Hood's TN Campaign

[larry_cockerham]

Originally Posted by whitworth

By the time Hood invaded Tennessee, the war was strategically over.

Bercause he went to Tennessee, Hood left Georgia undefended. His losses and retreat from Atlanta, allowed Sherman's army to sever the Army of Northern Virginia from much needed supplies in Alabama. It allowed Sherman to further destroy rails east of Atlanta, cutting Virginia off from the supply depot in Macon and increase the total unlikelyhood that Alabama supplies could ever get to Lee.

Hood conducted a campaign, a winter campaign, without the essential supplies needed by an offensive army.
He made a disasterous attack at Franklin, and attempted to make in all folly, a seige of Nashville.

When Hood's army cracked at Nashville, an army was lost with most of its artillery, never to be replaced. Hood's failed offensive meant a shorter war, and an earlier demise of Lee's army and the Confederacy.

Late in the war, General Joe E. Johnson wrote of a court of inquiry, about Hood's actions in Tennessee. The war was nearing its end. Hood would never get a very public analysis.

It would be an heirloom passed to the believers of the lost cause. The forgotten, disasterous winter war in Tennessee - Hood's War.

The cause ain't lost, it's just taking a while to play it out.

[EricJacobson]

Whitworth,

So you're making the argument that Hood helped defeat Lee, too??? Give me a break. Lee got outmaneuvered by Grant and ended up in a chokehold at Peterbsurg. Supplies weren't going to save him. The Army of Northern Virginia was crumbling, just like the Army of Tennessee, by November 1864.

And as far as Hood not having sufficient supplies for the invasion, that has as much to do with the awful supply system across the dying Confederacy as anything else.'

And as far as Johnston's request for a court of inquiry, as far as I know, it was based upon what Hood wrote about Atlanta, where he took several pointed shots at Old Joe. Johnston certainly didn't like the Tennessee results, but ultimately it had nothing to do with him.

[OpnDownfall]

Hood, was given command because Davis and his War Dept, felt that what the war in the West demanded was a Lumberjack rather than a carpenter.
Hood tried to do what was expected of him by his superiors. Turn the war around in the West, quickly, with minimum (or no) reinforcements or supplies.
Although no particular fan of Hood, I have come to believe that he was more sinned against than sinner.

[larry_cockerham]

Originally Posted by OpnDownfall

Hood, was given command because Davis and his War Dept, felt that what the war in the West demanded was a Lumberjack rather than a carpenter.
Hood tried to do what was expected of him by his superiors. Turn the war around in the West, quickly, with minimum (or no) reinforcements or supplies.
Although no particular fan of Hood, I have come to believe that he was more sinned against than sinner.

I think most of us agree he was a victim of his own personality and to a greater extent his circumstances.

A vote we had a couple of years ago to consider his descendants placing a monument to him on Winstead Hill indicated that such is not the general consensus around here quite yet.

[OpnDownfall]

It goes deeper than personality victimizatio. IMO it is because Hood failed.
Lee's offensive personality gets high marks, from many of those who count it against Hood, even when both ended up destroying their armies.

[Dred]

Originally Posted by OpnDownfall

It goes deeper than personality victimizatio. IMO it is because Hood failed.
Lee's offensive personality gets high marks, from many of those who count it against Hood, even when both ended up destroying their armies.

But what is the difference when either way you end up injuring your army beyond repair?

Is victory really victory if it cost you too many troops to make a go of it for the long haul? I bet Lee would say no in hind sight.

[Battalion]

Here's what Hood should have done-

Allow Schofield's army to escape to Nashville.

Advance on Nashville then turn the majority of his army on the Federal garrison at Murfreesboro (7,000).

Force its surrender then turn north, bypass Nashville and cross the Cumberland River.

Advance into Kentucky. Cross the Ohio River. Burn Cincinnati to the ground.

Turn northeast. Smash Pittsburg, Philadelphia...

[larry_cockerham]

Originally Posted by Dred

But what is the difference when either way you end up injuring your army beyond repair?

Is victory really victory if it cost you too many troops to make a go of it for the long haul? I bet Lee would say no in hind sight.

There were two well-loved and respected generals with Hood at Franklin who begged to differ with his notion to attack the line at Franklin. One gave his life in the effort. That was General Patrick Cleburne who fell near the Carter House gin mill just beyond the federal line. He had advised against the attack but decided it was his duty to do his best. The other was local hero Maj. General Nathan Bedford Forrest who begged for infantry assistance and a couple of hours to flank the enemy. Forrest knew where he was and as usual had considerable confidence in his abilities. Hood ordered otherwise. The 4th US Army Cavalry Corps was watching and waiting on the north side of the Harpeth for just such an attempt. Hood listened far less than he thought. Stubborn?

[larry_cockerham]

Originally Posted by Battalion

Here's what Hood should have done-

Allow Schofield's army to escape to Nashville.

Advance on Nashville then turn the majority of his army on the Federal garrison at Murfreesboro (7,000).

Force its surrender then turn north, bypass Nashville and cross the Cumberland River.

Advance into Kentucky. Cross the Ohio River. Burn Cincinnati to the ground.

Turn northeast. Smash Pittsburg, Philadelphia...

Generals Bates and Forrest under Hood's order did in fact attack the fortress Rosecrans in Murfreesboro with the resulting battle on Dec 7. Not enough men, hence a statemate. Forrest continued devastation of the railroad to Nashville while Bates returned for battle at Shy's Hill.

Advancing into Kentucky was not likely, but a noble thought. No supply lines, no supplies, frozen butts, does not an army make. Hood's was, as stated many times, shattered.

[cw1865]

Originally Posted by Battalion

Here's what Hood should have done-
Turn northeast. Smash Pittsburg, Philadelphia...

And you forgot to add, relieve Lee in Petersburg, and in fact that is Hood's grand vision. Its clearly too much with too little.