Joined: Mar 02, 2005 Posts: 241 Location: SW Illinois
Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:01 am Post subject: Controversies & Questions: The Battle of Franklin
Guys,
As some of you know, I've been covering Eric Jacobson's book for Cause and for Country: A Study of the Affair at Spring Hill and the Battle of Franklin in a series of blog entries. Today, I finally finished what was quite a job (for me anyway, we've got a lot of semi-professional and professional historians on here!). After summarizing Jacobosn's account of the Battle of Franklin, I chose 14 key points from the Battle of Franklin and attempted to compare and contrast Eric's views with those of Wiley Sword, author of The Confederacy's Last Hurrah. In the interest of space, I'm just listing the 14 points below.
I'm hoping to get discussions started on several of the message boards I frequent, and I'd love to hear from you in my comments section if you disagree with my take or just have something else to add.
1. Why didn't Hood order up Lee's Corps and the artillery sooner? Did Lee's absence affect the eventual outcome?
2. Was a flanking move by Forrest (instead of a frontal attack) likely to succeed or even possible?
3. Did an angry John Bell Hood "punish" Cheatham, Cleburne, and their men for their supposed failings when attacking breastworks?
4. If he didn't punish his men, why DID Hood attack?
5. Why did Wagner decide to stay in an advanced position despite overwhelming odds?
6. Why did the Carter family remain in their house on the front lines?
7. Who broke first, Conrad or Lane?
8. Cockrell's Brigade or Sears': Who attacked first in French's Division?
9. Featherston's Brigade took massive casualties in a railroad cut from enfilading artillery fire. Was there any way to avoid this?
10. How do both authors describe the death of Cleburne?
11. Opdycke suggested after the war that he beat CONFEDERATE soldiers over the head with a pistol, rather than just his own Union stragglers. Was he telling the truth?
12. David Stanley received a painful wound across the back of his neck during the fight. First, did Jacob Cox suggest that Stanley leave the field to get his wound dressed? Second, did Stanley really leave the field? Third, did Stanley deserve a Medal of Honor for his role in the Battle of Franklin?
13. John Adams and his brigade were being slaughtered as they attempted to cross the Osage orange barrier. Adams suddenly spurred his horse to the left, finding an opening in the trees. As he galloped toward the Union line both he and his horse were shot. Where did Adams and his horse fall? Within or without the Union lines?
14. Patrick Dowling, inspector general of Moore's Brigade, gathered together available units including the 101st Ohio to save the 111th Ohio's left flank. How crucial was this move to the final outcome of the battle? _________________ Brett S.
This from a novice. The little reading that I have done so far reveals that General Hood was unfit, in every way, for command of the army. President Davis, by extension, bears the responsibility for elevating him contrary to professional opinion within the military.
May I please refer you to the Hood and Nashville thread, also found here in the Western Theater forum? We've just had a very lengthy and very lively discussion about General Hood, and I think you might enjoy reading it.
Eric _________________ "If you want to have some fun, jine the cav'ry!"
Joined: May 22, 2006 Posts: 92 Location: Huntington WV
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:20 am Post subject:
Greg and Hughes:
Sam Hood here...my screen name and real name.
Hood had returned to duty in April 1864, having been wounded at Chickamauga 7 months earlier. He wasn't sick during the TN Campaign, rather, his personal physician commented on how robust he was prior to the campaign, although the doc may have been embellishing a bit. He was shot up and probably didn't have the energy of a fully healthy 33 year old.
Was he "unfit for command in every way"? Not an entirely unfair question. That would be a good subject for a seperate topic. He was not very experienced, but neither were his 3 corps commanders, and by that time in the war the Confederacy was running out of generals. Healthwise...perhaps he wasn't fit. By any other measure, he was a decent candidate. Having served under Lee and Jackson with great success, he was offensive-minded, and by mid 1864 the Confederacy was approaching desperation, and Johnston's Fabian strategy wasn't working, either militarily or politically. So they went with Hood, which proved to be the wrong decision, although we'll never know if another commander would have done better.
Hood had returned to duty in April 1864, having been wounded at Chickamauga 7 months earlier. He wasn't sick during the TN Campaign, rather, his personal physician commented on how robust he was prior to the campaign, although the doc may have been embellishing a bit. He was shot up and probably didn't have the energy of a fully healthy 33 year old.
Was he "unfit for command in every way"? Not an entirely unfair question. That would be a good subject for a seperate topic. He was not very experienced, but neither were his 3 corps commanders, and by that time in the war the Confederacy was running out of generals. Healthwise...perhaps he wasn't fit. By any other measure, he was a decent candidate. Having served under Lee and Jackson with great success, he was offensive-minded, and by mid 1864 the Confederacy was approaching desperation, and Johnston's Fabian strategy wasn't working, either militarily or politically. So they went with Hood, which proved to be the wrong decision, although we'll never know if another commander would have done better.
Just curious, but how did you feel about JBH's portrayal in the two Ron Maxwell movies? I don't know how accurate it was, but personally, I thought it was better in "Gettysburg." (I preferred that movie too.)
The actor was actually too old in both movies, but the age discrepancy really showed in "Gods and Generals." They should have at least colored his beard. Maybe Hood had a lighter side, but the whole Bonnie Blue Flag scene seemed out of character for him. _________________ "Let us have faith that right makes might..."
- Abraham Lincoln
Joined: May 22, 2006 Posts: 92 Location: Huntington WV
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:43 am Post subject:
Corydon:
I thought Maxwell treated Hood fairly in the movies. Of course there wasn't much not to like about Hood while he was serving in the ANV was there?
The actor, Patrick Gorman, is supposedly a real nice guy. I never met him, but some good friends of mine met him during the filming of Gettysburg and he was genuinely interested in both Hood and in Civil War history in general.
Yes...good heavens...casting Mr Gorman as Hood was a poor choice, due to his age, and even worse in G&G. And I too have wondered why they didn't "young him up" a bit with makeup.
The Bonnie Blue Flag scene was perhaps the worst scene in G&G, and there were IMHO many canididates in the movie for worst scene. I liked Gettysburg, but to be honest, I found G&G to be embarrassingly bad.
Sorry to stray off topic, but while we're at it, the portrayal of Ambrose Burnside seemed off.
I would have pictured Burnside as a lot more "timid" and less sure of himself than what was portrayed. _________________ "Let us have faith that right makes might..."
- Abraham Lincoln
In my embryonic state of knowledge, it seems that one of the most puzzling questions is how General Schofield's force was able to pass undetected or unchecked past General Hood's force. Is there a reputable source for the story of that movement? That may lead to the question, why was there a need for the second battle at Franklin at all.
Joined: May 22, 2006 Posts: 92 Location: Huntington WV
Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 4:35 pm Post subject:
Hughes:
Absolutely the best study of what happened at Spring Hill is Eric Jacobson's book "For Cause and For Country: A Study of the Affair at Spring Hill and the Battle of Franklin." Although be forewarned...what happened at Spring Hill is like the Fort Pillow incident...no definite answers, no smoking gun. Unless at some time in the future a letter or memoir is dicovered in some trunk in a musty attic, a full explanation of what happened will never be known. But Eric lays it all out in as understandable a format as possible and gives his own personal theories.The book is not available on amazon and at bookstores (I don't think), rather, go to http://www.civilwarinteractive.com/BattleofFranklin.htm
It was a "perfect storm" of confusion and consequences that converged at perfect times that allowed the Federals to escape.
Oh...another great little book is by Carter House docent Jamie Gillum, "The Battle of Spring Hill: Twenty-five Hours to Tragedy." His paperback is a chronology...hour by hour, minute by minute...of every recorded occurance during the critical hours at Spring Hill. The book is hard to find. Jamie's email address is gunnyjgillum@aol.com
Thanks, again, for the book suggestions. A snow storm cancelled my intended trip to the nearest bookstore. (80 miles). Found something on-line that I am sure everybody else but I already knew. In a passage in General Schofield's Forty-Six Years in the Army, he desribes what he sees as the neccessity for the attack and the tactical consederations that made it worth the risk for the Army of Tennessee and its commander.
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 3:36 pm Post subject: Help in the OR
OK, time to reveal more ignorance on my part. This morning in Civil War Journal on the History Channel the topic was Franklin and Nashville. In the lead up to the main topic was a passing reference to Spring Hill. I can't remember if it was the voice over commentary or a remark from Mr. Sword, but the impression was given that Genral Hood's orders were contradictory and confusing and led to the excape of General Schofield's troops. So, where in the OR can I find the orders that were issued? I still can't understand the index. Thanking you in advance.
Also, the same old charge against General Hood was made. One of the participants stated that he (the General, that is) was impaired. Thanks to the postings on this site, I was able to have a better grasp for the facts of that matter.
Although be forewarned...what happened at Spring Hill is like the Fort Pillow incident...no definite answers, no smoking gun. Unless at some time in the future a letter or memoir is dicovered in some trunk in a musty attic, a full explanation of what happened will never be known.
I'm always amused by the "debate" over the Fort Pillow "incident." Half of the Union garrison was killed. More were killed than wounded. Only 58 black soldiers were taken prisoner. If this had happened in any country other than America, would there be any debate that a massacre had occured? _________________ Will Hickox
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
