Fort Donelson

[diane]

Pillow and Floyd were both political generals but Buckner was West Point, which is where he met up with Grant. I'm not sure Grant knew Buckner was one of the generals in there - he seemed surprised to see him, at any rate! After Floyd lit out with his Virginians and Forrest with his Tennesseans, there wasn't much Buckner could do. Besides, he knew Grant well and, like anybody who did know him, did not really want to fight him. As shemans_march says, Floyd's hide was definitely foremost on his priority list!

 

[67th Tigers]

It is tricky to know what happened, as there is a lot of post-facto redaction. What seems to be absolute is:

ca. 1400: Grant arrives on the field at the Crisp House. He reiterated his previous orders to CF Smith to "keep quiet" (which he contradicts his memoirs) and rode 1,000 yds SW to Wallace and McClernand. He orders them to retreat to the ridgeline and entrench (more later). He returns to the Crisp House.

1430: Grant signals Foote (who has already left to take his ships to be repaired, Cmdr Dove of the St. Louis received it) that his men were demoralised and he must "order a charge to save appearances".

1500: CF Smith launches a brigade in said charge against 3 rebel companies and overwhelms them. His column is disordered going through the rebel skirmish line and stopped dead by the second rebel line.

1530: Col. Webster reiterates Grant's orders to Wallace and McClernand to retreat.

What was said by Grant to Wallace and McClernand was apparently not an order, as when it was reported Wallace and McClernand had advanced 3 or their 4 remaining brigades (Cruft, ML Smith and Ross) to retake the road, Grant reiterated his original retreat order. Wallace refused to obey.

It me it appears Grant was trying to create a "Golden Bridge". He wanted to let the rebels escape, probably as he doubted his own position. His 1430 message betrays utter desperation. McClernand and Wallace had determined to ignore their chief and instead "show the Iron Gate".

The next morning, when a rebel came over with a flag of truce to negotiate Smith replied "I make no terms with rebels with arms in their hands - my terms are unconditional and immediate surrender." Smith had stymied his chief, who now could not back down from Smith's challenge to his authority. He one-upped his subordinate by parroting Smith's words, and adding "I propose to move immediately upon your works", which was likely a bluff. Had Grant attacked his men would have been slaughtered. Fortunately for him the rebels were dead set on surrendering, and delivered ca. 11,000 troops to him.

 

[shermans_march]

It is tricky to know what happened, as there is a lot of post-facto redaction. What seems to be absolute is:

ca. 1400: Grant arrives on the field at the Crisp House. He reiterated his previous orders to CF Smith to "keep quiet" (which he contradicts his memoirs) and rode 1,000 yds SW to Wallace and McClernand. He orders them to retreat to the ridgeline and entrench (more later). He returns to the Crisp House.

1430: Grant signals Foote (who has already left to take his ships to be repaired, Cmdr Dove of the St. Louis received it) that his men were demoralised and he must "order a charge to save appearances".

1500: CF Smith launches a brigade in said charge against 3 rebel companies and overwhelms them. His column is disordered going through the rebel skirmish line and stopped dead by the second rebel line.

1530: Col. Webster reiterates Grant's orders to Wallace and McClernand to retreat.

What was said by Grant to Wallace and McClernand was apparently not an order, as when it was reported Wallace and McClernand had advanced 3 or their 4 remaining brigades (Cruft, ML Smith and Ross) to retake the road, Grant reiterated his original retreat order. Wallace refused to obey.

It me it appears Grant was trying to create a "Golden Bridge". He wanted to let the rebels escape, probably as he doubted his own position. His 1430 message betrays utter desperation. McClernand and Wallace had determined to ignore their chief and instead "show the Iron Gate".

The next morning, when a rebel came over with a flag of truce to negotiate Smith replied "I make no terms with rebels with arms in their hands - my terms are unconditional and immediate surrender." Smith had stymied his chief, who now could not back down from Smith's challenge to his authority. He one-upped his subordinate by parroting Smith's words, and adding "I propose to move immediately upon your works", which was likely a bluff. Had Grant attacked his men would have been slaughtered. Fortunately for him the rebels were dead set on surrendering, and delivered ca. 11,000 troops to him.

Can I please have a source? In what I have read, nothing shows that Grant was trying to create a Golden Bridge.

 

[67th Tigers]

Can I please have a source? In what I have read, nothing shows that Grant was trying to create a Golden Bridge.

The basic facts of the events are in any book on Donelson. I pulled them from Gott's "Where the South Lost".

No-one appears ever to have critically evaluated Grant's orders, which he sent twice. Gott simply notes that Wallace got away with disobeying them. The question is "why does Grant want to open the road". Either he's supremely ignorant of what's happening, or he is deliberately trying to open the road for the rebels.

 

[DanSBHawk]

It is tricky to know what happened, as there is a lot of post-facto redaction. What seems to be absolute is:

ca. 1400: Grant arrives on the field at the Crisp House. He reiterated his previous orders to CF Smith to "keep quiet" (which he contradicts his memoirs) and rode 1,000 yds SW to Wallace and McClernand. He orders them to retreat to the ridgeline and entrench (more later). He returns to the Crisp House.

1430: Grant signals Foote (who has already left to take his ships to be repaired, Cmdr Dove of the St. Louis received it) that his men were demoralised and he must "order a charge to save appearances".

1500: CF Smith launches a brigade in said charge against 3 rebel companies and overwhelms them. His column is disordered going through the rebel skirmish line and stopped dead by the second rebel line.

1530: Col. Webster reiterates Grant's orders to Wallace and McClernand to retreat.

What was said by Grant to Wallace and McClernand was apparently not an order, as when it was reported Wallace and McClernand had advanced 3 or their 4 remaining brigades (Cruft, ML Smith and Ross) to retake the road, Grant reiterated his original retreat order. Wallace refused to obey.

It me it appears Grant was trying to create a "Golden Bridge". He wanted to let the rebels escape, probably as he doubted his own position. His 1430 message betrays utter desperation. McClernand and Wallace had determined to ignore their chief and instead "show the Iron Gate".

The next morning, when a rebel came over with a flag of truce to negotiate Smith replied "I make no terms with rebels with arms in their hands - my terms are unconditional and immediate surrender." Smith had stymied his chief, who now could not back down from Smith's challenge to his authority. He one-upped his subordinate by parroting Smith's words, and adding "I propose to move immediately upon your works", which was likely a bluff. Had Grant attacked his men would have been slaughtered. Fortunately for him the rebels were dead set on surrendering, and delivered ca. 11,000 troops to him.

It's best just to rely on Lew Wallace for the most accurate and detailed account, and this hypothetical scenario to diminish Grant does not come close to what Wallace reported that he saw firsthand.

The comment about ordering a charge to "save appearances" was to maintain morale in an army of inexperienced volunteers. Wallace also commented about trying to maintain morale when a panicked soldier from McClernands division ran back into his lines.

The commander providing the impetus to this campaign was Grant. He never ordered a "retreat" but to retire out of the range of the forts guns until reinforcements arrived. He never suggested or ordered that the investment of Fort Donelson should end. There was no "desperation." And there is no evidence that Grant wanted to open the escape road to the confederates.

 

[shermans_march]

It is tricky to know what happened, as there is a lot of post-facto redaction. What seems to be absolute is:

ca. 1400: Grant arrives on the field at the Crisp House. He reiterated his previous orders to CF Smith to "keep quiet" (which he contradicts his memoirs) and rode 1,000 yds SW to Wallace and McClernand. He orders them to retreat to the ridgeline and entrench (more later). He returns to the Crisp House.

1430: Grant signals Foote (who has already left to take his ships to be repaired, Cmdr Dove of the St. Louis received it) that his men were demoralised and he must "order a charge to save appearances".

1500: CF Smith launches a brigade in said charge against 3 rebel companies and overwhelms them. His column is disordered going through the rebel skirmish line and stopped dead by the second rebel line.

1530: Col. Webster reiterates Grant's orders to Wallace and McClernand to retreat.

What was said by Grant to Wallace and McClernand was apparently not an order, as when it was reported Wallace and McClernand had advanced 3 or their 4 remaining brigades (Cruft, ML Smith and Ross) to retake the road, Grant reiterated his original retreat order. Wallace refused to obey.

It me it appears Grant was trying to create a "Golden Bridge". He wanted to let the rebels escape, probably as he doubted his own position. His 1430 message betrays utter desperation. McClernand and Wallace had determined to ignore their chief and instead "show the Iron Gate".

The next morning, when a rebel came over with a flag of truce to negotiate Smith replied "I make no terms with rebels with arms in their hands - my terms are unconditional and immediate surrender." Smith had stymied his chief, who now could not back down from Smith's challenge to his authority. He one-upped his subordinate by parroting Smith's words, and adding "I propose to move immediately upon your works", which was likely a bluff. Had Grant attacked his men would have been slaughtered. Fortunately for him the rebels were dead set on surrendering, and delivered ca. 11,000 troops to him.

I am looking at Grant Invades Tennessee: The 1862 battles for Fort Henry and Donelson by Timothy B. Smith right now. Referring to the C.F. Smith/Grant relationship, nothing supports the assumption that Smith was challenging his authority or there was anything, but amiable feelings toward each other.

Quoting from Smith's book on the surrender.

"Now Grant was in no mood to be merciful, and even if he had been, Smith was pushing him to be firm. When Grant read Buckner's note, the crusty old division commander Smith blurted firmly, "No terms with traitors." Grant laughed sat down to write his response, showing it to Smith with a frank, "General, I guess this will do." Smith responded, " It could not be better."

When Grant exceeded Smith's rank and Smith became his subordinate, Grant felt awkward since Smith used to be one of his instructors at West Point. Smith replied," I am now a subordinate, and I know a soldiers duty. I hope you will feel no awkwardness about our new relations"

 

[jackt62]

Pillow also thought he would be tried for treason. Floyd had much more legitimate concern with a treason charge. There is rumor that he send supplies from federal arsenals to the South before the war started. Floyd probably would have been executed.

Agreed. I understood that Floyd's diversion of federal arsenal supplies was more fact than rumor.

 

[shermans_march]

1530: Col. Webster reiterates Grant's orders to Wallace and McClernand to retreat.

What was said by Grant to Wallace and McClernand was apparently not an order, as when it was reported Wallace and McClernand had advanced 3 or their 4 remaining brigades (Cruft, ML Smith and Ross) to retake the road, Grant reiterated his original retreat order. Wallace refused to obey.

The order that Grant gave was not for retreat.

Quoting Gott, " For example when General Wallace received orders from Grant to pull back and regroup, Wallace disobeyed the order with the knowledge that doing so would further the aim for victory. His confidence that Grant would see this too was confirmed when his commander later backed him up fully."

Had Grant attacked his men would have been slaughtered. Fortunately for him the rebels were dead set on surrendering, and delivered ca. 11,000 troops to him.

Why isn't there the assumption, that if Grant attacked, the rebels would have had many casualties also? Why only Grant's men?
Quoting Woodworth, "Buckner believed his lines would not hold for 30 minutes in the face of the attack, he saw no choice but to accept surrender."

Sources:
Gott, Kendall. Where the South Lost the War: An Analysis of the Fort Henry-Fort Donelson Campaign. Stackpole Books, 2003.
Woodworth, Steven. Shiloh Confederate High Tide in the Heartland. Praeger, 2013.

 

[General Butterfield]

It's best just to rely on Lew Wallace for the most accurate and detailed account, and this hypothetical scenario to diminish Grant does not come close to what Wallace reported that he saw firsthand.

Reading Shadow of Shiloh: Major General Lew Wallace in the Civil War and I'm not sure the autobiography is a very good source. He didn't proofread it, his wife finished it for him and being the great writer he wanted to make it novel like so he changed real events on occasion. The Fort Donelson section in particular is said to have inaccuracies. I haven't read it myself or know enough about Fort Donelson to point them out though....

Not disagreeing with your posts, just thought I mention it since I read about it today.

 

[diane]

I don't see why Grant would not attack Ft Donelson. He'd won at Ft Henry and Ft Donelson was the last part of the key to controlling the river for the Union. I don't see why he'd leave a way out for the rebels - it was a sizable dent in Johnston's ability to defend the vast department he'd been assigned. As it was, later they came back to make a stab at retaking the fort - and it was not a good stab. Forrest did not want to fight at Dover but the boss man said to so he did. It fell out about like he figured it would.

 

[67th Tigers]

I don't see why Grant would not attack Ft Donelson. He'd won at Ft Henry

He'd done essentially nothing at Fort Henry. The rebels abandoned the flooded fort, and Grant's troops didn't fire a shot.

 

[diane]

He'd done essentially nothing at Fort Henry. The rebels abandoned the flooded fort, and Grant's troops didn't fire a shot.

Still counts as a win for him!

 

[shermans_march]

He'd done essentially nothing at Fort Henry. The rebels abandoned the flooded fort, and Grant's troops didn't fire a shot.

The gunboats fired a lot of shells at Fort Henry inflicting a lot of damage. Part of the force escaped and the rest surrendered with Tilghman. During the battle all the cannons, but one were damaged beyond repair. The flooding at that point affected the powder magazine and since only 1 cannon still functioned it didn't matter much. The troops on the gunboats were commanded by Foote who took orders from Grant. So in reality what you said is incorrect that "Grant's troops didn't fire a shot." Not counting the other things that we have already disproven.

 

[Bee]

I'm not sure Grant knew Buckner was one of the generals in there - he seemed surprised to see him, at any rate!

I recently read this passage in the new Grant book that I am plodding reading:

Later explaining why he dared to confront a larger Confederate force at the fort, Grant said: "Of course there was a risk in attacking Donelson as I did, bit I knew the men who commanded it. I knew some of them in Mexico. Knowledge of that kind goes far toward determining a movement like this" [14] Ron Chernow, Grant, [p179]
​

[14] New York Herald, July 24, 1878

 

[shermans_march]

One of the interesting things about reading a book about the battle is the things some Grant biographies miss. With a whole book devoted to the subject, there is so much more detail. For example, I never knew there was snow on the ground during most of the battle of Fort Donelson. There was so much suffering from the troops since lighting fires at night, when it was coldest, would give away their positions. This happened night after night.

 

[Bee]

One of the interesting things about reading a book about the battle is the things some Grant biographies miss. With a whole book there is so much more detail. For example, it was never knew there was snow on the ground during most of the battle of Fort Donelson. There was so much suffering from the troops since lighting fires would give away their positions. This happened night after night.

This is all covered on page 178 of the Chernow book (not sure if you read that far, yet) EDIT: Since the book is sitting on my lap, here is the passage @shermans_march

Those improvident soldiers who had cavalierly dumped coats and blankets by the roadside regretted their decisions on the night of February 13, 1862. The mercury plummeted to twelve degrees as the area was pelted by snow. Grant, nursing a cold, slept in a feather bed in a modest log farmhouse , but his soldiers within range of enemy muskets and lacking sufficient tents, lay down in the cold with weapons tightly clutched at their sides. To worsen matters, Grant had to forbid campfires that might draw enemy fire. "At midnight I noticed some of the me who had blankets lying on the ground completely covered with snow and you would think they were dead if it was not for their breath like little puffs of steam" said an Illinois officer. The men of the Twelfth Iowa, to avoid frostbite, ran around in circles . Ron Chernow, Grant, [178]​

Simpson mentions the snow on page 114, but at a glance I did not see the lack of fires mentioned.

 

[shermans_march]

This is all covered on page 178 of the Chernow book (not sure if you read that far, yet)

Simpson mentions the snow on page 114, but at a glance I did not see the lack of fires mentioned.

I have sadly not. Looks as though Chernow got one thing right that is absent in Smith's and White's biographies. I looked over the sections covering Donelson in those respective books and couldn't find any mention of the cold weather conditions the troops endured. How odd. Grant invades Tennessee by Timothy Smith covers it in detail.

I am pacing myself with the book. Given I have read several Grant bios I am not really in a hurry.

 

[diane]

I recently read this passage in the new Grant book that I am plodding reading:

Later explaining why he dared to confront a larger Confederate force at the fort, Grant said: "Of course there was a risk in attacking Donelson as I did, bit I knew the men who commanded it. I knew some of them in Mexico. Knowledge of that kind goes far toward determining a movement like this" [14] Ron Chernow, Grant, [p179]
​

[14] New York Herald, July 24, 1878

Thanks - should have known that! Buckner and Pillow - Mexican war. Well...always pays to know your enemy!