You have to be a naïve pushover to believe the North would authorize Letters like this to be released without sanitizing them to paint the North in a good light or remove any damaging rhetoric. So while it would be interesting to be able to hear these exchanges it would have to be an unfiltered version.
These letters are the perfect example of cursing someone out and telling them to F off without ever using vulgar language. Writing like this is a lost art.
Back then if anyone called someone a blue scum belly that was pretty harsh words. Or if anyone called a Rebel a "rabble", it was not good either. The short list of bigger cuss also included skallywaggs, pigheaded mule, and slimy snake eyed rascal, and bugged eyed old turtle.
I remember watching Ken Burn's Civil War documentary, which used a lot of letters written by ordinary soldiers, many of whom had little formal eduction. These letters were better written than college graduates can write today.
What an absolutely fascinating series of correspondences between these two generals! My goodness, that's worth the price of admission. You can really feel their personalities dripping off the pages! Bravo!
Yes, Hood was much more insightful and comprehensive in appreciating the political dimensions of the War (from the Southern perspective) than I ever would have expected from him, based upon my civil war readings.
Sadly, exactly the same thing and terms happened now in France in public debates with far right cons and racists and far left wokes. (except the still polite and in a way respectful tone of the letters.. but hey, 19th century vs 21st.. :/ ).
Laying aside the wartime tensions and testiness of these letters, this is yet another great example of the intelligent language used by that generation. Compare this communication with the mindless verbiage you see on emails and text messages of today.
Give ‘em hell, Tecumseh. This exchange could be a stage performance. Note to self: Don’t seat Hood and Sherman across from each other at a dinner party.
Separated by over a century, me and General Sherman once crossed paths in a manner of speaking. I have spent not enough fun hours hiking and researching Civil War battlefields. Decades ago I brought along my father and son. Later by myself I hiked Shiloh. In this battle Sherman was still a division commander and I got it in my head to use an old map and locate Sherman's HQ on the battlefield. Such place was not well defined on the "tourista" map. I trekked off into the thick woods, found what I was looking for, then suddenly realized I was lost in those thick woods. Not panicking I walked around until I heard car sounds on that highway outside Savannah, TN. I walked toward the sound until I saw about a half mile ahead, the green tail of a familiar car. For a moment the experience had its spiritual/historical side in that I felt I had wandered off the tourist trail and into history. Then it came time to go back to the present.
That’s a good point, now kids or even some adults have abbreviated phrases condensed into letters of the alphabet when communication on their cell phones.
Oh you should read the letters of some former slaves of the period who hadn't even been able to read and write for very long. Better than many modern day "yoots" with 12 years of public "schooling".
Fascinating! I watch many RUclips videos on historical events. This one is right at the top. Thank you for sharing! With respect, your obedient and humble servant, Billf4186
Though a son of the South and a descendant of numerous CSA soldiers, I have never hidden my true feelings of respect and admiration of Grant and Sherman. Though my great, g, g-grandfather served under JB Hood and was captured at Nashville, I find more to be admired of WT Sherman than Hood in these exchanges. As others have already articulated, both were war-weary; but Sherman seemed far more gracious and compassionate than Hood who seemed more petulant than concerned for the wellbeing of Atlanta’s citizenry. Letters, such as these, are far more telling of the emotion and the general make-up of the prime players in that sad period in our history. Great addition to your cache of historical documents.
He was actually not that compassionate to the emancipated that followed his brandished torch brigades. But then, most abolitionists abandoned the cause right quick after the end of the war. Far easier to free a slave than to actually provide for them.
You are a disgrace to your ancestors who suffered rape and burning flesh at the hands of that war criminal. And I say that as the descendant of a war criminal who lit the torch to Atlanta at the order of Gen. Sherman, monster and war criminal.
An interesting & welcome comment. IMO the North won the war but the South won the peace. Sadly the multi-racial governments in the South were over turned & Washington did nothing. How different would domestic politics have been, state & federal, if post 1865 the South had preserved voting rights.
@@jeffmilroy9345 Oh, but providing for them would have been "socialism". Besides which, we did have the Homestead Act, which could only be passed because the Southerners had abandoned Congress. Why did Southerners oppose giving federal land to the poor when it had so damn many poor?
Until he lost and punished his own army for it. Joe Johnston was doing his best possible given the situation and Hood came along and threw it away. I don’t doubt the man’s personal bravery but any competent general should have known the strategic situation was impossible That was Sherman’s curse, he knew from the start what it would take
People talk about Grant being a butcher but his tactics were vindicated through victory. Hood was no slouch at wasting men's lives and he did it in pursuit of a futile and lost cause.
I agree with the other poster. Johnston was loved by the Army of Tennessee, Hood, not so much. Only Bragg was more hated, but Hood was right in this case
@cleanwillie1307 Grant was a fool, except for one insightful observation. The pattern of previous engagements between Lee and all previous Yankee commanders: He grabbed Lee by the belt and never let go. Prior Yankee commanders had always pulled back to lick their wounds, giving Lee time to replenish the ANV. Grant denied Lee that interregnum.
@@jdffurr3237what's more remarkable is that this was not typed at 45-50 words a minute on a computer or even typewriter. This was all written out in longhand And elegant longhand at that
Eloquent language from Hood but stupid arguments. The Confederacy did attack without warning, did persecute dissidents, and did commit many of the war crimes he was accusing the Union of. In fact, Sherman's actions and concern for the civilian population exceed historical standards. The barbarism was largely on the other side.
As a Texan am always embarrassed that Hood didn't hold Atlanta no matter the cost allowing McClellan to win the election of 1864 and bringing a negotiated end to the war a half year earlier, and for his decisions at Franklin that resulted in the destruction of the Army of Tennessee and death of so many Confederate Generals including Cleburne and Granbury.
Possibly the best video & content on the entire web. Fascinating exchange. TY very much for your presentation. Just moved me so deeply of these famous generals and the depth of their knowledge and education. I expect this will stay with me a very long time. Thanks again.
Once again you bring to life the people of that time. The correspondence between these 2 Men was a perfect example of this. Their verbal jousting showed not only each man's caricature but the norms of the times which we have lost. Enjoy your work immensely.
Hood: I invoke God right now to impugn your intentions and honor. Also Hood: How dare you take issue with how I pray to God! Also also Hood: I’m now praying to God that He help me kill you.
What an amazing and illuminating exchange you presented here. As a current resident of Atlanta and having studied his campaign, I side with Sherman’s actions in depopulating the city. Atlanta’s population numbers had swollen by several times during the war to make it a center of transportation and industry supporting the rebellion. I believe Sherman already knew that he would be continuing his march to the coast and could not leave the city, with his supply lines cut, in a condition where it could quickly resume its function. Thus removing the bulk of citizens to the south and the willing others, including freed slaves, to the north was a strategic decision to deny the city’s usefulness to the Confederacy. In the end it was a victorious general’s communications with a defeated one that you read for us. Thank you.
So let’s get this straight, John Bell Hood, a one arm one leg morphine using confederate Lt. General, on July 20, 1864 in his first engagement as the AoT commanding general loses to George Thomas at the battle of Peach Tree Creek. Then not quite five months later between December 15-16, 1864, Hood looses again to George Thomas at the battle of Nashville. And THEN Hood, after having his ENTIRE army eliminated as an effective force, asks to be relieved of command on January 23. 1965. Makes you think that Hood, second only to maybe Leonidas Polk was one of the best Union assets in the confederate high command.
@@TonyRedunzo Harder to tell with Bragg. He was not a congenial man and may have made unnecessary enemies, but we would have a better judge of his strategic acumen if his orders had been followed with more alacrity and if his immediate subordinates hadn't undermined him at every turn. Still handling people is PART of generalship, and he failed at that. By military tradition, this is his responsibility apart from moral fault.
Wow. This was an impressive exchange. And fun too. Almost Shakespearian Americana. Puts me in mind of Beaufort's deliverance of Henry V's angry answer, including calm and firm threats, to the King of France. But our American military men here never stooped to ad hominem insult, even when scolding severely the other's intentions and means of carrying them out. Hood proves himself a courageous and honest racist religionist, while Sherman runs rings around him logically and beats him rhetorically as well as strategically. Still, holier than thou Hood didn't succeed in causing ol' War is Hell Sherman to regret or retract his unsolicited offer and considerations. And so, Sherman clearly won this particular war of words.
I thoroughly enjoyed hearing this correspondence between Sherman and Hood, with the former, not for the first time, getting the last word. Thanks for this episode!
As a civil war buff, i have like others found the verbage used then fascinating. The letters from soldiers were of limited education,but respectful innocent almost poetic form. Impressive! As already stated, a lost art.
Who knew the sheer eloquence that are possessed by these two military leaders? Even after recently reading U.S. Grant's Memoirs, I still am taken a back by this exchange. Thank you for sharing this!
Reminds me what an attorney once advised me: "Never let a self-serving letter go unanswered." Almost sounds as if these two generals, left to their own devices and close proximity, would be exchanging poignant letters til their dying days.
Wow. Fantastic episode. Almost speechless at the wrath and conviction of both parties. I learn so deeply much about the Civil War from your channel. I appreciate there’s a new episode almost every day, It’s part of my every day’s evening routine.
By 1860 Atlanta was home to 9,554 people and was already the fourth largest city in the state. It’s hard to imagine how tiny the population was in America back then.
I guess it's safe to say that Sherman didn't attend Hood's funeral, ha ha! 😬 But note that Hood's predecessor, Joseph Johnston DID attend Sherman's funeral, stood in the cold for it, and became sick because of it, and died a month later from it. Johnston couldn't stand Hood in post war, thought he was stabbed in the back by him to advance his own status in Davis' government.
Colds and flus are caused by viruses, not by standing in the cold, though that might weaken one's resistance. Whatever he died of, it was not from standing in the cold.
Gen Johnston was a class act, Gen. Hood was always the fool cost a lot of his troops lives. My GGGrand Father mom's side Bama 1st. Inf Reg., Father GGGrand Father served in the 10th Illinois Inf. Reg.
Hood tapped Sherman Duke of Louisiana for Mardi Gras Post Civil War. They were super close. This a perfect example of two uber competitive alpha males exchanging in the purest form
The blood of thousands of Confederate soldiers Hood recklessly threw away on the battlefield could ink a million eloquent letters refuting his generalship.
Lincoln was solely to blame for the horrendous war and its casualties. No Lincoln in the white house - no war. A few decades later farm mechanization would have resulted in the rapid economic death and phase out of slavery. Would the freed man have then been far better off without the bitter hatred bred by the war?
Check out the Kennesaw mountain battle where Sherman ordered uphill futile attacks that no sane commander would have ordered and no other commander never ever ordered throughout the entirety of the war. He without regret murdered his own men fully aware that none of them stood a single chance of attaining any of the objectives they were ordered to take by general Sherman on that mountain. J.B Hood, was fighting and had attained substantial bodily injury from fighting bravely with his men and as a consequence had made strategic errors any commander under similar circumstances would or could have made most likely. Your attempts to make Hood out to be a callus cold commander only illustrates extreme ignorance and bias and in comparison to Sherman, Hood's exploits were much more frugal in their attempts than Shermans exploits and decision making ever were during the war.
I am with respect, your obedient servant...funny how both of them put that formal tag at the end of their letters when neither of them is being humble to the other and neither is going to obey what the other wants done.
The discussions on America's Generals rarely goes beyond Washington, Lee, big gap, Pershing or Patton v Bradley. My vote is for Grant & Sherman, both much maligned, as the North may have won the war but it let the South win the peace.
Thank you, Ron, for bringing us this extraordinary exchange between Gens Sherman and Hood. I'll refrain from commenting on the validity of either man's perspective as others have, but will say their abilities to express themselves in the written word shows us that both were well schooled in grammar and composition. I'm sure this is the result of the education they both received at West Point. No doubt this correspondence would rank superior to those of today. Anyway, I'd be interested to know how these letters were preserved in order for us to read them today.
I don't doubt that West Point played a role in their exquisite verbal constructions. However, most of the correspondence extant from the 19th century reflect similarly.
Hood drew the discussion into non-military matters by his commentary. The only point of discussion was if they both agreed to let an evacuation happen. That said, both were probably tired and over worked in their respective duties, and most likely weary of a long war whose outcome was now much more certain. Two men, both doing their duties as they saw fit. This conversation may have been different had it occurred under different circumstances. But is it an important moment captured on paper.
I agree with you at first, but the more I think about it the more I see how the way Sherman phrased the act of evacuation as a kindness set hood off because in his view and paradigm, it was no kindness whatsoever it was a cruelty, and so maybe if Sherman want to have proposed the action like he was doing him a favor and just more of a military type order hood might have responded in kind
I have long held the opinion that Hood is an idiot, who got his commission because of his devotion to the cause and the rhetoric of that cause. Perhaps if he were not so young, he would have been a better general. He seemed deprived of the wisdom, caution, prudence, and trechery that comes with age. It was Hood at Gettysburg who had the opportunity and was ordered to take one of the hills on the first day. His delay help seal their defeat on the very first day. If he had not been grievously wounded he might have been disiplined by the army. At this point in the war he is drunk, high and tied to his horse. He has just finished a letter writing campaign to get his suppirior removed so that he can take command of the army. Johnston was playing chess. He had tried to outlast the election by fighting delaying actions and forcing Sherman into a prolonged seige for Atlanta. Hood was upset that he would not fight a piched battle against a vastly superior force. Hood would attempt to secure all the rail roads in Atlanta rather than conentrating his troops on one. This would allow Shermans superior force to defeat him in detail very quickly. The quick defeat of Atlanta would reach northern newspapers in time to give Lincoln a boost right before the election. Hood rather than opposing Sherman after Atlanta would allow him to march to the sea unopposed. He would take the army of Tennessee and waste their lives needlessly in Franklin before allowing them to freeze to death at Traveller's Rest. Don't be confused by the fancy language Hood was the 1860's version of an NPC. He didn't want to argue the point because he could not.
You may be interested in this story about Hood and Evander Law I wrote for Military Images magazine: www.militaryimagesmagazine-digital.com/2024/06/04/the-little-gamecock-the-rise-of-brig-gen-evander-mciver-law-c-s-a/
By this stage Hood was badly mutilated and using opium and alcohol to ease his discomfort. But he kept on fighting, which I respect, notwithstanding his blunders
@@dalemoss4684 Why? Hood threw away a whole army. Thousands died because of him while accomplishing less than nothing. His ideas of drawing Sherman away from Georgia utterly failed and all he did was make sure Sherman had _no_ effective opposition while eliminating an army. The south had no business putting him in a major command. He had no business commanding anyone. He should have gone home with the respect his earlier work earned and to deal with his grievous wounds.
Rookie General here. I always heard that the South’s generals were far superior to the north with sole exceptions being Sherman and Grant. You guys put this into the myth category?
@@rwarren58 I put this into the myth category. Early in the war, the resignation of valuable officers and West Point cadets who joined the Confederate military was a gain for the Southern states and a loss for the United States. However, as the war unfolded and dragged on it revealed thaT both sides had their share of great generals-and not so great generals. After the war, the Lost Cause narrative emphasized the prowess of Southern fighting men, and, later in the century, efforts towards reunification added luster to the Confederate fighting men and their generals.
Both are very articulate in their use of language, but Hood is such a joke in his claim that Sherman's evacuation order was uniquely cruel in the history of warfare. Clearly he had not studied the plundering, enslaving, and massacreing that defined most wars in history.
Hood's letters are dripping with this grievance rhetoric that is, surprisingly, recognizable to modern audiences. As to the other comments regarding how well formulated each of the officers' writting is -- I'm going to have to whole-heartedly agree. Both demonstrate an artful style of formal writting that I struggle to imagine is common in contemporary America.
Hood's personal sacrifice proves that he was brave while in an ignoble cause, and the opioid pain killers he took for his wounds undoubtedly impaired his cognitive ability, but he lost this correspondence battle as badly as he lost all his battles as a commanding general. Methinks he doth protest too much.
He certainly was fearless and a man of action. He was a reckless choice as the general in charge of an army. The issue regarding pain killers affecting his judgement is speculation. He justified his actions for the rest of his short life. He was only 48 when he died from yellow fever in New Orleans.
His battle record for the Atlanta to Nashville campaign was a present to the Union. Sherman Scofield and Thomas all crushed the Army of Tennessee. He failed at love earlier in his career and died from yellow fever at age 48. Don't forget he lost a leg and one arm was useless. Not the greatest life.
Sherman opened up a correspondence with Hood, then stated he didn't start the correspondence at the end of his final letter. Interesting chain of events. I enjoyed this so much that I'll likely listen to your podcast again. Where could we find these letters online? I see there is a transcript. There must be accessible source material, as well. Thank you for doing such a stellar job of reading these letters and not taking a side.
People complaining about the language of today compared to these letters fail to note the lack of education for the vast majority of the nation at the time. These generals are products of a class that prized education, and only for the white, well bred, and wealthy. The pretentious speech recalls Shakespeare. It is indeed a fascinating series of letters, and it is these from which we must remember the history and the conditions thereof.
The eloquence of these letters is impressive, although the attitudes that motivated their writing (Hood's especially) strike one as a bit petty minded. One gets the impression that Hood, at this point of the war, found very little to do that could seriously impact Sherman's victorious and devastating campaign and perhaps composed these letters just to occupy his mind.
I always love reading letters between Southern and Union military men where it's quiet obvious both writers are getting mad. Their in the era of being gentlemen, while still eloquently talking trash to eachother. Lol. And then....the sign off...respectfully, your obedient servant...haha.
Do the letters between Sherman and Wade Hampton during Sherman's march through South Carolina. Sherman didn't like his "foragers" getting hanged for violating females. That exchange is better than this one.
What a dialogue and dive into their minds! It did cross my mind, however, that these two had nothing better to do with all the misery surrounding them than sooth their own egos. The first letter and the reply would have been good enough.
@@oldcremona Of course I already knew that. I was pointing out the irony of letters that were basically saying, "You flaming a__hole" and closing with "Your obedient servant."
The present day analogous military closure would be "V/R" (for "Very Respectfully") followed by the writer's signature. That closing would be delivered even if the two individuals had contempt for one another :) Some things never change :) :)
What a wonderful and sad exchange. Both were hot-tempered and quick to take offense. If Sherman planned to goad Hood he couldn’t have done it better. He pricked him right in the pride and made it personal.
Hood will forever remain loved or hated, understood or misunderstood. The tenacious Hood of Gaines Mill and Sharpsburg or the foresighted Hood of Gettysburg day 2 vs. the desperate and grossly outnumbered Hood of Atlanta & Franklin (and let's not forget Spring Hill's fated error...). For me, no one in any armchair circa 2024 can pass judgement on the courage or character of a soldier (whose Texans loved him) and who literally gave and arm and a leg for his cause, regardless of what presentism thinks of that highly nuanced "cause" today. His story, from pre-war to post, is many things--with more extremes of commitment, tragedy and personal sacrifice than almost any of us today can imagine. The same, of course, is equally true of Union courage (from Reynolds to Grant). The correspondence shared here is a fascinating look at two fascinating men--each with their own biases, pride, passion and even eloquence. As always, much praise to Ron for sharing these daily gems and insights from such a powerful window into our history.
Seeing Hood sacrifice so many men for no reason at Franklin makes me question his heart of hearts. What was the purpose? Was he so filled with hate it caused reason fly out the window? He had to know the war was lost. Was he hoping to die on the battlefield? His actions don' t seem like those of a sane man. A more reasonable course of action would have been to link up with Johnston. Did he really think he could win in Tenn?
@@DaveHenshaw clearly he was committed to the cause.. Said he would fight to the death.. Many of his men did, and I'm sure he gladly would have. I applaud his devotion to the cause, misbegotten though it was.
@@DaveHenshaw It was an extremely complex situation, but in as few words as possible, it was basically a hail marry. Hood thought that the enemy was in the process of starting a retreat, and therefore couldn't deploy all their forces, and Hood thought that the attack could succeed. He thought it might be the last chance his army might get to attack a portion of the enemy army before it was reinforced and grew even larger and even more unassailable.. And this was after several golden opportunities to attack or damage the enemy force had been missed, and he wasn't going to allow another potential opportunity to slip.
Until I read "Advance and Retreat," I could never imagine why Hood defended GA by running west/north. While I don't entirely agree with his strategy, he was a brave and strong man in a diminished body and I'll not argue with his position. Franklin and Nashville is another matter though...
General Hood chose the battlefield, he is responsible for the consequences. I remember he secretly wrote letters subverting and bad mouthing Gehneral Johnston, his commanding officer.
I am glad to hear this, it gives insight into both men. No matter how hard I try I find Hood headstrong, thoughtless and now profoundly long winded, much as I find J. Davis his superior. He might have spent more time planning than writing. Thanks for this
It's telling how Hood seems to sidestep any accountability for the politics and acts of treason which led to the unwinnable war of which he was now immersed, foisting that responsibility onto his superiors. Meanwhile he still addressed each individual claim and accusation in an attempt to justify it, thus demonstrating that he was well aware of all of the underlying factors leading to secession, as well as their implications. He appeals to God as a moral backer to his plight--proving that anyone can implore fictitious gods to validate whatever decisions they so choose. Then, as he is perpetually outmatched on the battlefield, Hood and other Confederate Generals retreat to sanctuary cities in an attempt to fortify their army, failing to accept the prevailing reality which is that they have embedded themselves into civilian population centers and put their own women and children at risk during a time of war.
As an avid Civil War reader, these letters escaped notice and are fascinating.
Thanks for one of the best videos ever.
Amazing exchange.
You have to be a naïve pushover to believe the North would authorize Letters like this to be released without sanitizing them to paint the North in a good light or remove any damaging rhetoric. So while it would be interesting to be able to hear these exchanges it would have to be an unfiltered version.
Agreed
These letters are the perfect example of cursing someone out and telling them to F off without ever using vulgar language. Writing like this is a lost art.
These people were like ents.
The fine art of telling your enemy to get lost, politely telling him where to go, and asking him to enjoy the trip!
Back then if anyone called someone a blue scum belly that was pretty harsh words.
Or if anyone called a Rebel a "rabble", it was not good either.
The short list of bigger cuss also included
skallywaggs, pigheaded mule, and slimy snake eyed rascal, and bugged eyed old turtle.
I remember watching Ken Burn's Civil War documentary, which used a lot of letters written by ordinary soldiers, many of whom had little formal eduction. These letters were better written than college graduates can write today.
Well bless your heart
What an absolutely fascinating series of correspondences between these two generals! My goodness, that's worth the price of admission. You can really feel their personalities dripping off the pages! Bravo!
Yes, Hood was much more insightful and comprehensive in appreciating the political dimensions of the War (from the Southern perspective) than I ever would have expected from him, based upon my civil war readings.
This is a perfect showcase of Northern vs. Southern political thought. You can see the sparks that led up to the war within these exchanges
Yes you can, and it's very interesting window into the attitudes and feelings of the time .
Sadly, exactly the same thing and terms happened now in France in public debates with far right cons and racists and far left wokes. (except the still polite and in a way respectful tone of the letters.. but hey, 19th century vs 21st.. :/ ).
Very interesting
A little known gem of history I was not aware of. Thanks and keep up the great work!
Laying aside the wartime tensions and testiness of these letters, this is yet another great example of the intelligent language used by that generation. Compare this communication with the mindless verbiage you see on emails and text messages of today.
The difference is striking and appalling indeed.
Give ‘em hell, Tecumseh.
This exchange could be a stage performance.
Note to self: Don’t seat Hood and Sherman across from each other at a dinner party.
I'd say they had rather a lot of time on their hands to think through, compose and pen their letters. The penmanship was often superb as well.
@@nanavango9374 Dear self, If you do seat them adjacent to one another I would request a seat within earshot.
Separated by over a century, me and General Sherman once crossed paths in a manner of speaking. I have spent not enough fun hours hiking and researching Civil War battlefields. Decades ago I brought along my father and son.
Later by myself I hiked Shiloh. In this battle Sherman was still a division commander and I got it in my head to use an old map and locate Sherman's HQ on the battlefield. Such place was not well defined on the "tourista" map. I trekked off into the thick woods, found what I was looking for, then suddenly realized I was lost in those thick woods. Not panicking I walked around until I heard car sounds on that highway outside Savannah, TN. I walked toward the sound until I saw about a half mile ahead, the green tail of a familiar car.
For a moment the experience had its spiritual/historical side in that I felt I had wandered off the tourist trail and into history. Then it came time to go back to the present.
The 1864 version of angry tweets.
Both Sherman and Hood are way more articulate than the people of today.
That’s a good point, now kids or even some adults have abbreviated phrases condensed into letters of the alphabet when communication on their cell phones.
Gen Dave Petraeus could articulate with the same finesse as these two.
@@tjschakow Let me correct your statement "Gen Dave Patreus could _not_ articulate with the same finesse as these two."
Oh you should read the letters of some former slaves of the period who hadn't even been able to read and write for very long. Better than many modern day "yoots" with 12 years of public "schooling".
They had more practice and it was expected back then.
“Talk thus to the Marines…”
Oh, slap.
Indeed…
Fascinating! I watch many RUclips videos on historical events. This one is right at the top. Thank you for sharing!
With respect,
your obedient and humble servant,
Billf4186
Pray these historic communications are not erased.
Why would they be erased?
Thanks!
@@kensilverstone1656 thank you for the support, Ken. Huzzah!
The raw emotion of these letters was a great window into the minds of these two men.
A WAR where brother fought brother, a uniquely sublime chapter of our character.
Though a son of the South and a descendant of numerous CSA soldiers, I have never hidden my true feelings of respect and admiration of Grant and Sherman. Though my great, g, g-grandfather served under JB Hood and was captured at Nashville, I find more to be admired of WT Sherman than Hood in these exchanges.
As others have already articulated, both were war-weary; but Sherman seemed far more gracious and compassionate than Hood who seemed more petulant than concerned for the wellbeing of Atlanta’s citizenry.
Letters, such as these, are far more telling of the emotion and the general make-up of the prime players in that sad period in our history.
Great addition to your cache of historical documents.
He was actually not that compassionate to the emancipated that followed his brandished torch brigades. But then, most abolitionists abandoned the cause right quick after the end of the war. Far easier to free a slave than to actually provide for them.
You are a disgrace to your ancestors who suffered rape and burning flesh at the hands of that war criminal. And I say that as the descendant of a war criminal who lit the torch to Atlanta at the order of Gen. Sherman, monster and war criminal.
An interesting & welcome comment. IMO the North won the war but the South won the peace. Sadly the multi-racial governments in the South were over turned & Washington did nothing. How different would domestic politics have been, state & federal, if post 1865 the South had preserved voting rights.
@@jeffmilroy9345 Oh, but providing for them would have been "socialism".
Besides which, we did have the Homestead Act, which could only be passed because the Southerners had abandoned Congress. Why did Southerners oppose giving federal land to the poor when it had so damn many poor?
@@warheadsnation You seem ignorant.
Thanks!
I look forward to more excellent content of similar quality in the future on this channel.
Subscribed.
“You can talk about your Beauregard and sing of General Lee, but the battling Hood of Texas played Hell in Tennessee”
Until he lost and punished his own army for it. Joe Johnston was doing his best possible given the situation and Hood came along and threw it away.
I don’t doubt the man’s personal bravery but any competent general should have known the strategic situation was impossible
That was Sherman’s curse, he knew from the start what it would take
Well they were all losers and traitors so who cares.
People talk about Grant being a butcher but his tactics were vindicated through victory. Hood was no slouch at wasting men's lives and he did it in pursuit of a futile and lost cause.
I agree with the other poster. Johnston was loved by the Army of Tennessee, Hood, not so much. Only Bragg was more hated, but Hood was right in this case
@cleanwillie1307 Grant was a fool, except for one insightful observation. The pattern of previous engagements between Lee and all previous Yankee commanders: He grabbed Lee by the belt and never let go. Prior Yankee commanders had always pulled back to lick their wounds, giving Lee time to replenish the ANV. Grant denied Lee that interregnum.
The art of writing has sadly declined since the 19th century.
NO U!
@@patrickshannon4854 Sherman was remarkably eloquent. The best writer of the war, save Grant.
I agree,I could listen to proper English for hrs
@@jdffurr3237what's more remarkable is that this was not typed at 45-50 words a minute on a computer or even typewriter. This was all written out in longhand And elegant longhand at that
Read letters from ordinary Civil War soldiers. They were often illiterate by modern standards.
Hood fought better in written correspondence than he did as a commanding general.
It wouldn't have been hard to be better at it than he was as a general.
@@lawrence142002 Hood was a capable leader of a brigade but his skills maxed out there.
Eloquent language from Hood but stupid arguments. The Confederacy did attack without warning, did persecute dissidents, and did commit many of the war crimes he was accusing the Union of. In fact, Sherman's actions and concern for the civilian population exceed historical standards. The barbarism was largely on the other side.
Not so sure about that.
As a Texan am always embarrassed that Hood didn't hold Atlanta no matter the cost allowing McClellan to win the election of 1864 and bringing a negotiated end to the war a half year earlier, and for his decisions at Franklin that resulted in the destruction of the Army of Tennessee and death of so many Confederate Generals including Cleburne and Granbury.
Possibly the best video & content on the entire web. Fascinating exchange. TY very much for your presentation. Just moved me so deeply of these famous generals and the depth of their knowledge and education. I expect this will stay with me a very long time. Thanks again.
Agreed
Once again you bring to life the people of that time. The correspondence between these 2 Men was a perfect example of this. Their verbal jousting showed not only each man's caricature but the norms of the times which we have lost. Enjoy your work immensely.
for sure... Great job Ron!
This starts to sound like an 1860s Facebook rant
Perfect. Perfect. hahahaha
Not like the cogent manner of expression of the 1860s would confer either eloquence or elegance to FaceBook. But OK, then, right?
Farcebook is not worthy of either side.
And the original of word limits on X…
Hood: I invoke God right now to impugn your intentions and honor.
Also Hood: How dare you take issue with how I pray to God!
Also also Hood: I’m now praying to God that He help me kill you.
What an amazing and illuminating exchange you presented here. As a current resident of Atlanta and having studied his campaign, I side with Sherman’s actions in depopulating the city. Atlanta’s population numbers had swollen by several times during the war to make it a center of transportation and industry supporting the rebellion. I believe Sherman already knew that he would be continuing his march to the coast and could not leave the city, with his supply lines cut, in a condition where it could quickly resume its function. Thus removing the bulk of citizens to the south and the willing others, including freed slaves, to the north was a strategic decision to deny the city’s usefulness to the Confederacy. In the end it was a victorious general’s communications with a defeated one that you read for us. Thank you.
Plus where would they have to live after they torched the city.
So let’s get this straight, John Bell Hood, a one arm one leg morphine using confederate Lt. General, on July 20, 1864 in his first engagement as the AoT commanding general loses to George Thomas at the battle of Peach Tree Creek. Then not quite five months later between December 15-16, 1864, Hood looses again to George Thomas at the battle of Nashville. And THEN Hood, after having his ENTIRE army eliminated as an effective force, asks to be relieved of command on January 23. 1965. Makes you think that Hood, second only to maybe Leonidas Polk was one of the best Union assets in the confederate high command.
@@wmschooley1234 and maybe Braxton Bragg also
@@TonyRedunzo Harder to tell with Bragg. He was not a congenial man and may have made unnecessary enemies, but we would have a better judge of his strategic acumen if his orders had been followed with more alacrity and if his immediate subordinates hadn't undermined him at every turn. Still handling people is PART of generalship, and he failed at that. By military tradition, this is his responsibility apart from moral fault.
Amazing that Gen. Hood found the time to write such long and passionate letters.
I’ve used this correspondence in Ethics classes. Always provoked lively discussions.
Wow. This was an impressive exchange. And fun too. Almost Shakespearian Americana. Puts me in mind of Beaufort's deliverance of Henry V's angry answer, including calm and firm threats, to the King of France. But our American military men here never stooped to ad hominem insult, even when scolding severely the other's intentions and means of carrying them out. Hood proves himself a courageous and honest racist religionist, while Sherman runs rings around him logically and beats him rhetorically as well as strategically. Still, holier than thou Hood didn't succeed in causing ol' War is Hell Sherman to regret or retract his unsolicited offer and considerations. And so, Sherman clearly won this particular war of words.
I thoroughly enjoyed hearing this correspondence between Sherman and Hood, with the former, not for the first time, getting the last word.
Thanks for this episode!
Precious primary sources, best of the internet!
As a civil war buff, i have like others found the verbage used then fascinating. The letters from soldiers were of limited education,but respectful innocent almost poetic form. Impressive! As already stated, a lost art.
This was a great episode. Thank you.
Your obedient servant is such a sick burn!
Who knew the sheer eloquence that are possessed by these two military leaders?
Even after recently reading U.S. Grant's Memoirs, I still am taken a back by this exchange.
Thank you for sharing this!
Wow, thank you for sharing such history
Reminds me what an attorney once advised me: "Never let a self-serving letter go unanswered." Almost sounds as if these two generals, left to their own devices and close proximity, would be exchanging poignant letters til their dying days.
In close enough proximity they would no doubt come to sabres or pistols.
hope that these letters are required reading at our military academies.
They aren't.
This is amazing. Thank you. I am an airmchair historian who is a son of the South. Never heard of this exchange. Great stuff!
Well said
They have the most eloquent way to insult each other.
I think the main thing we can learn from these two is that holy crap, educated people really knew how to write back then.
Damn, I knew this was gonna be interesting but I wasn’t expecting it to be as good as it is
Very interesting dialogue between these two (2) Civil War opponents. Thanks
Wow. Fantastic episode. Almost speechless at the wrath and conviction of both parties. I learn so deeply much about the Civil War from your channel. I appreciate there’s a new episode almost every day, It’s part of my every day’s evening routine.
From back when there were schools..
Extremely liked your readings of both letters.
Kind regards,
Robert.
By 1860 Atlanta was home to 9,554 people and was already the fourth largest city in the state.
It’s hard to imagine how tiny the population was in America back then.
And then consider 500,000 men died in the war
The largest migrations of Europeans to the USA happened after the war (and therefore after slavery was ended) and they were truly massive
It was not a city by modem standards, but was well known and a crossroads
Hoods last paragraph says it all about him and the cause ..
And of course Sherman's reply says it all about his feelings about Black equality.
I guess it's safe to say that Sherman didn't attend Hood's funeral, ha ha! 😬 But note that Hood's predecessor, Joseph Johnston DID attend Sherman's funeral, stood in the cold for it, and became sick because of it, and died a month later from it. Johnston couldn't stand Hood in post war, thought he was stabbed in the back by him to advance his own status in Davis' government.
actually he did.....he brought popcorn and a vuvuzela
Colds and flus are caused by viruses, not by standing in the cold, though that might weaken one's resistance. Whatever he died of, it was not from standing in the cold.
@@fasteddie4145 And humble pie... :)
Gen Johnston was a class act, Gen. Hood was always the fool cost a lot of his troops lives. My GGGrand Father mom's side Bama 1st. Inf Reg., Father GGGrand Father served in the 10th Illinois Inf. Reg.
Hood tapped Sherman Duke of Louisiana for Mardi Gras Post Civil War. They were super close. This a perfect example of two uber competitive alpha males exchanging in the purest form
The blood of thousands of Confederate soldiers Hood recklessly threw away on the battlefield could ink a million eloquent letters refuting his generalship.
Lincoln was solely to blame for the horrendous war and its casualties. No Lincoln in the white house - no war. A few decades later farm mechanization would have resulted in the rapid economic death and phase out of slavery. Would the freed man have then been far better off without the bitter hatred bred by the war?
I always thought that he had Fort Hood named after him, because his chronic incompetence made him seem like a hidden Union asset :-).
He was a fool and stabbed Johnston in the back, a pathetic leader.
Check out the Kennesaw mountain battle where Sherman ordered uphill futile attacks that no sane commander would have ordered and no other commander never ever ordered throughout the entirety of the war. He without regret murdered his own men fully aware that none of them stood a single chance of attaining any of the objectives they were ordered to take by general Sherman on that mountain. J.B Hood, was fighting and had attained substantial bodily injury from fighting bravely with his men and as a consequence had made strategic errors any commander under similar circumstances would or could have made most likely. Your attempts to make Hood out to be a callus cold commander only illustrates extreme ignorance and bias and in comparison to Sherman, Hood's exploits were much more frugal in their attempts than Shermans exploits and decision making ever were during the war.
@@countryboy2368 And yet, Hood's command was given back to Joe Johnston. Probably to prevent Hood from destroying it completely.
I am with respect, your obedient servant...funny how both of them put that formal tag at the end of their letters when neither of them is being humble to the other and neither is going to obey what the other wants done.
Hearing “Your obedient servant” at the end of each letter just kills me. So glad Lin-Manuel Miranda picked up on that for the song in Hamilton.
Common ending in 18th and 19th century correspondence.
The expression caught my attention too. How can 2 opposing Generals, at war, be "obedient servants"?
These are included in Sherman’s Memoirs in their entirety. Great stuff. The lesson to be learned is “Don’t go to war against Gen Sherman”
The discussions on America's Generals rarely goes beyond Washington, Lee, big gap, Pershing or Patton v Bradley. My vote is for Grant & Sherman, both much maligned, as the North may have won the war but it let the South win the peace.
Trolling each other in 1864.
What a polite way of conveying a hissy fit and having your panties in a bunch , I love this time era. Amazing! Who started what ? 🤦🏼♀️
Thank you, Ron, for bringing us this extraordinary exchange between Gens Sherman and Hood. I'll refrain from commenting on the validity of either man's perspective as others have, but will say their abilities to express themselves in the written word shows us that both were well schooled in grammar and composition. I'm sure this is the result of the education they both received at West Point. No doubt this correspondence would rank superior to those of today. Anyway, I'd be interested to know how these letters were preserved in order for us to read them today.
I don't doubt that West Point played a role in their exquisite verbal constructions. However, most of the correspondence extant from the 19th century reflect similarly.
As someone who studies the civil war I have never heard of this event these letters were rather interesting
thank you for sharing, so fascinating. that correspondence perfectly summarizes the cultural rifts that led to the civil war
Hood drew the discussion into non-military matters by his commentary. The only point of discussion was if they both agreed to let an evacuation happen.
That said, both were probably tired and over worked in their respective duties, and most likely weary of a long war whose outcome was now much more certain. Two men, both doing their duties as they saw fit. This conversation may have been different had it occurred under different circumstances. But is it an important moment captured on paper.
I agree with you at first, but the more I think about it the more I see how the way Sherman phrased the act of evacuation as a kindness set hood off because in his view and paradigm, it was no kindness whatsoever it was a cruelty, and so maybe if Sherman want to have proposed the action like he was doing him a favor and just more of a military type order hood might have responded in kind
It’s war shouldn’t even be considered as a option
Wow. Thanks for sharing these letters
I have long held the opinion that Hood is an idiot, who got his commission because of his devotion to the cause and the rhetoric of that cause. Perhaps if he were not so young, he would have been a better general. He seemed deprived of the wisdom, caution, prudence, and trechery that comes with age. It was Hood at Gettysburg who had the opportunity and was ordered to take one of the hills on the first day. His delay help seal their defeat on the very first day. If he had not been grievously wounded he might have been disiplined by the army. At this point in the war he is drunk, high and tied to his horse. He has just finished a letter writing campaign to get his suppirior removed so that he can take command of the army. Johnston was playing chess. He had tried to outlast the election by fighting delaying actions and forcing Sherman into a prolonged seige for Atlanta.
Hood was upset that he would not fight a piched battle against a vastly superior force. Hood would attempt to secure all the rail roads in Atlanta rather than conentrating his troops on one. This would allow Shermans superior force to defeat him in detail very quickly. The quick defeat of Atlanta would reach northern newspapers in time to give Lincoln a boost right before the election. Hood rather than opposing Sherman after Atlanta would allow him to march to the sea unopposed. He would take the army of Tennessee and waste their lives needlessly in Franklin before allowing them to freeze to death at Traveller's Rest. Don't be confused by the fancy language Hood was the 1860's version of an NPC. He didn't want to argue the point because he could not.
You may be interested in this story about Hood and Evander Law I wrote for Military Images magazine: www.militaryimagesmagazine-digital.com/2024/06/04/the-little-gamecock-the-rise-of-brig-gen-evander-mciver-law-c-s-a/
By this stage Hood was badly mutilated and using opium and alcohol to ease his discomfort. But he kept on fighting, which I respect, notwithstanding his blunders
@@dalemoss4684 Why? Hood threw away a whole army. Thousands died because of him while accomplishing less than nothing. His ideas of drawing Sherman away from Georgia utterly failed and all he did was make sure Sherman had _no_ effective opposition while eliminating an army.
The south had no business putting him in a major command. He had no business commanding anyone. He should have gone home with the respect his earlier work earned and to deal with his grievous wounds.
Rookie General here. I always heard that the South’s generals were far superior to the north with sole exceptions being Sherman and Grant. You guys put this into the myth category?
@@rwarren58 I put this into the myth category. Early in the war, the resignation of valuable officers and West Point cadets who joined the Confederate military was a gain for the Southern states and a loss for the United States. However, as the war unfolded and dragged on it revealed thaT both sides had their share of great generals-and not so great generals. After the war, the Lost Cause narrative emphasized the prowess of Southern fighting men, and, later in the century, efforts towards reunification added luster to the Confederate fighting men and their generals.
Both are very articulate in their use of language, but Hood is such a joke in his claim that Sherman's evacuation order was uniquely cruel in the history of warfare. Clearly he had not studied the plundering, enslaving, and massacreing that defined most wars in history.
Very interesting. I wonder how many generals in later wars actually corresponded with each other like this.
"I have the honor of receiving"..."Your obedient servant". Dual of words.
Hood's letters are dripping with this grievance rhetoric that is, surprisingly, recognizable to modern audiences. As to the other comments regarding how well formulated each of the officers' writting is -- I'm going to have to whole-heartedly agree. Both demonstrate an artful style of formal writting that I struggle to imagine is common in contemporary America.
So very interesting..thank you
As a true Southerner, with at least 3 family members lost in the War Between the States, I must say that General Sherman stated his case very well.
Hood is a great example of the Peter principle. He should have never got above brigade commander.
Bragg was far worse. Soldiers in the Army of TN would shout, "Here comes Bragg, he's Hell on retreat!"
That was great! Thank you.
Absolutely your best comentary yet !! Every american this day should hear this !!
Terrific!
I love this. I just went to Atlanta last month and saw some of the civil war stuff. The museum was amazing.
Hood's personal sacrifice proves that he was brave while in an ignoble cause, and the opioid pain killers he took for his wounds undoubtedly impaired his cognitive ability, but he lost this correspondence battle as badly as he lost all his battles as a commanding general. Methinks he doth protest too much.
He certainly was fearless and a man of action. He was a reckless choice as the general in charge of an army. The issue regarding pain killers affecting his judgement is speculation. He justified his actions for the rest of his short life. He was only 48 when he died from yellow fever in New Orleans.
They weren’t opioids. They were the real organic deal :)
Good was a traitor nothing more nothing less
His battle record for the Atlanta to Nashville campaign was a present to the Union. Sherman Scofield and Thomas all crushed the Army of Tennessee. He failed at love earlier in his career and died from yellow fever at age 48. Don't forget he lost a leg and one arm was useless. Not the greatest life.
@@marklynch6426 People like you are truly pathetic. He was a greater man than you'll ever be.
Sherman opened up a correspondence with Hood, then stated he didn't start the correspondence at the end of his final letter. Interesting chain of events. I enjoyed this so much that I'll likely listen to your podcast again. Where could we find these letters online? I see there is a transcript. There must be accessible source material, as well. Thank you for doing such a stellar job of reading these letters and not taking a side.
People complaining about the language of today compared to these letters fail to note the lack of education for the vast majority of the nation at the time. These generals are products of a class that prized education, and only for the white, well bred, and wealthy. The pretentious speech recalls Shakespeare. It is indeed a fascinating series of letters, and it is these from which we must remember the history and the conditions thereof.
The eloquence of these letters is impressive, although the attitudes that motivated their writing (Hood's especially) strike one as a bit petty minded. One gets the impression that Hood, at this point of the war, found very little to do that could seriously impact Sherman's victorious and devastating campaign and perhaps composed these letters just to occupy his mind.
I always love reading letters between Southern and Union military men where it's quiet obvious both writers are getting mad. Their in the era of being gentlemen, while still eloquently talking trash to eachother. Lol. And then....the sign off...respectfully, your obedient servant...haha.
How can "obedient servants" write this to then continue to try to kill each other? Hardly obedient, to state the obvious.
Do the letters between Sherman and Wade Hampton during Sherman's march through South Carolina. Sherman didn't like his "foragers" getting hanged for violating females. That exchange is better than this one.
Those letters are actually a good lesson in Civility. . . a lot to be learned from two men who have honor thats actually tethered to the same code.
The Generals look like the ancestors of Jake Gyllenhaal and Collin Quinn!
Wow that was some serious tongue lashing on both sides. They're tearing each other down 😮😮😮
But, they’re each others’ “obedient and humble servants!”
What a dialogue and dive into their minds! It did cross my mind, however, that these two had nothing better to do with all the misery surrounding them than sooth their own egos. The first letter and the reply would have been good enough.
Two alpha male Generals on opposite sides having a conversation. Sherman won this exchange and had the last word.
"Your obedient servant..." Ha ha ha... Great pissing contest.
Standard way of closing letters.
@@oldcremona Of course I already knew that. I was pointing out the irony of letters that were basically saying, "You flaming a__hole" and closing with "Your obedient servant."
The present day analogous military closure would be "V/R" (for "Very Respectfully") followed by the writer's signature. That closing would be delivered even if the two individuals had contempt for one another :) Some things never change :) :)
"I have the honor of receiving"
What a wonderful and sad exchange. Both were hot-tempered and quick to take offense. If Sherman planned to goad Hood he couldn’t have done it better. He pricked him right in the pride and made it personal.
I wonder what the correspondence between Sherman and Johnston were like.
Well, Hood didn't fulfill his promise to fight to the death.
Well, they're obviously talking past each other as we do today. That said, they sure do it real pretty!
Just to chat, truly yours, your biggest fan, this is WT Sherman
Jake Gyllenhaal’s ancestor on the left. Or he’s a time traveler
Wow. That was absolutely amazing. I say John Bell Hood got the best of ol Sherman in that exchange.
Sherman: "Your the bad guys! Look at how many of my shells fell upon civilian dwellings when you chose to defend yourselves so closely to them!"
That was great!!!!
Hood will forever remain loved or hated, understood or misunderstood. The tenacious Hood of Gaines Mill and Sharpsburg or the foresighted Hood of Gettysburg day 2 vs. the desperate and grossly outnumbered Hood of Atlanta & Franklin (and let's not forget Spring Hill's fated error...). For me, no one in any armchair circa 2024 can pass judgement on the courage or character of a soldier (whose Texans loved him) and who literally gave and arm and a leg for his cause, regardless of what presentism thinks of that highly nuanced "cause" today. His story, from pre-war to post, is many things--with more extremes of commitment, tragedy and personal sacrifice than almost any of us today can imagine. The same, of course, is equally true of Union courage (from Reynolds to Grant).
The correspondence shared here is a fascinating look at two fascinating men--each with their own biases, pride, passion and even eloquence. As always, much praise to Ron for sharing these daily gems and insights from such a powerful window into our history.
Seeing Hood sacrifice so many men for no reason at Franklin makes me question his heart of hearts. What was the purpose? Was he so filled with hate it caused reason fly out the window? He had to know the war was lost. Was he hoping to die on the battlefield? His actions don' t seem like those of a sane man. A more reasonable course of action would have been to link up with Johnston. Did he really think he could win in Tenn?
My Grandfather died at Sharpsburg, 12th South Carolina Infantry.
@@DaveHenshaw clearly he was committed to the cause.. Said he would fight to the death.. Many of his men did, and I'm sure he gladly would have. I applaud his devotion to the cause, misbegotten though it was.
@@DaveHenshaw It was an extremely complex situation, but in as few words as possible, it was basically a hail marry. Hood thought that the enemy was in the process of starting a retreat, and therefore couldn't deploy all their forces, and Hood thought that the attack could succeed. He thought it might be the last chance his army might get to attack a portion of the enemy army before it was reinforced and grew even larger and even more unassailable.. And this was after several golden opportunities to attack or damage the enemy force had been missed, and he wasn't going to allow another potential opportunity to slip.
Until I read "Advance and Retreat," I could never imagine why Hood defended GA by running west/north. While I don't entirely agree with his strategy, he was a brave and strong man in a diminished body and I'll not argue with his position. Franklin and Nashville is another matter though...
General Hood chose the battlefield, he is responsible for the consequences. I remember he secretly wrote letters subverting and bad mouthing Gehneral Johnston, his commanding officer.
Fascinating correspondence between them. How were the letters preserved and put together so you could tell the story?
I am glad to hear this, it gives insight into both men. No matter how hard I try I find Hood headstrong, thoughtless and now profoundly long winded, much as I find J. Davis his superior. He might have spent more time planning than writing. Thanks for this
Is the Jonesboro being mentioned the Jonesboro in Tennessee?
Those words sum up the beliefs and goals of the North vs those of the South more succinctly than anything else I’ve seen.
Don't you love the "your most obedient servant" closing. Uh, right...
That was extremely interesting.
My affection for Sherman grows.
It's telling how Hood seems to sidestep any accountability for the politics and acts of treason which led to the unwinnable war of which he was now immersed, foisting that responsibility onto his superiors. Meanwhile he still addressed each individual claim and accusation in an attempt to justify it, thus demonstrating that he was well aware of all of the underlying factors leading to secession, as well as their implications. He appeals to God as a moral backer to his plight--proving that anyone can implore fictitious gods to validate whatever decisions they so choose. Then, as he is perpetually outmatched on the battlefield, Hood and other Confederate Generals retreat to sanctuary cities in an attempt to fortify their army, failing to accept the prevailing reality which is that they have embedded themselves into civilian population centers and put their own women and children at risk during a time of war.