Hello Art:
Nice to hear from you. I like Larry Daniel's book because he questioned several events that others accepted. Among these was the group of cannon referred to as "Ruggles' Line". On page 228-229, he asks the question of who ordered this collection of guns. Larry mentions that Ruggles Official Report was amended about one year after the battle and claims the credit for himself. Also mentioned is that Major Francis Shoup claims that Ruggles was a spectator and he (Shoup) gathered the guns. See Shoup's article in Confederate Veteran Magizine, Vol 2, 1894 pages 137 to 140. Daniel indicates that two seperate groups were gathered, the northern group commanded by Capt. Bankhead and the southern group commanded by Major Shoup. The truth of who ordered the concentration of guns is probably somewhere in the middle between Ruggles'and Shoup's versions. In short, they both contributed in this matter unaware of the efforts by the other. A possible clue to solve this question is to note where these batteris came from to join their respective group, northern or southern. The guns in Shoup's group appear to all have come from the same area of the battlefield, in rear along the Purdy road, near the Review and Barnes' Fields. The guns in Bankhead's (Ruggles) appear to have arrived from other areas of the battlefield. Remember, that Ruggles sent staff officers out over the battlefield to search for batteries and the location of the batteries he collected were along the main Corinth road west of the Duncan field and also two batteries on or near the Purdy road, east of the Eastern Corinth Road. In short, the batteries in the two groups came from different geographical areas. I believe that Daniel's description of Ruggle's Line to be more accurate than other authors. I further believe that the two officers were unaware of the efforts of the other and Ruggles sent staff officers who ranged over a wider area of the battlefield while Shoup who did not have staff officers, brought up batteries he had placed in the rear of the army waiting for a call.
Larry Daniel also questions the make-up of these groups, as I do. He gives a number of guns as 53 and I agree with that except for the mystery of "Trabue's Kentucky Battery". As is well known by all, there was no Trabue's Kentucky Battery. Art, do you any informatiuon on this battery? Did the placement of Trabue's battery last in line, next to Brynes' Kentucky battery, cause any confusion. Was this battery actually part of Brynes' battery or could it have been a section of Cobb's Kentucky battery as some have suggested? If this was a section of Cobb's battery, then the number of guns must increase from 53 to 55. The Shiloh Battlefield plaque #453 suggests that this was Cobb's battery. Fifty-three guns present accounts for all of the batteries but a section of Cobb's battery wou;ld have to add two. I believe it could have been, at best, only a section of two guns.

Anybody got a guess?
Ron