the book slogs along with way too much detail about troop movements combined with way to few maps. The included maps show enough detail to be useful, there are just too few of them.
I recommend this book for Civil War buffs. But that's it. For the general reader you'll never get through it, heck, I barely did and I have professional reasons to be reading it.
May 10, 2018
Well written history of an important battle
This book masters the difficult task of providing a detailed description of complex actions while maintaining a fast pace. The author often uses quotes and journal entries in order to convey an "on the ground view". Nevertheless, the carnage is often disguised by the use of metaphors and euphemisms for hand to hand combat and the capricious nature of violence. There is also an admirable attempt to describe the stragetic aims of various troop movements.
This book masters the difficult task of providing a detailed description of complex actions while maintaining a fast pace. The author often uses quotes and journal entries in order to convey an "on the ground view". Nevertheless, the carnage is often disguised by the use of metaphors and euphemisms for hand to hand combat and the capricious nature of violence. There is also an admirable attempt to describe the stragetic aims of various troop movements.
August 1, 2020
This 2014 book is the new standard for the Battle of Shiloh. Thorough and definitive yet highly readable. The author brings two unique approaches to the battle: first, a detailed discussion of the geography of the battlefield. The hourglass image does a wonderful job of helping picture what is going on in this chaotic struggle. Second, Smith is the first author to spend the justified detail on the SECOND day of the battle. It was a lot harder fought than you may have realized. Smith takes 150 pages for the second day. Others such as Wiley Sword summarized it in 40 pages or less.
July 21, 2021
Excellent history of Shiloh. Places as much emphasis on the second day as on the first. Tackles a few myths. For example, the Union soldiers were not completely surprised and unprepared for the initial assault. Likewise, Smith argues that the Confederates were fairly strong on day two, despite the fact that that their commanders did little reorganization during the night. Smith defends Lew Wallace who was maligned by Grant. Lots of emphasis on lower level commanders (brigades, regiments, companies) and their actions. All well told.
April 5, 2023
Although Winston Groom’s “Shiloh, 1862” was an excellent book, its focus on the experience of the common soldier wasn’t exactly what I was looking for the purpose of my ongoing study of the American Civil War on the operational and tactical level. After some investigation, I’ve decided to give “Shiloh: Conquer Or Perish” a chance. I am happy to report that if one is looking for a detailed account of the battle of Shiloh, chances are you won’t be able to find a book that surpasses this one.
Author’s approach in this book is slow and meticulous. The book starts with the description of the strategic situation and circumstances that led General Johnston to decide to attack Union camps at Shiloh. Considerable amount of space is also dedicated to a survey of the terrain on which the battle was to be fought. When it comes to some battles, the peculiarities of the terrain are of the utmost importance when trying to understand them; Dr. Smith ensures that the reader understands from the start that Shiloh was one such battle.
Next, the author provides a detailed account of the Confederate battle plan and the conditions existing during the days and hours before the first shots were fired. Those familiar with the controversies regarding this engagement will hardly be surprised that so much attention is paid to both of those issues. Those reading about the battle of Shiloh for the first time will understand why those controversies regarding Confederate deployment and state of preparedness of the Union troops are hotly debated to this very day.
The account of the battle itself can best be described as methodical and extremely meticulous. The narrative is split into separate parts, with individual chapters dealing with Union left, center and right sections one at a time. Considering the course of the engagement, this approach works surprisingly well for both days of the battle, although I must confess that this compartmentalization did at times cause me a bit of a challenge in regard to time and space in the overall picture. Fortunately, the narrative is supported by an excellent set of situational maps which were of great assistance in visualizing the events described in the narrative.
Maps aren't the only thing that this book excels at. Throughout his account of the battle, Dr. Smith pays a lot of attention to the often overlooked aspect of terrain in which the troops were forced to operate. His narrative, while explaining why and how the terrain affected the course of action in this particular battle, also gives excellent insight into what kind of challenges difficult terrain could create for linear formations of that era. This book served for me as something of an eye-opener in regard to topics such as command and control at brigade/regiment level and impact of terrain on cohesion of large formations during ACW.
Finally, an eloge must be given to the author for his coverage of the second day of the battle. If I understand it correctly, all other studies of battle at Shiloh tend to focus on Sunday’s Confederate attack on Union camps and the crisis it created. The Union counter-attack that took place on the second day seems to be relegated to something akin to a mopping up operation, not worth much attention. Dr. Smith doesn’t share that opinion and dedicates in his book equal space to both days of the battle. If his account of the second day is to be believed, the severity and importance of the combat that took place on Monday was in every respect equal to that of previous day’s. After reading this book, I have to agree with the author.
In pretty much every respect, this volume deserves to be praised as the seminal study of the battle of Shiloh. And I really wish that this is how I could end this review, but… there is one negative issue regarding this book that I have to point out. In simple terms, the editor of this book dropped the ball on two accounts. The first one is a minor irritation, in the same way a small pebble is an annoyance in one's shoe; the frequency with which the author uses the word “unfortunately” at the beginning of the sentences. At first it was a minor niggle, halfway through the book I winced every time I saw that word appearing yet again on the page.
The second issue is far more serious and for me at least had a large negative impact on the enjoyment of reading this book - the narrative, especially in those parts where complex events are described, suffers from the overuse of conjunctive adverbs. At times, sentences with complex structure are of course necessary. However, when paragraph after paragraph consists of daisy chains of composite sentences stretching six or seven rows… absorbing information in texts structured in such a manner becomes very taxing after a while. The thing is that this issue could have been easily fixed by the editor of this book. For some reason this problem was either ignored or simply missed and it's a real shame. With a little effort on part of the editor, this book would become not only extremely informative, but also an enjoyable reading experience.
Even with this annoying flaw, “Shiloh: Conquer or Perish” is in my opinion a mandatory read for a serious student of the American Civil War. While the “reading experience” it provides may not be at the same level as something from the pen of Sears of Cozzens, Dr. Smith’s vast knowledge about this battle and his attention to detail more than makes up for annoyances caused by the somewhat lackluster editing effort.
Author’s approach in this book is slow and meticulous. The book starts with the description of the strategic situation and circumstances that led General Johnston to decide to attack Union camps at Shiloh. Considerable amount of space is also dedicated to a survey of the terrain on which the battle was to be fought. When it comes to some battles, the peculiarities of the terrain are of the utmost importance when trying to understand them; Dr. Smith ensures that the reader understands from the start that Shiloh was one such battle.
Next, the author provides a detailed account of the Confederate battle plan and the conditions existing during the days and hours before the first shots were fired. Those familiar with the controversies regarding this engagement will hardly be surprised that so much attention is paid to both of those issues. Those reading about the battle of Shiloh for the first time will understand why those controversies regarding Confederate deployment and state of preparedness of the Union troops are hotly debated to this very day.
The account of the battle itself can best be described as methodical and extremely meticulous. The narrative is split into separate parts, with individual chapters dealing with Union left, center and right sections one at a time. Considering the course of the engagement, this approach works surprisingly well for both days of the battle, although I must confess that this compartmentalization did at times cause me a bit of a challenge in regard to time and space in the overall picture. Fortunately, the narrative is supported by an excellent set of situational maps which were of great assistance in visualizing the events described in the narrative.
Maps aren't the only thing that this book excels at. Throughout his account of the battle, Dr. Smith pays a lot of attention to the often overlooked aspect of terrain in which the troops were forced to operate. His narrative, while explaining why and how the terrain affected the course of action in this particular battle, also gives excellent insight into what kind of challenges difficult terrain could create for linear formations of that era. This book served for me as something of an eye-opener in regard to topics such as command and control at brigade/regiment level and impact of terrain on cohesion of large formations during ACW.
Finally, an eloge must be given to the author for his coverage of the second day of the battle. If I understand it correctly, all other studies of battle at Shiloh tend to focus on Sunday’s Confederate attack on Union camps and the crisis it created. The Union counter-attack that took place on the second day seems to be relegated to something akin to a mopping up operation, not worth much attention. Dr. Smith doesn’t share that opinion and dedicates in his book equal space to both days of the battle. If his account of the second day is to be believed, the severity and importance of the combat that took place on Monday was in every respect equal to that of previous day’s. After reading this book, I have to agree with the author.
In pretty much every respect, this volume deserves to be praised as the seminal study of the battle of Shiloh. And I really wish that this is how I could end this review, but… there is one negative issue regarding this book that I have to point out. In simple terms, the editor of this book dropped the ball on two accounts. The first one is a minor irritation, in the same way a small pebble is an annoyance in one's shoe; the frequency with which the author uses the word “unfortunately” at the beginning of the sentences. At first it was a minor niggle, halfway through the book I winced every time I saw that word appearing yet again on the page.
The second issue is far more serious and for me at least had a large negative impact on the enjoyment of reading this book - the narrative, especially in those parts where complex events are described, suffers from the overuse of conjunctive adverbs. At times, sentences with complex structure are of course necessary. However, when paragraph after paragraph consists of daisy chains of composite sentences stretching six or seven rows… absorbing information in texts structured in such a manner becomes very taxing after a while. The thing is that this issue could have been easily fixed by the editor of this book. For some reason this problem was either ignored or simply missed and it's a real shame. With a little effort on part of the editor, this book would become not only extremely informative, but also an enjoyable reading experience.
Even with this annoying flaw, “Shiloh: Conquer or Perish” is in my opinion a mandatory read for a serious student of the American Civil War. While the “reading experience” it provides may not be at the same level as something from the pen of Sears of Cozzens, Dr. Smith’s vast knowledge about this battle and his attention to detail more than makes up for annoyances caused by the somewhat lackluster editing effort.
April 15, 2023
This is now the standard on the Shiloh Campaign. Timothy Smith has a well researched and well written masterpiece. Smith ably breaks the battle down into phases for each day of fighting thereby making what was a chaotic battle easily understandable. There is a very good balance between the experiences of the leaders and the common soldiers. Throughout the text Smith provides honest keen analyses of the fighting. This book is well worth reading.
April 10, 2022
Meticulous. Somewhat redeems Lew Wallace.
May 26, 2022
An exceptional look at one of the most important battles in history.
December 16, 2024
If you are interested in the practically hour-by-hour movement and fighting throughout the battle this book is fantastic. Beware though, the regiment/brigade numbers and commanders can get a little overwhelming at times. Still, an excellent book for the detail oriented.
September 1, 2025
Excellent book. Very detailed on what happen from both the Federalists and Confederacy viewpoints. Plus, the maps were very helpful.
February 13, 2023
This is the best book on the Battle of Shiloh. One of my ancestors was in the 36th Indiana, so this battle has a personal connection with me. I have read Cunningham's book and Winston Groom's book (the author of Forrest Gump), and I thought Smith's book was superior. Cunningham gets too bogged down in some parts of the book and Groom does not, in my opinion, spend a lot of time on the second day of the battle. He gives great detail of the first day, but the book loses steam on the second day. Smith does well explaining the opening of the campaign, the first day of the battle and the second day. There are excellent maps throughout the book. Smith also provides new insights about the battle. For example, a lot of people argue that the Confederates would have won the battle if Albert Johnston had lived. Smith argues the Confederates still would have lost if Johnston had lived. The Union retreated to a stronger position and were expecting reinforcements. It seems like a lot of works about article just present the Union counter-attack on the second day and the Confederates retreated whereas Smith describes the Confederates put up a fight. It was a bloody and horrific battle. I hope to see the battlefield in person soon and see where my ancestor was present during the battle. Timothy Smith's book gave me the next best thing.
December 22, 2014
In its coverage of the background to the battle and the action on the first day, there is nothing that sets this book apart from other offerings, but it is with its coverage of the fighting on the second day that "Shiloh: Conquer or Perish" rises above other books on Shiloh.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews