Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[civilwarwest] Artillery at Franklin

Expand Messages
  • Bob Watt
    Wayne, There were at least 3 batteries on the field at Franklin. The only one I am certain was engaged was 1st Missouri which was on the extreme right of the
    Message 1 of 12 , Mar 8, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Wayne,

      There were at least 3 batteries on the field at Franklin. The only one I
      am certain was engaged was 1st Missouri which was on the extreme right
      of the Confederate line following(???) Loring's Division. Evidently,
      they were in the rear of Adams' Brigade because they were near the
      Harpeth and within easy range of the Yankee batteries north of the
      Harpeth. The other two batteries present were Cowan's Mississippi
      Battery and Ferguson's South Carolina Battery. I am not sure when they
      took the field. Hope this helps.
      Bob
    • Steve Charles
      Bob, I m almost certain that the 6th Michigan Battery was at Franklin also, But I could be wrong. Steve Charles ... From: Bob Watt To:
      Message 2 of 12 , Mar 8, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Bob,
        I'm almost certain that the 6th Michigan Battery was at Franklin also, But
        I could be wrong.
        Steve Charles
        -----Original Message-----
        From: Bob Watt <BobWatt@...>
        To: CivilWarWest@egroups.com <CivilWarWest@egroups.com>
        Date: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 7:06 PM
        Subject: [civilwarwest] Artillery at Franklin


        >Wayne,
        >
        >There were at least 3 batteries on the field at Franklin. The only one I
        >am certain was engaged was 1st Missouri which was on the extreme right
        >of the Confederate line following(???) Loring's Division. Evidently,
        >they were in the rear of Adams' Brigade because they were near the
        >Harpeth and within easy range of the Yankee batteries north of the
        >Harpeth. The other two batteries present were Cowan's Mississippi
        >Battery and Ferguson's South Carolina Battery. I am not sure when they
        >took the field. Hope this helps.
        >Bob
        >
        >
        >------------------------------------------------------------------------
        >The race is on! We've got the most comprehensive elections coverage
        >for women. Get your election updates at
        >http://click.egroups.com/1/1877/1/_/14182/_/952560443/
        >
        >-- Talk to your group with your own voice!
        >-- http://www.egroups.com/VoiceChatPage?listName=civilwarwest&m=1
        >
        >
        >
      • Steve Charles
        Bob, I m almost certain that the 6th Michigan Battery was at Franklin also, But I could be wrong. Steve Charles ... From: Bob Watt To:
        Message 3 of 12 , Mar 8, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          Bob,
          I'm almost certain that the 6th Michigan Battery was at Franklin also, But
          I could be wrong.
          Steve Charles
          -----Original Message-----
          From: Bob Watt <BobWatt@...>
          To: CivilWarWest@egroups.com <CivilWarWest@egroups.com>
          Date: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 7:06 PM
          Subject: [civilwarwest] Artillery at Franklin


          >Wayne,
          >
          >There were at least 3 batteries on the field at Franklin. The only one I
          >am certain was engaged was 1st Missouri which was on the extreme right
          >of the Confederate line following(???) Loring's Division. Evidently,
          >they were in the rear of Adams' Brigade because they were near the
          >Harpeth and within easy range of the Yankee batteries north of the
          >Harpeth. The other two batteries present were Cowan's Mississippi
          >Battery and Ferguson's South Carolina Battery. I am not sure when they
          >took the field. Hope this helps.
          >Bob
          >
          >
          >------------------------------------------------------------------------
          >The race is on! We've got the most comprehensive elections coverage
          >for women. Get your election updates at
          >http://click.egroups.com/1/1877/1/_/14182/_/952560443/
          >
          >-- Talk to your group with your own voice!
          >-- http://www.egroups.com/VoiceChatPage?listName=civilwarwest&m=1
          >
          >
          >
        • Wayne Mulig
          Bob, Thanks! The plot thickens ... I had only read vague references to the Confederate batteries at Franklin ... and then only two have been mentioned ...
          Message 4 of 12 , Mar 8, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Bob,

            Thanks! The plot thickens ... I had only read vague references to the
            Confederate batteries at Franklin ... and then only two have been mentioned
            ... Will continue my search into this matter ....
            Appreciate the leads ...

            Sincerely,
            Wayne Mulig

            >From: BobWatt@... (Bob Watt)
            >Reply-To: civilwarwest@egroups.com
            >To: CivilWarWest@egroups.com
            >Subject: [civilwarwest] Artillery at Franklin
            >Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 19:04:24 -0500 (EST)
            >
            >Wayne,
            >
            >There were at least 3 batteries on the field at Franklin. The only one I
            >am certain was engaged was 1st Missouri which was on the extreme right
            >of the Confederate line following(???) Loring's Division. Evidently,
            >they were in the rear of Adams' Brigade because they were near the
            >Harpeth and within easy range of the Yankee batteries north of the
            >Harpeth. The other two batteries present were Cowan's Mississippi
            >Battery and Ferguson's South Carolina Battery. I am not sure when they
            >took the field. Hope this helps.
            >Bob
            >
            >
            >------------------------------------------------------------------------
            >The race is on! We've got the most comprehensive elections coverage
            >for women. Get your election updates at
            >http://click.egroups.com/1/1877/1/_/14182/_/952560443/
            >
            >-- Talk to your group with your own voice!
            >-- http://www.egroups.com/VoiceChatPage?listName=civilwarwest&m=1
            >
            >

            ______________________________________________________
          • Wayne Mulig
            Bob, Thanks! The plot thickens ... I had only read vague references to the Confederate batteries at Franklin ... and then only two have been mentioned ...
            Message 5 of 12 , Mar 8, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              Bob,

              Thanks! The plot thickens ... I had only read vague references to the
              Confederate batteries at Franklin ... and then only two have been mentioned
              ... Will continue my search into this matter ....
              Appreciate the leads ...

              Sincerely,
              Wayne Mulig

              >From: BobWatt@... (Bob Watt)
              >Reply-To: civilwarwest@egroups.com
              >To: CivilWarWest@egroups.com
              >Subject: [civilwarwest] Artillery at Franklin
              >Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 19:04:24 -0500 (EST)
              >
              >Wayne,
              >
              >There were at least 3 batteries on the field at Franklin. The only one I
              >am certain was engaged was 1st Missouri which was on the extreme right
              >of the Confederate line following(???) Loring's Division. Evidently,
              >they were in the rear of Adams' Brigade because they were near the
              >Harpeth and within easy range of the Yankee batteries north of the
              >Harpeth. The other two batteries present were Cowan's Mississippi
              >Battery and Ferguson's South Carolina Battery. I am not sure when they
              >took the field. Hope this helps.
              >Bob
              >
              >
              >------------------------------------------------------------------------
              >The race is on! We've got the most comprehensive elections coverage
              >for women. Get your election updates at
              >http://click.egroups.com/1/1877/1/_/14182/_/952560443/
              >
              >-- Talk to your group with your own voice!
              >-- http://www.egroups.com/VoiceChatPage?listName=civilwarwest&m=1
              >
              >

              ______________________________________________________
            • Bob Watt
              Steve I am sure you are right, Wayne ask about Confederate Artillery as well. That s what I was responding to.I am sure there were much more CS units at
              Message 6 of 12 , Mar 9, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                Steve I am sure you are right, Wayne ask about Confederate
                Artillery as well. That's what I was responding to.I am sure there were
                much more CS units at Franklin, but were not engaged. I don't know who
                gave the order,but the Confederate guns could NOT fire on the Federals.I
                am not a fan of Hood, he must have been out of his mind to order the
                attack. It was doomed from the get go. Thanks Bob
              • Bob Watt
                Steve I am sure you are right, Wayne ask about Confederate Artillery as well. That s what I was responding to.I am sure there were much more CS units at
                Message 7 of 12 , Mar 9, 2000
                • 0 Attachment
                  Steve I am sure you are right, Wayne ask about Confederate
                  Artillery as well. That's what I was responding to.I am sure there were
                  much more CS units at Franklin, but were not engaged. I don't know who
                  gave the order,but the Confederate guns could NOT fire on the Federals.I
                  am not a fan of Hood, he must have been out of his mind to order the
                  attack. It was doomed from the get go. Thanks Bob
                • Andy Berstel
                  bobwat-@webtv.net (bob watt) wrote: original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/civilwarwest/?start=678 ... were ... Federals.I ... So Hood not only deprives
                  Message 8 of 12 , Mar 9, 2000
                  • 0 Attachment
                    bobwat-@... (bob watt) wrote:
                    original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/civilwarwest/?start=678
                    > Steve I am sure you are right, Wayne ask about Confederate
                    > Artillery as well. That's what I was responding to.I am sure there
                    were
                    > much more CS units at Franklin, but were not engaged. I don't know who
                    > gave the order,but the Confederate guns could NOT fire on the
                    Federals.I
                    > am not a fan of Hood, he must have been out of his mind to order the
                    > attack. It was doomed from the get go. Thanks Bob
                    >


                    So Hood not only deprives himself of S.D. Lees corp and most of the
                    armies guns, but also Lee's artillery expertise. Seems obvious a
                    preliminary bombardment or artillery support was never a part of Hood's
                    plan. Wonder why. Range too far? According to Wagner and other 1st hand
                    accounts the few rounds the confederates did get off landed near the
                    Carter house, well within the union lines. Did the ineffectiveness of
                    the bombardment preceding Picketts charge make him think it was a waste
                    of time and ammunition? While the Gettysburg bombardment didn't do the
                    damage Lee might have hoped, it was still a terrifying experience for
                    the Union soldiers in line there, something I would think, in general,
                    would lower a defensive lines breaking point. Maybe it was just more
                    troop discipline for Spring Hill, but that seems hard to believe.

                    Andy
                  • Andy Berstel
                    bobwat-@webtv.net (bob watt) wrote: original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/civilwarwest/?start=678 ... were ... Federals.I ... So Hood not only deprives
                    Message 9 of 12 , Mar 9, 2000
                    • 0 Attachment
                      bobwat-@... (bob watt) wrote:
                      original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/civilwarwest/?start=678
                      > Steve I am sure you are right, Wayne ask about Confederate
                      > Artillery as well. That's what I was responding to.I am sure there
                      were
                      > much more CS units at Franklin, but were not engaged. I don't know who
                      > gave the order,but the Confederate guns could NOT fire on the
                      Federals.I
                      > am not a fan of Hood, he must have been out of his mind to order the
                      > attack. It was doomed from the get go. Thanks Bob
                      >


                      So Hood not only deprives himself of S.D. Lees corp and most of the
                      armies guns, but also Lee's artillery expertise. Seems obvious a
                      preliminary bombardment or artillery support was never a part of Hood's
                      plan. Wonder why. Range too far? According to Wagner and other 1st hand
                      accounts the few rounds the confederates did get off landed near the
                      Carter house, well within the union lines. Did the ineffectiveness of
                      the bombardment preceding Picketts charge make him think it was a waste
                      of time and ammunition? While the Gettysburg bombardment didn't do the
                      damage Lee might have hoped, it was still a terrifying experience for
                      the Union soldiers in line there, something I would think, in general,
                      would lower a defensive lines breaking point. Maybe it was just more
                      troop discipline for Spring Hill, but that seems hard to believe.

                      Andy
                    • Wayne Mulig
                      Andy and Bob, I agree with your summations that Hood was not too smart to attack the prepared Union positions at Franklin as he did. I am sure a preparatory
                      Message 10 of 12 , Mar 9, 2000
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Andy and Bob,

                        I agree with your summations that Hood was not too smart to attack the
                        prepared Union positions at Franklin as he did. I am sure a preparatory
                        artillery barrage or at least some artillery support would have been
                        helpful, but so would the third infantry corps being involved. Judging from
                        when S.D. Lee finally arrived at Franklin would probably not have been
                        ready to attack much before dark. Would that time waiting for Lee been
                        better used to determine weakness of Schofield's right? in actually
                        observing the Union positions and the routes that Confederate troops would
                        have had to approach the enemy lines? Would Hood succumb to the notion that
                        flanking Schofield out of Franklin might have been the better course? And
                        would the time spent waiting allowed the Union forces to further strengthen
                        their positions? Would Wagner's Division been pulled back from its forward
                        position? All the great "what if's", I know ... but is interesting to
                        think about the alternatives .... Any thoughts, ladies and gents??

                        Sincerely,
                        Wayne Mulig


                        >From: "Andy Berstel" <greenhaven@...>
                        >Reply-To: civilwarwest@egroups.com
                        >To: civilwarwest@...
                        >Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Artillery at Franklin
                        >Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 06:59:18 -0800
                        >
                        >bobwat-@... (bob watt) wrote:
                        >original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/civilwarwest/?start=678
                        > > Steve I am sure you are right, Wayne ask about Confederate
                        > > Artillery as well. That's what I was responding to.I am sure there
                        >were
                        > > much more CS units at Franklin, but were not engaged. I don't know who
                        > > gave the order,but the Confederate guns could NOT fire on the
                        >Federals.I
                        > > am not a fan of Hood, he must have been out of his mind to order the
                        > > attack. It was doomed from the get go. Thanks Bob
                        > >
                        >
                        >
                        >So Hood not only deprives himself of S.D. Lees corp and most of the
                        >armies guns, but also Lee's artillery expertise. Seems obvious a
                        >preliminary bombardment or artillery support was never a part of Hood's
                        >plan. Wonder why. Range too far? According to Wagner and other 1st hand
                        >accounts the few rounds the confederates did get off landed near the
                        >Carter house, well within the union lines. Did the ineffectiveness of
                        >the bombardment preceding Picketts charge make him think it was a waste
                        >of time and ammunition? While the Gettysburg bombardment didn't do the
                        >damage Lee might have hoped, it was still a terrifying experience for
                        >the Union soldiers in line there, something I would think, in general,
                        >would lower a defensive lines breaking point. Maybe it was just more
                        >troop discipline for Spring Hill, but that seems hard to believe.
                        >
                        >Andy
                        >
                        >
                        >------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        >Successful or aspiring career women won't want to miss Women.Future!
                        >Today's top business women share how they led their way to the top.
                        >Find out how at
                        >http://click.egroups.com/1/1876/1/_/14182/_/952613995/
                        >
                        >-- Easily schedule meetings and events using the group calendar!
                        >-- http://www.egroups.com/cal?listname=civilwarwest&m=1
                        >
                        >

                        ______________________________________________________
                      • Wayne Mulig
                        Andy and Bob, I agree with your summations that Hood was not too smart to attack the prepared Union positions at Franklin as he did. I am sure a preparatory
                        Message 11 of 12 , Mar 9, 2000
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Andy and Bob,

                          I agree with your summations that Hood was not too smart to attack the
                          prepared Union positions at Franklin as he did. I am sure a preparatory
                          artillery barrage or at least some artillery support would have been
                          helpful, but so would the third infantry corps being involved. Judging from
                          when S.D. Lee finally arrived at Franklin would probably not have been
                          ready to attack much before dark. Would that time waiting for Lee been
                          better used to determine weakness of Schofield's right? in actually
                          observing the Union positions and the routes that Confederate troops would
                          have had to approach the enemy lines? Would Hood succumb to the notion that
                          flanking Schofield out of Franklin might have been the better course? And
                          would the time spent waiting allowed the Union forces to further strengthen
                          their positions? Would Wagner's Division been pulled back from its forward
                          position? All the great "what if's", I know ... but is interesting to
                          think about the alternatives .... Any thoughts, ladies and gents??

                          Sincerely,
                          Wayne Mulig


                          >From: "Andy Berstel" <greenhaven@...>
                          >Reply-To: civilwarwest@egroups.com
                          >To: civilwarwest@...
                          >Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Artillery at Franklin
                          >Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 06:59:18 -0800
                          >
                          >bobwat-@... (bob watt) wrote:
                          >original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/civilwarwest/?start=678
                          > > Steve I am sure you are right, Wayne ask about Confederate
                          > > Artillery as well. That's what I was responding to.I am sure there
                          >were
                          > > much more CS units at Franklin, but were not engaged. I don't know who
                          > > gave the order,but the Confederate guns could NOT fire on the
                          >Federals.I
                          > > am not a fan of Hood, he must have been out of his mind to order the
                          > > attack. It was doomed from the get go. Thanks Bob
                          > >
                          >
                          >
                          >So Hood not only deprives himself of S.D. Lees corp and most of the
                          >armies guns, but also Lee's artillery expertise. Seems obvious a
                          >preliminary bombardment or artillery support was never a part of Hood's
                          >plan. Wonder why. Range too far? According to Wagner and other 1st hand
                          >accounts the few rounds the confederates did get off landed near the
                          >Carter house, well within the union lines. Did the ineffectiveness of
                          >the bombardment preceding Picketts charge make him think it was a waste
                          >of time and ammunition? While the Gettysburg bombardment didn't do the
                          >damage Lee might have hoped, it was still a terrifying experience for
                          >the Union soldiers in line there, something I would think, in general,
                          >would lower a defensive lines breaking point. Maybe it was just more
                          >troop discipline for Spring Hill, but that seems hard to believe.
                          >
                          >Andy
                          >
                          >
                          >------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          >Successful or aspiring career women won't want to miss Women.Future!
                          >Today's top business women share how they led their way to the top.
                          >Find out how at
                          >http://click.egroups.com/1/1876/1/_/14182/_/952613995/
                          >
                          >-- Easily schedule meetings and events using the group calendar!
                          >-- http://www.egroups.com/cal?listname=civilwarwest&m=1
                          >
                          >

                          ______________________________________________________
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.