What really happened at Spring Hill?

[Mild53]

The book "The Lost Papers of John Bell Hood" appears to vindicate Hood from drug dependency and responsibility for Spring Hill. In a review of the book in Civil War Times (October 2015) the reviewer alludes to another explanation for the lost opportunity. "Placing the blame on Patrick Cleburne and Benjamin Cheatham because they particpated in a drunken orgy hosted by the wife of Earl Van Dorn's assassin was unacceptable so that left Hood to take the fall, but only because of rumors of his addiction."

Dunken orgy? Sounds titillating. Can anyone shed some light here.

 

[MajGenl.Meade]

That's Winston Groom in Shrouds of Glory; etc. I'd not heard of this claim despite extensive reading and two field trips to Spring Hill with excellent guides. Also, I haven't found a version that includes Cleburne - who of all people I would never fault for Spring Hill.

While dismissing the old calumnies about drugs, I still think that Hood bears the responsibility as commander for failing to ensure that events on the ground were according to his plans and orders. He may have been too long in the saddle given his pains but still should have been up closer behind Cheatham and not lolling around further back in more comfortable surroundings.

 

[ole]

Another "demon rum" theory. Mine is simpler, at the end of the day Hood was exhausted. He left it to
Cheatham who blew it. Now why Cheatham blew it is another theory. I don't have one for that part. It is enough for me to know that he did.

 

[Drew]

Forum member @gunny wrote the book on this. Maybe he'll stop in and speak to the OP.

 

[ole]

Forum member @gunny wrote the book on this. Maybe he'll stop in and speak to the OP.

He has, as has Eric Jacobsen. I follow their line.

 

[diane]

I'm guessing this accusation carried over from the morning of the infamous breakfast conference! Nobody who was there lived to tell what was really said except Forrest and Cheatham, and they didn't say anything about it. The conversation is in the 'legend' category - nobody seems to be able to find a real source for anything supposed to have been said. Mrs Peters was a young woman married to a much older man and that's always a bit of trouble. Cheatham definitely liked a taste or two. According to the legend, it wasn't Cleburne Hood accused of carousing but Forrest. Which brought about Forrest's allegedly saying, "If you were a whole man I'd whip you to within an inch of your life." What is known is Forrest was furious when he left the conference and Cleburne was much hurt, possibly costing him his life later that afternoon. Hood did feel that somebody was drunk and I can't help but sympathize a little with him considering the incomprehensible way Schofield slid on by.

 

[BillO]

My personal opinion, based entirely on my own past experiences and a feeling of how things work, makes me think that everyone was just used up and to tired too care.

 

[nitrofd]

I'm sure gunny will chime in soon, but IIRC in his book he does not fault cleburne but implies that Cheatham was the one to blame.in 1866 Hood spoke to Harper's Weekly that Bate was to blame but in talking to Sam Hood he s not sure if Hood was talking about Spring Hill or Nashville.

 

[MajGenl.Meade]

Tim Kent in his novel Die Like Men had a hidden microphone in that breakfast room:

 

[nitrofd]

Tim Kent didn't have a microphone there, just talked to a fly on the wall.

 

[Jamieva]

Read For Cause and Country by Eric Jacobsen

 

[nitrofd]

Read For Cause and Country by Eric Jacobsen

Eric ' s book is an excellent book but it mainly deals with the battle of Franklin.it does give hat happened at Spring Hill but does not have the detail of gunny ' s book.
Gunny is Jamie Gillum and his book is "Twenty-five Hours To Tragedy".the battle of Spring Hill and Operating on November 29,1864, Precursor to the battle of Franklin.
On another thread here eric stated that gunny ' s book is a better book.

 

[ole]

Eric ' s book is an excellent book but it mainly deals with the battle of Franklin.it does give hat happened at Spring Hill but does not have the detail of gunny ' s book.
Gunny is Jamie Gillum and his book is "Twenty-five Hours To Tragedy".the battle of Spring Hill and Operating on November 29,1864, Precursor to the battle of Franklin.
On another thread here eric stated that gunny ' s book is a better book.

Both are excellent books and both authors are personable fellows. I've met Jamie once and Eric about three times. They've grown some since I met them.

 

[Nathanb1]

I know it sounds like a broken record....but we have a ton of threads on this...including some excellent information from @gunny and @EricAJacobson.

To get to those, go to Forums, South and Western Theatre, then in the search, use "Spring Hill," use "gunny" as member and search that forum only. Enjoy reading...and there will be links to other applicable threads.

 

[gunny]

I'm guessing this accusation carried over from the morning of the infamous breakfast conference! Nobody who was there lived to tell what was really said except Forrest and Cheatham, and they didn't say anything about it. The conversation is in the 'legend' category - nobody seems to be able to find a real source for anything supposed to have been said. Mrs Peters was a young woman married to a much older man and that's always a bit of trouble. Cheatham definitely liked a taste or two. According to the legend, it wasn't Cleburne Hood accused of carousing but Forrest. Which brought about Forrest's allegedly saying, "If you were a whole man I'd whip you to within an inch of your life." What is known is Forrest was furious when he left the conference and Cleburne was much hurt, possibly costing him his life later that afternoon. Hood did feel that somebody was drunk and I can't help but sympathize a little with him considering the incomprehensible way Schofield slid on by.

First, I'm glad you addressed the "Breakfast meeting."

Just as you say - "nobody seems to be able to find a real source for anything supposed to have been said."

There is clearly a reason why. Hood of course blamed Cheatham in the days following the event, and especially in his autobiography. He was in great need of corroborating testimony regarding many of his accusations regarding most everything, and be sure - if he had anyone that would have corroborated 'chewing out his corps commanders' at Rippavilla, he certainly would have included testimony from that person. He doesn't mention it in his autobiography at all though.

Cheatham and Forrest probably didn't mention it because - it likely never really happened.

I have searched long and hard for facts regarding that meeting. Other than complete supposition, there is only one oral account of the meeting. Mrs. Cheairs supposedly gave them breakfast, and heard Hood's tone and could recognize the anger in his voice. Mrs. Cheairs never identified who was at the meeting, but in light of absolutely no evidence of any of the commanders other than Hood being there, I suspect he was ranting and raving to his staff - talking **** about the failure of Cheatham, Stewart and Forrest.

Second, Hood never actually accused anyone of drunkenness. Again, you can be sure that that would have been included in his autobiography. Hood was face to face with all his corps commanders at different points that night. He would have known- and so would many others - if one of them was drunk.

All the evidence merely points to the simple fact that plans don't always unfold the way they are intended to. No one is blameless for the failure there, that goes for ALL the corps commanders, CO and even Forrest!

 

[gunny]

Tim Kent in his novel Die Like Men had a hidden microphone in that breakfast room:

View attachment 74754

I know Tim Kent and he writes his fiction well, but it's just that: Fiction based loosely on a big historical event.

 

[Jamieva]

In a nutshell everything that could go wrong for the AoT that night did. Incompetence on every level

 

[gunny]

View attachment 74746

That's Winston Groom in Shrouds of Glory; etc. I'd not heard of this claim despite extensive reading and two field trips to Spring Hill with excellent guides. Also, I haven't found a version that includes Cleburne - who of all people I would never fault for Spring Hill.

While dismissing the old calumnies about drugs, I still think that Hood bears the responsibility as commander for failing to ensure that events on the ground were according to his plans and orders. He may have been too long in the saddle given his pains but still should have been up closer behind Cheatham and not lolling around further back in more comfortable surroundings.

I find that accusation of Cheatham quite funny. Cheatham had a young man on his staff named Abbott Roberston - he just so happened to be the brother of Cheatham's future wife. Cheatham had a courtship going on with Anna Belle throughout the course of the war.

 

[gunny]

The book "The Lost Papers of John Bell Hood" appears to vindicate Hood from drug dependency and responsibility for Spring Hill. In a review of the book in Civil War Times (October 2015) the reviewer alludes to another explanation for the lost opportunity. "Placing the blame on Patrick Cleburne and Benjamin Cheatham because they particpated in a drunken orgy hosted by the wife of Earl Van Dorn's assassin was unacceptable so that left Hood to take the fall, but only because of rumors of his addiction."

Dunken orgy? Sounds titillating. Can anyone shed some light here.

I saw that review and laughed quite hard when I saw it. The suggestion that "they participated in a drunken orgy hosted by the wife of Earl Van Dorn's assassin" is as bad as suggesting Hood took laudanum!

There is an equal amount of evidence that supports either theory.

The word that comes to mind in the days after the event would be "hearsay" and "gossip." These were prevalent in the army at all levels, and many different people were blamed. This is where the drunkenness accusation comes from.

 

[Mild53]

Amazing how fiction quoted can become fact. I read Eric Jacobson's book and had him for a guide of a tour of Spring Hill and Franklin. With all the detail he brings to the story of the battles, I was surprised that I had never heard this before. And for good reason, it wasn't true.

Still the idea of a drunken orgy as an explanation is kinda...kinky. These days such an act would certainly been recorded and leaked on the internet.