Comments on: Shiloh's False Hero http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm From the World's Largest History Magazine Publisher Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:40:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Drew http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm#comment-821609 Drew Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:38:49 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13680274#comment-821609 I would have to say, as much as I would partially agree and disagree with this article, both Prentiss and Wallace were equal heroes. They endured horrifying experiences while their men were getting blown away. It was a very traumatizing experience for anyone to experience what happened during that war and I am sure very few people of today can endure what happened back then. I think Wallace never got the credit he deserved, because of the fact he died shortly after the battle was over, however Prentiss also should be thought of as a hero as well. We must also think though that the lifestyle of mankind was so much different back then, compared to today. I believe people by nature were way tougher then and endured a lot more harsher lifestyle (rather if it is through war, illness or other tragedies). Men not only died in combat, but also died from old wounds or even illness both during and after battle and there was less access to proper medical care back then. We should not compare the performance of Prentiss or Wallace simply because both men faced terrible conditions at war and did the best they could (nor were any of us alive back then to make such judgements). Both men were true heroes along with all the men who were at Shiloh. I would have to say, as much as I would partially agree and disagree with this article, both Prentiss and Wallace were equal heroes. They endured horrifying experiences while their men were getting blown away. It was a very traumatizing experience for anyone to experience what happened during that war and I am sure very few people of today can endure what happened back then. I think Wallace never got the credit he deserved, because of the fact he died shortly after the battle was over, however Prentiss also should be thought of as a hero as well. We must also think though that the lifestyle of mankind was so much different back then, compared to today. I believe people by nature were way tougher then and endured a lot more harsher lifestyle (rather if it is through war, illness or other tragedies). Men not only died in combat, but also died from old wounds or even illness both during and after battle and there was less access to proper medical care back then. We should not compare the performance of Prentiss or Wallace simply because both men faced terrible conditions at war and did the best they could (nor were any of us alive back then to make such judgements). Both men were true heroes along with all the men who were at Shiloh.

]]> By: JW http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm#comment-812178 JW Sun, 15 Jul 2012 00:21:53 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13680274#comment-812178 This article is ludicrous. Why denigrate Prentiss as a "false hero?" He did his job, did it well and a good case could be made he was a "hero" to his those who fought with him, and certainly a hero for holding out for so long. You false indignation is immature and not worthy of publication. This article is ludicrous. Why denigrate Prentiss as a "false hero?" He did his job, did it well and a good case could be made he was a "hero" to his those who fought with him, and certainly a hero for holding out for so long.

You false indignation is immature and not worthy of publication.

]]> By: Jon Neal Wallace http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm#comment-203227 Jon Neal Wallace Tue, 23 Feb 2010 03:44:02 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13680274#comment-203227 After reading the comment above from Perry, I have to say, ' I agree.' General William Wallace was the true hero of the Battle of Shiloh. It was he who split his division into three parts and formed a shield in the center of the battlefield. Prentiss did not have nothing to do with it, General Tuttle came to his aid when some 4000 of his men ran to the Tenn. river. General Tuttle was sent there by Wallace. General Will was shot while trying to form a new line in front of Grant's Last Line and some 20,000 Union men. Sadly, General William Wallace's bravery is ignored and forgotten. That is wrong and you know it. While I'm writing a comment, Fort Donelson truth is also buried with General William Wallace. It wasn't Smith who save the day and keep the line from braking, and then repelling the Rebel assault back into the fort. It was General William Wallace. Get your facts straigth, tell the truth. I will, for I'm writing a book about this man's life and what he did for the cause of freedom. After reading the comment above from Perry, I have to say, ' I agree.' General William Wallace was the true hero of the Battle of Shiloh. It was he who split his division into three parts and formed a shield in the center of the battlefield. Prentiss did not have nothing to do with it, General Tuttle came to his aid when some 4000 of his men ran to the Tenn. river. General Tuttle was sent there by Wallace. General Will was shot while trying to form a new line in front of Grant's Last Line and some 20,000 Union men.

Sadly, General William Wallace's bravery is ignored and forgotten. That is wrong and you know it.

While I'm writing a comment, Fort Donelson truth is also buried with General William Wallace. It wasn't Smith who save the day and keep the line from braking, and then repelling the Rebel assault back into the fort. It was General William Wallace. Get your facts straigth, tell the truth. I will, for I'm writing a book about this man's life and what he did for the cause of freedom.

]]> By: Perry http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm#comment-202301 Perry Mon, 22 Feb 2010 03:50:44 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13680274#comment-202301 "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?????" As much as I respect Shelby Foote, writing a best selling book does not automatically qualify one as an expert on every subject. Wiley Sword, among others, does not credit Prentiss with saving Grant's army. Nor does current park historian Stacy Allen. The same was true of historian Edward Cunningham. Nowhere in anything these respected historians of the battle wrote will you find it claimed that Prentiss saved the day at the Hornets Nest. "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 !" Actually most of the pressure applied to the Union line for the majority of the day occurred outside the line defended by Prentiss and Wallace. The Confederate army almost literally split into two segments, with the majority of the troops ending up on the western side of the battlefield against McClernand and Sherman. Most of the rest were on the eastern side of the battlefield, fighting against Hurlbut, McArthur, and Stuart. Only a handful of troops opposed the center for most of the day, where the Hornets Nest was located. It wasn't until the flanks gave way that the center drew the attention, as the flow of the battle clearly shows. So it is not possible that the troops defending the center therefore saved the troops on either flank. "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." Surprisingly, given it's fame, contemporary Confederate accounts do not indicate that the bombardment was that important, or effective. It may not have lasted more than perhaps 30 minutes, and only succeeded in driving away the Union artillery supporting Wallace and Prentiss. But it was the collapse of the flanks, not the bombardment, that doomed the center. The Hornets Nest was doomed even if the bombardment had never occurred. As the Confederates themselves seem to have understood at the time, it was noisy, but not much else. "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." I'm not sure I follow this, but Prentiss actually erred in not pulling back when Hurlbut did so. Once his flanks had been compromised, his position was worthless. It had no value in and of itself, and could not be held once the rest of the army pulled back. The real question is whether by staying put, even if it was the wrong decision, Prentiss inadvertently disrupted the Confederate advance, and therefore saved Grant's army by allowing more time to form the last defensive line. This might be the case, although had he pulled back when the rest of the army did, that last line, which was already formidable, would therefore have had an extra 2,200 men. Prentiss stand may or may not have been important to the outcome of the battle, but the idea that he somehow saved Grant's army by sacrificing his command is a bit much to accept. Especially when considering how strong that last line already was. And Prentiss was not trying to save Grant's army in any case. He simply misjudged how rapidly the situation had deteriorated, and did not attempt to retreat until it was too late. "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." Johnston was trying to turn the flank of the entire Union army and drive them away from the landing, and any possible help, forcing them into destruction or surrender. The offensive stalled after the attack that cost Johnston his life for the simple fact that everyone needed a breather. Once it resumed, the Confederates methodically worked their way around Stuart's flank, forcing him, McArthur, and finally Hurlbut, to pull out. Prentiss should have done the same, but did not, and inadvertently drew the attention of virtually the entire Confederate army, since he and his men were the only ones who did not pull back. As I said above, there was nothing inherently important about his position in and of itself. Prentiss guarded no road, and could hold back no advance without help. His position was totally dependent on the troops on either flank. "Prentiss didn't die- for that you make him out as a villian- you are pathetic- seriously!" It isn't a matter of making him out to be a villain as simply trying to get a more accurate view of what happened during the battle. Prentiss fought well and deserves credit for doing so. His mistake was in not heeding Peabody's warnings the night before, and in not withdrawing from the Hornets Nest at the proper time. Later he would commit a grave injustice against Peabody by all but totally ignoring that officer's vital role in the battle. Whatever credit Prentiss has coming for his stand in the Hornets Nest, and whatever wrongs were committed against him in the early accounts of the battle, it does not absolve him of his blatant negligence toward Peabody. His exaggeration of his Hornets Nest fighting might be understandable, as others have said. His deliberate disregard of a fellow officer, not so much. "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?????"

As much as I respect Shelby Foote, writing a best selling book does not automatically qualify one as an expert on every subject. Wiley Sword, among others, does not credit Prentiss with saving Grant's army. Nor does current park historian Stacy Allen. The same was true of historian Edward Cunningham. Nowhere in anything these respected historians of the battle wrote will you find it claimed that Prentiss saved the day at the Hornets Nest.

"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 !"

Actually most of the pressure applied to the Union line for the majority of the day occurred outside the line defended by Prentiss and Wallace. The Confederate army almost literally split into two segments, with the majority of the troops ending up on the western side of the battlefield against McClernand and Sherman. Most of the rest were on the eastern side of the battlefield, fighting against Hurlbut, McArthur, and Stuart. Only a handful of troops opposed the center for most of the day, where the Hornets Nest was located.

It wasn't until the flanks gave way that the center drew the attention, as the flow of the battle clearly shows. So it is not possible that the troops defending the center therefore saved the troops on either flank.

"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."

Surprisingly, given it's fame, contemporary Confederate accounts do not indicate that the bombardment was that important, or effective. It may not have lasted more than perhaps 30 minutes, and only succeeded in driving away the Union artillery supporting Wallace and Prentiss. But it was the collapse of the flanks, not the bombardment, that doomed the center. The Hornets Nest was doomed even if the bombardment had never occurred. As the Confederates themselves seem to have understood at the time, it was noisy, but not much else.

"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."

I'm not sure I follow this, but Prentiss actually erred in not pulling back when Hurlbut did so. Once his flanks had been compromised, his position was worthless. It had no value in and of itself, and could not be held once the rest of the army pulled back.

The real question is whether by staying put, even if it was the wrong decision, Prentiss inadvertently disrupted the Confederate advance, and therefore saved Grant's army by allowing more time to form the last defensive line. This might be the case, although had he pulled back when the rest of the army did, that last line, which was already formidable, would therefore have had an extra 2,200 men.

Prentiss stand may or may not have been important to the outcome of the battle, but the idea that he somehow saved Grant's army by sacrificing his command is a bit much to accept. Especially when considering how strong that last line already was. And Prentiss was not trying to save Grant's army in any case. He simply misjudged how rapidly the situation had deteriorated, and did not attempt to retreat until it was too late.

"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."

Johnston was trying to turn the flank of the entire Union army and drive them away from the landing, and any possible help, forcing them into destruction or surrender. The offensive stalled after the attack that cost Johnston his life for the simple fact that everyone needed a breather. Once it resumed, the Confederates methodically worked their way around Stuart's flank, forcing him, McArthur, and finally Hurlbut, to pull out.

Prentiss should have done the same, but did not, and inadvertently drew the attention of virtually the entire Confederate army, since he and his men were the only ones who did not pull back. As I said above, there was nothing inherently important about his position in and of itself. Prentiss guarded no road, and could hold back no advance without help. His position was totally dependent on the troops on either flank.

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

It isn't a matter of making him out to be a villain as simply trying to get a more accurate view of what happened during the battle. Prentiss fought well and deserves credit for doing so. His mistake was in not heeding Peabody's warnings the night before, and in not withdrawing from the Hornets Nest at the proper time. Later he would commit a grave injustice against Peabody by all but totally ignoring that officer's vital role in the battle.

Whatever credit Prentiss has coming for his stand in the Hornets Nest, and whatever wrongs were committed against him in the early accounts of the battle, it does not absolve him of his blatant negligence toward Peabody. His exaggeration of his Hornets Nest fighting might be understandable, as others have said. His deliberate disregard of a fellow officer, not so much.

]]> By: Kevin Getchell http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm#comment-109360 Kevin Getchell Sun, 30 Aug 2009 20:57:00 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13680274#comment-109360 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. 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: Robert von Holstein http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm#comment-99471 Robert von Holstein Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:59:52 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13680274#comment-99471 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! 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 http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm#comment-99467 Robert von Holstein Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:56:17 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13680274#comment-99467 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. 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 http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm#comment-99449 Robert von Holstein Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:38:47 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13680274#comment-99449 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! 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: jay bozarth http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm#comment-81977 jay bozarth Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:39:15 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13680274#comment-81977 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. 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: Author Charles Ezell/ Charles Dale http://www.historynet.com/shilohs-false-hero.htm#comment-75249 Author Charles Ezell/ Charles Dale Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:28:00 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13680274#comment-75249 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 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

]]>