Burnside vs Franklin at Fredericksburg

[General Butterfield]

Burnside vs Franklin at Fredericksburg

The Battle of Fredericksburg was one of the worst Union defeats of the entire war. It forever ruined General Ambrose Burnside's reputation and earned him the title "butcher of Fredericksburg." Burnside despite admitting the defeat was partially his fault shifted much of the blame on to his left wing commander General William B. Franklin.

In Burnside's opinion had the initial Union breakthrough in Franklin' sector been properly supported victory would have been achieved. Franklin was very hands off in the battle and failed to commit Doubleday- Smith at the key moment. On the other hand it could be argued that Burnside was more at fault since it was his operation to begin with and his orders were less then clear.

Opinions? If you had to chose a side who would you take Burnside or Franklin?

 

[kel1985]

I visited Fredericksburg a few times, and while the land approaching Marye's Heights has changed significantly since the battle, I recall reading that the attacks there were supposed to be a diversion while Franklin's area of operation was supposed to be the main attack.
There were so many different fingers to point over the failure of the AOP at Fredericksburg that I'd need more than the two hands I've got.
However, Franklin failed Burnside, and Burnside failed the AOP.

 

[rpkennedy]

Burnside vs Franklin at Fredericksburg

The Battle of Fredericksburg was one of the worst Union defeats of the entire war. It forever ruined General Ambrose Burnside's reputation and earned him the title "butcher of Fredericksburg." Burnside despite admitting the defeat was partially his fault shifted much of the blame on to his left wing commander General William B. Franklin.

In Burnside's opinion had the initial Union breakthrough in Franklin' sector been properly supported victory would have been achieved. Franklin was very hands off in the battle and failed to commit Doubleday- Smith at the key moment. On the other hand it could be argued that Burnside was more at fault since it was his operation to begin with and his orders were less then clear.

Opinions? If you had to chose a side who would you take Burnside or Franklin?

View attachment 146285

Burnside absolutely has to shoulder the responsibility for attacking at all after his pontoon bridges were badly delayed.

That being said, Franklin was terrible at Fredericksburg and has to be blamed for a lot of what transpired that day. I have one teenager and one almost teenager so I know about half-donkeyed efforts and Franklin doesn't even rise to that level.

Ryan

 

[Jimklag]

I visited Fredericksburg a few times, and while the land approaching Marye's Heights has changed significantly since the battle, I recall reading that the attacks there were supposed to be a diversion while Franklin's area of operation was supposed to be the main attack.
There were so many different fingers to point over the failure of the AOP at Fredericksburg that I'd need more than the two hands I've got.
However, Franklin failed Burnside, and Burnside failed the AOP.

Burnside's behavior during the battle belies the 'diversion' theory for the attacks on Marye's Heights. You don't pile in brigade after brigade like he did if it's a diversion. Good commanders feed troops into successful attacks not failures.

 

[kel1985]

Burnside's behavior during the battle belies the 'diversion' theory for the attacks on Marye's Heights. You don't pile in brigade after brigade like he did if it's a diversion. Good commanders feed troops into successful attacks not failures.

Like I said, there was plenty of blame to go around, Burnside as commanding officer AOP the laurels for success or blame for failure ultimately fall on his head.

 

[Andy Cardinal]

I think part of the problem was Burnside was terrible at writing orders. Franklin's attack was intended to be the main attack, but the orders he sent to Franklin were vague. Franklin did not display any initiative and unleashed only a limited attack. While Burnside should bear much of the blame for disaster, Franklin's performance was reprehensible.

 

[amweiner]

Such a perfect storm: vaguely written orders delivered so late there was almost no opportunity to clarify them, given to a Grand Division commander with a reputation of following orders to the letter without thinking creatively. What a mess...so many men paid for those mistakes with their lives. It does make me wonder if things could have turned out differently had First and Third Corps gone all-in and turned the Confederate right flank.

 

[rpkennedy]

Such a perfect storm: vaguely written orders delivered so late there was almost no opportunity to clarify them, given to a Grand Division commander with a reputation of following orders to the letter without thinking creatively. What a mess...so many men paid for those mistakes with their lives. It does make me wonder if things could have turned out differently had First and Third Corps gone all-in and turned the Confederate right flank.

Honestly, I don't think it would've made much difference. The reserves that Jackson had available likely could have stopped any major breakthrough before it could have been seriously exploited.

The mistake was attacking at all. Burnside's plan was a good one and would have worked if the pontoons had arrived on time. Their delay allowed Lee to counter Burnside's move, rendering it moot. But Burnside felt that he had to try something and so Fredericksburg resulted.

Ryan

 

[amweiner]

You're most likely right, Ryan. I imagine that if Franklin had managed to bring his whole Grand Division into the fray, and even if Hooker had sent over any support, all it would have accomplished is lengthening the casualty list.

I do think that Burnside probably could have gotten away with crossing the fords when he first arrived at Fredericksburg, even without waiting for pontoons. It would've been a risk, and he certainly wasn't one to take intelligent risks.

 

[jackt62]

Burnside had ultimate responsibility as overall commander so he must shoulder the major fault. Particularly since once he became aware of the bungled situation with the lack of timely pontoons, the plan of attack should at the least, been modified.

 

[Jamieva]

Overall it is on Burnside, but Franklin is not totally without blame. His aides begged him to ask for clarity on the written order from Burnside and his response was basically no, I am going to do exactly what he ordered. Franklin was super hard headed. He had been told verbally by Burnside that his attack was the main attack of the army, so logically that attack would not be made by only 1 division when you had 30-40,000 men under your command.

 

[Andrew]

I just visited here and learned that this was this first major battle where the Union HQ had direct contact with corps HQs during the battle via telegraph. However, the communications were not reliable for some reason. Several signal stations were set up as well.

It makes me wonder if Burnside was getting bad intelligence from the southern end of the battlefield (Franklin). I think the fighting there stopped at around 3:00-3:30 in the afternoon, while the "diversion" at Marye's Heights continued until dusk. Why continue to attack at the Stone Wall after knowing that Franklin was done and had made no progress against Jackson?

 

[amweiner]

I just visited here and learned that this was this first major battle where the Union HQ had direct contact with corps HQs during the battle via telegraph. However, the communications were not reliable for some reason. Several signal stations were set up as well.

It makes me wonder if Burnside was getting bad intelligence from the southern end of the battlefield (Franklin). I think the fighting there stopped at around 3:00-3:30 in the afternoon, while the "diversion" at Marye's Heights continued until dusk. Why continue to attack at the Stone Wall after knowing that Franklin was done and had made no progress against Jackson?

I have to wonder if Burnside froze psychologically, unable to stop even though he was likely aware that there was no chance of success. His behavior bears some similarities to people with addictions, engaging in dangerous behaviors regardless of knowing the adverse effects and the probable outcomes. That doesn't excuse it, but hopefully all of us sharing perspectives and opinions can perhaps understand this disaster just a bit better.

 

[dzent5th]

This thread is of particular interest to me. I'm a newbie here (as of today) and mentioned in my introductory post elsewhere that my great-grandfather (a 1st Lieutenant) and his younger brother (a Major) had been part of Meade's assualt at Fredericksburg. They were members of the 5th Pennsylvania Reserves (aka the 34th Pennsylvania Volunteers prior to the war) and both were casualties on that day in Fredericksburg - Dec.13, 1862. My GGF was killed that day, his brother the Major was severely wounded, taken prisoner, and sent to Libby prison were he died before years end.

I'd love to find as much detailed info as I can about the orders given, exact route taken, and where they likely fell at Fredericksburg...so any and all suggestions would be appreciated. Who on this forum or in academia are considered to be the most knowledgeable on the specifics of this battle? Also, I have recently acquired an interest in antique firearms amd would love to find out what specific long arms and hand guns would have been issued to these men of the 5th Pennsylvania Reserves.

Thanks in advance for your help.

 

[Andrew]

I believe the book that is considered to be the one to read about details regarding Fredericksburg is Francis O'Reilly's book called The Fredericksburg Campaign. O'Reilly is considered to be one of, if not the top guy in regard to Fredericksburg. He was (and maybe still is?) a ranger at the park. The best troop movement maps I've found are in an article O'Reilly wrote for Blue and Gray magazine back in 2008 or 2009 (Vol. 25 #5). You'll have to search eBay for that issue, though. It's not always easy to find.

Have you looked in the Official Records for the reports of the 5th PA Reserves? That would be a good place to start.

 

[General Butterfield]

This thread is of particular interest to me. I'm a newbie here (as of today) and mentioned in my introductory post elsewhere that my great-grandfather (a 1st Lieutenant) and his younger brother (a Major) had been part of Meade's assualt at Fredericksburg. They were members of the 5th Pennsylvania Reserves (aka the 34th Pennsylvania Volunteers prior to the war) and both were casualties on that day in Fredericksburg - Dec.13, 1862. My GGF was killed that day, his brother the Major was severely wounded, taken prisoner, and sent to Libby prison were he died before years end.

I'd love to find as much detailed info as I can about the orders given, exact route taken, and where they likely fell at Fredericksburg...so any and all suggestions would be appreciated. Who on this forum or in academia are considered to be the most knowledgeable on the specifics of this battle? Also, I have recently acquired an interest in antique firearms amd would love to find out what specific long arms and hand guns would have been issued to these men of the 5th Pennsylvania Reserves.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Thanks for the post, welcome to the forum. I'm not an expert on the Fredericksburg campaign by any means, hopefully someone else will come by and help. @Jamieva probably will have some ideas.

Books wise The Fredericksburg Campaign: Winter War on the Rappahannock by Francis O'Reilly seems to be the best book currently available.

Some other resources I found that might be useful to you:
https://www.civilwar.org/learn/civil-war/battles/fredericksburg
https://archive.org/stream/historyofpennsyl00syph/historyofpennsyl00syph_djvu.txt
http://www.civilwarhome.com/meadefredricksburg.html
http://www.civilwarhome.com/aopfredericksburg.html

 

[General Butterfield]

I believe the book that is considered to be the one to read about details regarding Fredericksburg is Francis O'Reilly's book called The Fredericksburg Campaign. O'Reilly is considered to be one of, if not the top guy in regard to Fredericksburg. He was (and maybe still is?) a ranger at the park. The best troop movement maps I've found are in an article O'Reilly wrote for Blue and Gray magazine back in 2008 or 2009 (Vol. 25 #5). You'll have to search eBay for that issue, though. It's not always easy to find.

Have you looked in the Official Records for the reports of the 5th PA Reserves? That would be a good place to start.

Beat me too it by a minute, much thanks for the assistance.

 

[dzent5th]

Thanks to all for your interest, encouragement, and suggestions. My primary sources thus far are Bates, History of the Pennsylvania Volunteers 1861-1865 and Sypher, History of the Pennsylvania Reserve Corps, a complete record of organization. Another, rather distant family member, has done some extensive research and produced the following pages on our family's geneology website re:

my great-grandfather - 1st. Lt. David Zentmyer:
http://zentmeyergenealogy.com/getperson.php?personID=I467&tree=ZentMain

and his younger brother - Maj. Frank Zentmyer:
http://zentmeyergenealogy.com/getperson.php?personID=I2328&tree=ZentMain

As a youngster some 55 years ago, I was told by my father that one of the brothers had been wounded and the other went to his rescue only to be hit as well. Unfortunately, I don't recall who was wounded first. I can only speculate that Frank had been wounded while likely leading from the front, while David, acting adjutant, had come to his rescue. If at all possible, I am hoping to verify or refute this speculation.

Thanks again and keep the suggestions coming!

 

[Andy Cardinal]

O'Reilly's book is excellent. I am currently reading Uzal Ent's Pennsylvania Reserves in the Civil War. It is very good and very detailed, although I haven't got to the chapter about Fredericksburg yet.

 

[civilken]

it's hard to pick a side when both genitals were two sandwiches short of a picnic Burnside should have changed plans after the pontoons were late in coming. And Franklin was too busy trying to, caver his own behind militarily they were both incompetent one was plain wrong and the other if he couldn't take the pressure he shouldn't have been a general.