This is another in a series of works by Jeff Shaara, whose father authored the well acclaimed work "The Killer Angels" (a novel of the battle at Gettysburg). Shaara has military historical novels on the American Civil War, World War II and so on. The mode of operation is the same, between both pere and fils. Several figures are selected to act as characters in their novels. We see the particular battle or campaign through their eyes. By, then, aggregating these individual views, we get an overall sense of the nature of the battle or campaign. Generally, this has worked well.

This novel focuses on the first major bloodletting in the Civil War--making Bull Run seem like a skirmish. Shiloh. Here Ulysses Grant's forces met an equal sized army, led by Albert Sidney Johnston, a Confederate general who had a towering reputation--but who had not fared as well as what people had expected from him.

In this novel, there are more "ordinary" characters, "grunts" in both the Union and Confederate armies. Other characters who provide us their view of the battle include William Sherman, Albert Sidney Johnston, and so on.

The work gives is insights into the character of some of the major figures in both armies, from U. S. Grant to Pierre G. T. Beauregard, the hot tempered Braxton Bragg, Nathan Bedford Forrest, and on.

The novel takes us from the aftereffects of Grant's victories at Forts Henry and Donelson, which wrecked Johnson's defensive line from the Mississippi River to Eastern Tennessee. The story of his retreat, linking with forces led by Beauregard and Bragg, and his subsequent decision to mount a surprise attack on Grant's forces, now camping at Pittsburg Landing (Shiloh was a small church in the land above the Mississippi).

The surprise attack turned into a nightmare for the Confederates (the anger and frustration among Confederate generals is well told). Union forces seemed stubbornly resistant to recognizing signs of an imminent attack. Then, the battle.

The view from the ground continues to work well. Some issues did arise here though. There seemed to be an overemphasis on the humdrum lives of the grunts, which slowed the development of the action. It was fine for giving a sense of the private's perspective, but did it really add to the narrative?

The historical aspects of this novel seem pretty well done (I am an amateur in terms of history, but most of the book is consistent with my understanding of this sanguinary battle).