WI Battle of Franklin Not Botched?

Malta · Oct 22, 2013

The Battle of Franklin in 1864 was the Battle which pretty much crippled the Army of Tennessee and not only discredited Hood but killed or wounded Cleburne and fourteen other Confederate Generals and three times as many regimental commanders. The whole affair in itself was botched in that Hood's attempts to destroy the corps under Schofield he ended up destroying his own forces.

It is somewhat possible the Army of Tennessee could have overrun Schofield just prior to the battle when his supply train was divided and vulnerable but managed to escape and attempts by Wagner or one of the other Union Commanders was muddled.

Still, where could Hood have gone after this? His apparent plan was to make for the Ohio River and take back Nashville but he already knew that the fortifications there were strong. Is it possible Hood could have swept into Kentucky or even go on the offensive and prevent Union forces from reaching Mississippi?

Dirk_Pitt · Oct 22, 2013

Malta Shah said:
The Battle of Franklin in 1864 was the Battle which pretty much crippled the Army of Tennessee and not only discredited Hood but killed or wounded Cleburne and fourteen other Confederate Generals and three times as many regimental commanders. The whole affair in itself was botched in that Hood's attempts to destroy the corps under Schofield he ended up destroying his own forces.

It is somewhat possible the Army of Tennessee could have overrun Schofield just prior to the battle when his supply train was divided and vulnerable but managed to escape and attempts by Wagner or one of the other Union Commanders was muddled.

Still, where could Hood have gone after this? His apparent plan was to make for the Ohio River and take back Nashville but he already knew that the fortifications there were strong. Is it possible Hood could have swept into Kentucky or even go on the offensive and prevent Union forces from reaching Mississippi?

Prevent? They already did reach it in 1863 during the Vicksburg Campaign.

rob2001 · Oct 22, 2013

Nashville

Even if Hood had somehow won at Franklin he would still have taken casualties. Thomas had close 60,000 men at Nashville, while Hood had 30,000 men. I think the battle of Nashville would have been a bigger blood bath for the Confederacy. But I don't think Hood could have won at Franklin, he was hooked on drugs, and in in a lot of pain, most of the time he was in a narcotic daze. He blamed everyone else for his failures in that campaign, I even heard that Forrest had theartened to kill him if he was a whole man, on Nov. 30. The only way the Army of Tennessee could have won was if someone else was in command, in my opinion.

Elfwine · Oct 22, 2013

Hood being on drugs has been disputed, but whether he was on laudanum or not . . .

No. The entire campaign from conception on was doomed to crash and burn, the only question is where and when.

You can't unbotch a battle that should never have been fought.

edvardas · Oct 23, 2013

I was thinking of such a scenario. Hood dies and Forrest becomes acting general. This is before the incident at Spring Hill. The
Confederates capture the supply train. and then win at Franklin. They then occupy Nashville as OTL. Although Forrest realizes he can't hold it for long, this is a morale booster for the Confederates. Hearing of Sherman's virtually unopposed march through Georgia and the Carolinas, Forrest abandons Nashville, and moves most of the army to the Carolinas to oppose Sherman.
Forrest, if he is still in command, will have a much larger army than Johnston had at Bentonville. Forrest or Johnston may be able to earn a tactical victory before settling down to talks.

Anaxagoras · Oct 23, 2013

Malta Shah said:
It is somewhat possible the Army of Tennessee could have overrun Schofield just prior to the battle when his supply train was divided and vulnerable but managed to escape and attempts by Wagner or one of the other Union Commanders was muddled.

If you're referring to the incident at Spring Hill, it was entirely possible for the Army of Tennessee to smash Schofield's force there, perhaps capturing the whole lot of them. Just about everything went wrong for the Confederates the night of November 29, with plenty of blame to go around. Had they pulled it off, they would have won a telling victory and deprived Thomas at Nashville of the core of his force.

Malta Shah said:
Still, where could Hood have gone after this? His apparent plan was to make for the Ohio River and take back Nashville but he already knew that the fortifications there were strong. Is it possible Hood could have swept into Kentucky or even go on the offensive and prevent Union forces from reaching Mississippi?

Hood's plan was apparently to move into Kentucky after taking Nashville, but even if he had won at Spring Hill it would have been a difficult task to capture Nashville and an even tougher task to move into Kentucky. Really, the campaign was a forlorn hope from the beginning.

Don't know what you mean about Mississippi.

edvardas said:
I was thinking of such a scenario. Hood dies and Forrest becomes acting general. This is before the incident at Spring Hill. The
Confederates capture the supply train. and then win at Franklin. They then occupy Nashville as OTL. Although Forrest realizes he can't hold it for long, this is a morale booster for the Confederates. Hearing of Sherman's virtually unopposed march through Georgia and the Carolinas, Forrest abandons Nashville, and moves most of the army to the Carolinas to oppose Sherman.

Forrest was one of the best military minds produced by the Confederacy, but he would have been an absolutely terrible army commander. He was best utilized as an independent cavalry commander.

Elfwine · Oct 23, 2013

edvardas said:
I was thinking of such a scenario. Hood dies and Forrest becomes acting general. This is before the incident at Spring Hill. The
Confederates capture the supply train. and then win at Franklin. They then occupy Nashville as OTL.

Um, they didn't occupy Nashville OTL. Hood set outside the army letting Thomas get nice and ready to smash the AoT into fragments.

I can't see Forrest doing the same.

Malta · Oct 23, 2013

Anaxagoras said:
Hood's plan was apparently to move into Kentucky after taking Nashville, but even if he had won at Spring Hill it would have been a difficult task to capture Nashville and an even tougher task to move into Kentucky. Really, the campaign was a forlorn hope from the beginning.

Don't know what you mean about Mississippi.

After Nashville the Union pursued Hood into Mississippi.

Anaxagoras · Oct 23, 2013

Malta Shah said:
After Nashville the Union pursued Hood into Mississippi.

They stopped at the Tennessee River, actually.

edvardas · Oct 25, 2013

If they can crush Schofelfd at spring hill, the south would be able to occupy Nashville. Hood was planning to let Thomas take casualties attacking him, but he botched it by sending of Forrest. Forrest would probably withstand two days assault before he withdraws in good order.

Anaxagoras · Oct 25, 2013

edvardas said:
If they can crush Schofelfd at spring hill, the south would be able to occupy Nashville. Hood was planning to let Thomas take casualties attacking him, but he botched it by sending of Forrest. Forrest would probably withstand two days assault before he withdraws in good order.

There is no way that Forrest would have commanded the army at Nashville. Even if Hood had been killed or otherwise removed, Forrest was outranked by each of the three infantry corps commanders present during the Franklin-Nashville Campaign. Forrest's promotion to major general took place on December 4, 1863. He was outranked by Benjamin Cheatham (major general on March 10, 1862), A. P. Stewart (major general on June 2, 1863), and Stephen Lee (major general on August 3, 1863).

I'd have to check, but I'm sure some of the divisional commanders present with the AoT during the Franklin-Nashville Campaign outranked Forrest as well. Off the top of my head, I know Cleburne did (assuming you don't have him killed at Franklin as IOTL).

Nytram01 · Oct 26, 2013

edvardas said:
I was thinking of such a scenario. Hood dies and Forrest becomes acting general.

No. If Hood died in the Franklin-Nashville Campaign then command of the Army of Tennessee would have fallen upon the shoulders of Benjamin Cheatham. Forrest would not even have been considered due to the fact that he had only commanded mounted forces during the war and would not be trusted to command an entire army.

LtNOWIS · Oct 26, 2013

It grieves me that the US Army's biggest fort is named after such an idiot.

Anaxagoras · Oct 26, 2013

LtNOWIS said:
It grieves me that the US Army's biggest fort is named after such an idiot.

Isn't it interesting that the three biggest military facilities in the South - Fort Hood, Fort Bragg, and Fort Polk - are named after the South's three worst generals?

Elfwine · Oct 26, 2013

edvardas said:
If they can crush Schofelfd at spring hill, the south would be able to occupy Nashville. Hood was planning to let Thomas take casualties attacking him, but he botched it by sending of Forrest. Forrest would probably withstand two days assault before he withdraws in good order.

Even if somehow Schofield is smashed so badly Hannibal would be jealous, no, they would not.

I don't have exact numbers at my fingertips, but there are other Federal troops at Nashville. It won't be a pushover even for a military genius.

usertron2020 · Oct 26, 2013

So where is Fort Pickett?

Anaxagoras said:
Isn't it interesting that the three biggest military facilities in the South - Fort Hood, Fort Bragg, and Fort Polk - are named after the South's three worst generals?

Southern Senator to Northern Senator:

"We want all the big US Army installations to be built in the South, and named after Southern generals in 'The War of Most Dastardly Yankee Aggression!'"

Northern Senator to Southern Senator:

"

"

"OK. BUT WE GET TO PICK THE NAMES!"

EDIT: Generals Brockenbrough (biggest goat at Gettysburg), Davis (Jeff's nephew & second biggest goat at Gettysburg), and Pillow (Ft.Donelson) would like a word with you.

Elfwine · Oct 26, 2013

Biggest goats?

Not Iverson and O'Neal (like Brockenbrough a colonel, but who's counting?)?

Not that I want to know how one would determine who failed worst. All four should have been turned over their men to be beaten to death by the ghosts of the soldiers their incompetence got killed.

usertron2020 · Oct 26, 2013

Elfwine said:
Biggest goats?

Not Iverson and O'Neal (like Brockenbrough a colonel, but who's counting?)?

Not that I want to know how one would determine who failed worst. All four should have been turned over their men to be beaten to death by the ghosts of the soldiers their incompetence got killed.

Agreed, but unlike the incompetence of Iverson and O'Neal, Jeff Davis' little nephew could be called a coward in the field, while Brockenbrough was guilty of being nothing less than a complete poltroon!

Elfwine · Oct 26, 2013

usertron2020 said:
Agreed, but unlike the incompetence of Iverson and O'Neal, Jeff Davis' little nephew could be called a coward in the field, while Brockenbrough was guilty of being nothing less than a complete poltroon!

There is that.

Do you have something in mind broader than just his (lack of) leadership in Pickett's Charge, or are you looking just at that?

I still have to wonder what on earth his self-rationalization was for splitting a brigade already barely bigger than a big regiment in two pieces like he did. I mean, Iverson didn't exactly lead his brigade by example but he at least doesn't seem to have actively embarrassed it in this regard.

But if Brockenbrough failed like this in other fights, no wonder that brigade was in such sorry shape. Archer's men may have been decimated but they were still fighters - Field's former brigade seems to have been underwhelming (edit: Heth does refer to their 'usual valor" in his Gettysburg report, so apparently the men weren't bad, just their commander. Still.).

Edit: Found this while searching for more information on those poor Virginians . . .

http://www.aphillcsa.goellnitz.org/FREDfield.html

So two regiments just spontaneously decided to join the fight. While the rest of the brigade did what, Colonel?!

I am vaguely surprised Lee didn't get rid of him sooner.

I guess we're wandering off topic, but sheesh. At least Hood was a good division and brigade commander and Bragg had some good performances (and Fort Bragg in California at least is from him being a good artillery captain in the Mexican-American war), but Polk or any of these losers? Its disgraceful.

Anaxagoras · Oct 27, 2013

Elfwine said:
I don't have exact numbers at my fingertips, but there are other Federal troops at Nashville. It won't be a pushover even for a military genius.

The army with which Thomas fought the Battle of Nashville two weeks after Franklin was about 50,000 strong. Of these, about 20,000 were Schofield's men who had fought at Franklin and two divisions (IIRC) of about 10,000 men were from Missouri and did not arrive at Nashville until after Franklin. The remaining 20,000 were generally inexperienced and not well trained and the cavalry lacked horses.

So, assuming that Hood somehow pulls off a magical victory at Spring Hill and captures Schofield's entire force without much loss to himself, his 35,000 hardened veterans would be faced with 20,000 less experienced men at Nashville. But the defenses of Nashville were probably stronger than any other city in Federal hands aside from Washington itself and reinforcements were on their way. Even if he had a best-case-scenario that allowed him to deploy superior numbers and better troops against Thomas, I don't see Hood gaining control of Nashville. Its fortifications were just too strong.