Funny that I read this now after having just read the chapter on Shiloh in Victor Davis Hanson’s “Ripples of Battle”. I suppose it’s inevitable that such false reputations will be made on occasion and then carried forward through time. I doubt, after the snowball started rolling, that Prentiss would have wanted to essentially call out his own deceptions and, the longer it went, the more he probably began to believe in the myth. Did Wallace have any family that ever tried to defend (or at least promote) his role in the battle?

By Todd on Dec 10, 2008 at 11:35 am

Very good article, but at the beginning when it says fighting Mormons, it shouldn’t say fought, but was involved with the Mormon War. This is an important incident that gave many Civil war generals experience. Known as “Buchanan’s Blunder ” Albert Sydney Johnston, led the expedition to investigate reports of treason from Utah authorities. Lumping the Mexican War and Mormon War together is like saying the Korean War and the US involvement in Kosovo in the 1990’s, were both conflicts. But still an excellent article, keep up the good work.

By Josh on Dec 10, 2008 at 10:04 pm

Wallace stood his ground and inspired the strategy and position of the defence. It is historical critic’s fault over the years to not give credit where it was due, not the local adulation and boasting of Prentiss. And shame on careless history. However, for all the good that Wallace did, it was in Prentiss’s power to unravel it all, and he didn’t. He fought like a bulldog with the same bullets humming around him as felled his boss, and he both completed Wallace’s vision of delaying the Rebs, and additionally saved many Union boys from being needlessly killed. Prentiss, ya did OK.

By Steve on Dec 11, 2008 at 6:28 pm

Did we really expect him to say, “Aw, Shucks, t’weren’t nothin”? The living get to blow their own horn, and sadly, the brave dead don’t. In my book, they were all heroes. I do, however, appreciate new facts being exposed or new viewpoints being put forward when someone reviews the facts.

Does it really matter in the end? Sometimes there isn’t two seconds between the hero and the dud. If the bullet that wounded Jackson had been a foot to the right, would the war have ended differently, who knows?

By Marilyn Burgess on Dec 19, 2008 at 2:25 pm

Interesting, yet is it relevant? Is this just a search for a new ’slant’ on the war?
Surely Prentiss deserves accolades. He was there through the thick and thin of it.
Someone already made the point that why shouldn’t he toot his own horn. I notice in the article that Prentiss’ use of pronoun in an after war speech is ‘we,’ not ‘I.’
I always look for a different take on the civil war because it’s becoming a struggle to keep it in the public eye as it was the past two decades.
Yet comparing Prentiss, even is subtly to the example of present day phonies weating medals undeserved from the Vietnam War is a bit much…really.

By Pete Heron on Dec 23, 2008 at 9:08 am

Reviewing Shiloh, I see how historians now claim that perhaps the Hornet’s Nest was not the focal point of the battle. They base this on afterbattle reports from laborers who counted and located bocies on the field. The Hornet’s Nest did not have the number of bodies that less well known locations there had.
But I see the author’s point in this article a little better. Prentiss loudly claimed he and his unit saved the day. A government panel, decades later, with its chairman a veteran who fought smack in the middle of the Hornet’s Nest essentially agreed with Prentiss. Surely there was bias.
This seems to be a debate that is just heating up. Many critics want to establish new facts based on better evidence.
My only problem is denigrating Prentiss. Sure, he may have committed a sin in hyping his and his men’s accomplishments. But he’s far from a flase hero. Sadly, with the use of the words ‘false hero’ and in using fake Vietman veterans and their fake medals as an analogy has shot the author smack dab in the foot. Otherwise it’s a fine, thoughtful article.

By Pete Heron on Dec 23, 2008 at 9:26 am

Prentiss was sneakier than you think.

Post-war he gave little credit in his AAR to Colonel Everett Peabody, who commanded the 1st Brigade of Prentiss’s VI th Division.

Peabody had visited Prentiss’s HQ on the night before the battle to stress that an attack was imminent and asked for a Battery to be placed in front of his own Regiment, the 25th Missouri. Prentiss ‘hooted’ at the idea of a Rebel attack.

It was Peabody who sent a detachment to probe for Confederate forces in the vicinity in the early hours of April 6th and Peabody who aroused the VI Division by having the ‘Long Roll’ sounded.

When Prentiss arrived, the Division was already formed and he demanded to know if Peabody had brought on the battle and would subsequently hold him responsible for starting the engagement. After stating that he was personally responsible for all his actions, Peabody rode away in disgust.

Peabody was killed soon after, as the Confederates overran the camp – another witness who could have made Prentiss’s post-war reputation less ‘heroic’ than it appeared.

I enjoyed the article by the way – a great piece of writing. Thank you.

By Chris O'Brien on Jan 29, 2009 at 8:24 pm

After reading some of your replies concerning Wallace, I leave you with this tid bit of information. The sage that I now attempt to write also reveals some hidden mysteries that one may find interesting. Did you know that at that same battle that incidents of wives following their men into battle. Wheel Within A Wheel speaks to those that enjoy learning that true love will follow anywhere.
Tate Publishing Company is considering publishing the story and should be marketable by 2010.

I appreciate your web and your info keep up the good works.
Thank you.
\Regards
Author : Charles Ezell/Charles Dale

By Author Charles Ezell/ Charles Dale on Jun 12, 2009 at 11:28 am

Prentiss s[ent a lot of time defending himself to critics who printed(Detroit Free Press, among others) that he surrendered at 10 am. And He was the ranking Officer at the Hornets Nest if you count his time in the Illinois militia. His service against the Mormans happened in 1844 in Illinois, following the murder of Joseph Smith and his brother. Also let’s not forget that Grant had ordered Prentiss to hold that position. I think Wallace deserves more credit than he received but not at the price of belittling Prentiss’ contribution. They both should receive the Medal of Honor for their actions.

By jay bozarth on Jun 30, 2009 at 8:39 am

SMITH- You article was hilarious! So absurd that I first wondered if it was a joke?????? I was going to start posting here when I found the site- I looked forward to an interesting forum, yet the very first op piece I read- your above bashing of Prentiss, was so idiotic, it eliminates any future visits here on my part.

So poorly did you choose your words….so absurd was your reasoning…..it makes me wonder if you ever visited the battlefield or studied the actual details?? Or just followed the thoughts of other misguided minds?

If I could- I would email this to every person that left a comment here-all 11 of them- LOL.

My points of your absurd notions;

1. Shelby Foote himself (Fort Sumter to Perryville-page 341) said that Prentiss saved Grant- which award winning bestsellers have you and those that you echo wrote????? What books? I didn’t catch that?????

2. The Honet’s Nest allowed Sherman, McClernand and Hurlbut (minus those at the Hoprnet’s Nest) to save their divisions!!!!!!!!! It became a focal point for the battle as the Confederates had to mass 62 guns against it !

3. Wallace did stand fast and had great courage- he lasted until the line bent like a horseshoe-then he was mortally wounded as his men collapsed- Only Prentiss and his troops remained along the sunken road. TWO HOURS AFTER RUGGLES BEGAN HIS 62 GUN CANNONADE- -PRENTISS FINALLY SURRENDERED being totally surrounded.

4. The Confederate right was stopped after after hour after hour at the THE HORNESTS NEST- this basically stalled the left wing of Johnston which had chased the collapsed Sherman and McClernand.

5. Johnston could see the great importance of the Hornet’s Nest- he tried to turn the far flank at the peach orchard-it was finally captured as we all know- and with that- he was killed. The entire offensive was still stalled- and would be stalled for the rest of the day since Prentiss held out three hours after the orchard was taken and the flank turned.

Prentiss didn’t die- for that you make him out as a villian- you are pathetic- seriously!

By Robert von Holstein on Aug 12, 2009 at 9:38 pm

Chris O’Brien- You are a fool!!!!!!!!!!!!

1. Prentiss was sneakier than we think?? HE WAS A VIRGINIAN! HE STAYED LOYAL AND FOUGHT FOR THE UNION- FAR MORE HONEST AND LOYAL COMPARED TO NORTHERN TRAITORS LIKE PEMBERTON!

2. Shelby Foote wrote about what Peabody did- being sleepless and sending out a three company reconnaissance- who then encountered Hardee’s skirmishers- AND???? YOUR POINT????

??????????????????????????????????????????????

Foote gives Peabody his due for being pro-active and alert- and he also says PRENTISS SAVED GRANT!

If this is the best you people can do- it’s no wonder there are only 11 comments- nobody bothers with this kind of crap!!!!!!!!!!!

And this shows me I’ve missed nothing in not reading Civil War Times- nothing at all.

By Robert von Holstein on Aug 12, 2009 at 9:56 pm

I didn’t have my glasses on and I couldn’t see this type set too well- excuse any spelling mistakes as I can hardly see the words here with this tan background and no glasses on.

I won’t be back-you people bashing Prentiss was absurd- that is the best you can do in Civil War Times????????

Pathetic!

By Robert von Holstein on Aug 12, 2009 at 9:59 pm

It is easy almost 150 years from the time it happened to criticize events that have been hashed and rehashed for that same period of time. To call Prentiss a false hero however is harsh. Much of the criticism of Prentiss all thes years later has to do with his lack of credit to Colonel Peabody. The arrogance, backbiting, and ambition of high ranking officers was rife, especially that early in the Civil War. Prentiss was hardly alone in the rancor or lack of credit he had with Peabody. It must be acknowledged however that he was Division Commander. In his action or inaction on reports recieved from Peabody and others on April 5th, he was following directives that came from his superiors as well. Sherman was more conspicuous in his inaction than Prentiss. Sherman was more in disdain of certain subordinate officers than Prentiss. Sherman had been the informal commander at Pittsburgh Landing for weeks and it was largely his responsibilty for what happend on April 6th to the Union forces. Nonetheless, ultimate fault lay with General Halleck who continuously tried to micromanage things from afar. Grant arrived on the scene trying to organize a mess that Halleck had created do to his jealousy over Grant. Grant had spent two weeks lanquishiing in veritable arrest on board a steamship, while Halleck had tried to get Lincoln to fire him. Prentiss performed admirably, having been thrown out in front of the whole army as a new and still forming division. Certainly he did not die the way W. H. L. Wallace did and so did not pay the ultimate price and become that kind of hero. But Prentiss was there out in front, whether by accident or not. He was where he was. After his months as a prisoner of war he came back as a Major General and won the battle of Helena the same day Grant took Vickburg, overshadowed and now paying the price for his deserved or unreserved renown, he tried to defend Fitz Jon Porter and got plenty of politcal payback for it. Rather than to continue to deal with the politics of the war he retired to private life, not able to play the political game that Sherman and Grant excelled at, There were over 100,000 heroes at Shiloh. Prentiss was one of them.

By Kevin Getchell on Aug 30, 2009 at 4:57 pm