Member Review "Five Tragic Hours - The Battle of Franklin" by James Lee McDonough and Thomas L. Connelly

James N.

Colonel
Annual Winner
Featured Book Reviewer
Asst. Regtl. Quartermaster Antietam 2021
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Location
East Texas
Image.jpg


Five Tragic Hours - The Battle of Franklin
by James Lee McDonough and Thomas L. Connelly
Pub. by The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee
218 pp.total; 185 pp. narrative, the rest notes, sources, orders-of-battle, and index
Paperback ed. 1983, third printing 1991
ISBN 0-87049-397-3

The aptly-named Five Tragic Hours is a relatively brief account of the November 30, 1864 Battle of Franklin, Tennessee which effectively wrecked General John Bell Hood's once-proud Army of Tennessee and along with it any hopes of Confederate reconquest of its eponymous state. It is largely in the tradition of author James Lee McDonough's previous books on that army, Shiloh - In Hell Before Night, Stones River - Bloody Winter in Tennessee, and Chattanooga: A Death Grip on the Confederacy, all studies of often-neglected Western battles that shaped the course of the conflict. Like them, this later volume is somewhat short on many details and is therefore best-suited for a reader trying to get a basic understanding of the events and is therefore perhaps not for the more advanced reader looking for minutiae or obscure facts. Personally, I found it overall satisfactory though somewhat a letdown for its brevity.

I think the trouble with Five Tragic Hours is its very concentration on simply this particular battle rather than telling the entire story of Hood's Nashville Campaign of which this was only a part, although likely the most critical. Naturally, events leading up to the action at Franklin must be described in some detail, and it is in the pretty complete examination of the preceding day at Spring Hill that is probably the most interesting part of the book. In this analysis of the failure of Hood's subordinates to trap and possibly destroy the Federal force led by Maj. Gen. John M. Schofield in their retreat from Columbia to Franklin, Ben Cheatham emerges as the principal but not sole culprit; as army commander, Hood is charged with the ultimate failure in command. Perhaps oddly enough, considering the period in which this was written, the frequent accusation of Hood's dependency on opiates and pain-killers plays no real role in the explanation for either the failure or the subsequent bloodbath the following day. That is not to say that Hood escapes blame for what transpired there; his actions are considered more in the light of those of a desperate gambler who knew his time was running out and not the drug-besotted villain he is sometimes portrayed.

The battle itself is reasonably well-presented, and I thought the sequence of events that caused it to degenerate into a bloody stalemate that lasted the five hours of the title became clear for the first time. From the time the Confederate assault went in around 4 pm until it sputtered out in exhaustion around 9 pm there was more or less continual firing and fighting somewhere along the line. One important criticism, though: although this book is illustrated with a number of full-page portraits of principals and modern-day photographs of some locations the number and quality of maps is especially poor. There is essentially a single historic map of the battlefield prepared by a Confederate cartographer that does very little to supplement the text and is almost a decoration rather than a helpful tool; one would hope in vain for a modern topographic map with detailed troop placements by the Battlefield Trust!

Overall, the writing is somewhat uneven, with events presented sometimes out-of-chronological order that might prove confusing to someone not already pretty familiar with them; how much this may be attributable to the dual authorship is unclear. (Co-author Thomas L. Connelly is best-known for his two-volume study of the Army of Tennessee, so it's difficult to know exactly where their respective responsibilities may lie.) At times I got the feeling that portions or even chapters may have been written for some specific purpose, then edited or simply collected together in book form. I was also disappointed to have less than expected in the way of primary accounts of the battle included in the text. Although Franklin suffers especially from a Confederate perspective in a relative dearth of official reports due to the incredibly high casualty rate among the higher command levels, some accounts like that of Captain Sam Foster of Granbury's Brigade are absent; even Federal primary accounts or comments are few. Although events post-battle are described, relatively well-known experiences like those of the Lotz family whose home located on the Union front line was severely damaged and turned into a field hospital are mostly absent. Even the McGavock's of Carnton receive relatively little attention; only the Carters are truly well-represented among the civilians who were caught up in the struggle.

This account is so short that it would have profited greatly if it followed the Union retreat and Hood's advance all the way to the outskirts of Nashville with at least as complete a description of the debacle that occurred there and brought the entire campaign to a close. As it is, Five Tragic Hours stands as a rather uneven introduction to the Spring Hill-Franklin portion of the Confederacy's last offensive; it is in no way a comprehensive and complete account of its designated subject, the Battle of Franklin.

James N.
 
Last edited:
I recently read this book, which I would recommend for a detailed account of the battle of Franklin and the events leading up to it.
I only wish it had been at least a little more detailed; although I've been there several times, I found the map to be all but useless - to help locate sites on the ground it would be completely useless!
 
Still, the book appears to be the most detailed account of the battle that I have come across, although there may be others of note.
 
Wiley Sword's The Confederacy's Last Hurrah: Spring Hill, Franklin and Nashville, 1992, (originally published as Embrace an Angry Wind) covers the entire campaign. I found his battle accounts quite detailed and with excellent maps. It was also a well-told story. I recommend it.
 
Eric Jacobson's For Cause & For Country is probably the most detailed history of the battle to date. Also much more recently published than Five Tragic Hours.

To add: I have the second edition of Jacobson's book, published in 2013 (originally published in 2006). In comparison to Five Tragic Hours, it is 548 pp. narrative and 630 pp. total, with footnotes, bibliography, orders of battle, index. Also a few good quality maps by Hal Jespersen and a number of photos. I do have some issues with his take on certain aspects of the battle, but overall it's still a great read.
 
Last edited:
Is this book still the most detailed on the Battle of Franklin?
Wiley Sword's The Confederacy's Last Hurrah: Spring Hill, Franklin and Nashville, 1992, (originally published as Embrace an Angry Wind) covers the entire campaign. I found his battle accounts quite detailed and with excellent maps. It was also a well-told story. I recommend it.
I've never seen the Sword book, but his known prejudice against Hood and the part he played in promoting the now-debunked myth that Hood was deranged from laudanum during the battle tends to make him a suspect source. Regardless, I might hope for better maps and more first-person accounts of the battle and its aftermath in a more recent work.
 
I would agree as a campaign study it falls short. But as a detailed account of the Battle of Franklin itself, I thought it was an excellent read...
Eric Jacobson's For Cause & For Country is probably the most detailed history of the battle to date. Also much more recently published than Five Tragic Hours.

To add: I have the second edition of Jacobson's book, published in 2013 (originally published in 2006). In comparison to Five Tragic Hours, it is 548 pp. narrative and 630 pp. total, with footnotes, bibliography, orders of battle, index. Also a few good quality maps by Hal Jespersen and a number of photos. I do have some issues with his take on certain aspects of the battle, but overall it's still a great read.
It sounds as if Five Tragic Hours might be a good starting point for someone wanting the basic facts of the campaign and battle without going into too much detail, and that For Cause... would be better for someone wanting to get into the real details of the battle action. Hal Jesperson's notable cartography would be an undeniable asset to any account of the battle!
 
JamesN. Did the author of the newly found Hood papers take to task both Sword and McDonough for their views regarding Hood and his actions during the Confederate offensive? Does his views change your opinion towards the scholarship of both Sword and McDonough in their accounts? This is why I find the study of history a fascinating mental exercise. There is so much undiscovered information out in the public sphere just waiting for someone to find it. I find that very exciting. David.
 
JamesN. Did the author of the newly found Hood papers take to task both Sword and McDonough for their views regarding Hood and his actions during the Confederate offensive? Does his views change your opinion towards the scholarship of both Sword and McDonough in their accounts? This is why I find the study of history a fascinating mental exercise. There is so much undiscovered information out in the public sphere just waiting for someone to find it. I find that very exciting. David.
I can't answer your question with any certainty, especially since I haven't read @samhood Sam Hood's new book; however from his comments made here on the forums at the time of its publication - which you could probably find by searching it - I believe he most likely disagrees wholeheartedly with any accusation about the general's alleged drug dependency, based on his discovery of the writings by Hood's personal physician. As for his unrealistic expectations of any success for the hasty and poorly-prepared assault he rashly ordered I have no idea.
 
Last edited:
I can't answer your question with any certainty, especially since I haven't read Sam Hood's new book; however from his comments made here on the forums at the time of its publication - which you could probably find by searching it - I believe he most likely disagrees wholeheartedly with any accusation about the general's alleged drug dependency, based on his discovery of the writings by Hood's personal physician. As for his unrealistic expectations of any success for the hasty and poorly-prepared assault he rashly ordered I have no idea.
I heard Hood speak several times on you tube and he takes to task the accounts of the general portrayed by both McDonough and especially Sword as completely and grossly incorrect and inaccurate based on the newly found letters. I just thought a man of your experience and knowledge of the civil war might have an opinion. David.
 
I believe he most likely disagrees wholeheartedly with any accusation about the general's alleged drug dependency, based on his discovery of the writings by Hood's personal physician
I don't think one really needs to "throw gas on the fire" with accusations about Hood's drug abuse. There is plenty to be critical of Hood with respect to his performance as the commander of the Army of Tennessee without even considering whether drugs were a factor...
 
Back
Top