Where would you rate Nathan Bedford Forrest among Civil War Cavalry Generals? I think He was the best in the Confederate Army. He was audacious and extremely aggressive which are good qualities to have in that position.
Joined Jun 2012
5,689 Posts | 2+
Hippy town U.S.A.!
Joined Aug 2010
8,654 Posts | 844+
VA
I would disagree with the classification of Forrest as cavalry; he was effectively mounted infantry. He did not usually perform the traditional roles of cavalry, such as reconnaissance and screening, and he didn't do a very good job of them when he did. He was tactically brilliant, but it's easy to rack up a impressive W-L record when your targets are rear-echelon garrisons and third-string armies. Strategically, he didn't make much of an impact. Wade Hampton and Stuart were the Confederacy's best cavalrymen.
Joined Jun 2012
5,689 Posts | 2+
Hippy town U.S.A.!
Joined Aug 2010
8,654 Posts | 844+
VA
Fitz wasn't really that great. He had a few very good days, and was mediocre the rest of the time.
Joined Oct 2009
23,286 Posts | 99+
Maryland
Forrest's fighting spirit makes for amusing reading - like the time he ran down and knifed the man who attempted to murder him, or the time he lifted a Union soldier onto his horse to use a human shield.
But as a human being he was repulsive to an extreme - slave-driver before the War, murderer of surrendered men at least once during the War, and Klansman after the War. In all fairness, there are claims that Forrest left the Klan when it became too extreme for his tastes, and he supposedly called for racial harmony late in his life.
I haven't done more than a cursory study of Forrest from a military perspective, but what little I have seen aligns with Viperlord's assessment. He probably falls into that category of historical figures who could be considered 'overrated' (whatever that means, exactly).
I can vaguely understand his appeal as a Confederate celebrity; compared to the immaculate, untouchable Lee, Forrest was rough and openly ruthless, yet probably much more approachable; being a self-made man, he is easier to admire and relate to. He seems to be the stereotypical racist, conservative, gun-toting white male American in his most gritty and spectacular form.
Definitely not one of the Civil War's more cuddly, politically correct heroes, probably overrated as a military man, and arguably a murderous racist bastard, but an interesting figure all the same.
But as a human being he was repulsive to an extreme - slave-driver before the War, murderer of surrendered men at least once during the War, and Klansman after the War. In all fairness, there are claims that Forrest left the Klan when it became too extreme for his tastes, and he supposedly called for racial harmony late in his life.
I haven't done more than a cursory study of Forrest from a military perspective, but what little I have seen aligns with Viperlord's assessment. He probably falls into that category of historical figures who could be considered 'overrated' (whatever that means, exactly).
I can vaguely understand his appeal as a Confederate celebrity; compared to the immaculate, untouchable Lee, Forrest was rough and openly ruthless, yet probably much more approachable; being a self-made man, he is easier to admire and relate to. He seems to be the stereotypical racist, conservative, gun-toting white male American in his most gritty and spectacular form.
Definitely not one of the Civil War's more cuddly, politically correct heroes, probably overrated as a military man, and arguably a murderous racist bastard, but an interesting figure all the same.
Nathan Bedford Forrest
I would say that he carved out his own niche as a cavalryman. An instinctive tactician and a good one . Sort of a scoundral but a fighter , one of those not much liked after the war but obviously valued while the bullits were flying.
I would say that he carved out his own niche as a cavalryman. An instinctive tactician and a good one . Sort of a scoundral but a fighter , one of those not much liked after the war but obviously valued while the bullits were flying.
Joined Jul 2010
7,575 Posts | 16+
Georgia, USA
So would you put forrest in the same catagory as William Quantrill and Bloody Bill Anderson?
Joined Mar 2009
25,361 Posts | 13+
Texas
I would rate him as any side, South or North, would want him on their
side and performing his duties as hard and well as he did. That to me
rates him in the top echelon of commanders.
Joined Oct 2009
23,286 Posts | 99+
Maryland
Those men were effectively land-locked pirates. Forrest had at least a faint sense of human decency and was able to behave with gentlemanly conduct.
Joined Aug 2010
8,654 Posts | 844+
VA
No, because Buford was in the east. Ironically though, Buford's cousin Abraham was one of Forrest's officers. Forrest did fight a Federal cavalry division of James H. Wilson's corps, commanded by Edward Hatch, at Franklin, where he had a numeric advantage; they stopped him dead in his tracks.
Joined Aug 2010
8,654 Posts | 844+
VA
Even your average pirate of the Golden Age would happily spare you as long as you surrendered. Quantrill and Anderson lacked even that decency.
More History Discussions
Trending History Discussions
-
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles? - Version 7- Started by DiocletianIsBetterThanYou
- Replies: 861
-
-
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles? - Version 5
- Started by DiocletianIsBetterThanYou
- Replies: 3K
-
The Diversity Of Early African Architecture/Ruins Thread- Started by Kilwa Sultanate
- Replies: 2K
-