Face Off Stuart, Forrest, & Sheridan who?

[TheGallantPelham17]

Originally Posted by Elennsar

Was Pelham an amazing officer? Definately. Was he a commander of cavalrymen? No.

I dispute that he was a Great Cavalryman only because his branch was, however closely linked to tactically, different than the cavalry. I cannot make that part too clear...its not meant to say he was any less great, simply that his greatness was the greatness of an artillerist and not a leader of horsemen.

Good to see him mentioned...I don't think he made Stuart as invincible as he was (played a role but not the only role), but any list of the great subordinates Stuart had must include him.

I disagree. What made Pelham such a brilliant officer was his innovation (and courage) with horses. Pelham grew up on a 1,000 acre farm and was a known horse expert, even at his young age. When Pelham died, Stuart was an emotional wreck and lost tons of confidence and never had the great success afterward that he did when Pelham was alive.

Stuart was "missing in action" at Gettysburg and I believe (as do others) that he didn't come guns a blazing onto that Pennsylvania battlefield because he didn't have Pelham at that point.

[5fish]

I see all those who worship of the highwayman Forrest have forgotten one thing.

I have notice that you Forrest worshipers seem to have forgotten a Union general James Wilson who easily check the thug Forrest during the Hood Franklin to Nashville Campaign.

Not only did Union cavalryman James Wilson not only check the murder Forrest but went on to terrorized AL., MS.. and GA. with his cavalry raids until May of 1865.

Where was the over-hyped Forrest when Wilson's cavalry was romping cross the south taken Selma, Columbus and destroying the infrastructure of those Southern states.

Those who worship the criminal Forrest as the best cavalry man. You all must acknowledge that James Wilson is the best cavalry man of the war for he easily outperformed Forrest time and time again....

Change your heathen ways and worship Wilson as the best cavalry man of the civil war...

The amazing thing is Wilson only became a cavalry man in 1864, before that an engineer.

[TheGallantPelham17]

Originally Posted by 5fish

I see all those who worship of the highwayman Forrest have forgotten one thing.

I have notice that you Forrest worshipers seem to have forgotten a Union general James Wilson who easily check the thug Forrest during the Hood Franklin to Nashville Campaign.

Not only did Union cavalryman James Wilson not only check the murder Forrest but went on to terrorized AL., MS.. and GA. with his cavalry raids until May of 1865.

Where was the over-hyped Forrest when Wilson's cavalry was romping cross the south taken Selma, Columbus and destroying the infrastructure of those Southern states.

Those who worship the criminal Forrest as the best cavalry man. You all must acknowledge that James Wilson is the best cavalry man of the war for he easily outperformed Forrest time and time again....

Change your heathen ways and worship Wilson as the best cavalry man of the civil war...

The amazing thing is Wilson only became a cavalry man in 1864, before that an engineer.

What does "change your heathen ways" mean? But, since you have a signature line with a quote from a heathen in his own right (Jesse Jackson), I guess that actually tells me all I need to know.

Wilson and his men were thugs (not gentlemen by any means), so you can say that it works both ways. His men terrorized my great, great grandmother and her two little girls (who were home alone) when his thugs came through Lowndes County, Alabama. They stole valuables and destroyed all of their clothes for good measure. My late grandmother always talked about that and my mom has never let me forget it either!

[Elennsar]

Gentlemen (or individuals professing to civilized behavior and equiped with male sex organs if "gentlemen" doesn't fit), lets not get in a "My enemy was more monsterous than your enemy." contest. At least not in this thread. I'm sure there's room on the boards for a thread for how "General _____ should have been killed for crimes against God and Woman." (No, I'm not being sarcastic) if you feel you need to wrestle with it.

As to Pelham (the officer)...

Innovation and courage with horses? Yes. As part of using artillery. Even with his work being almost always with the cavalry, he (Pelham) never commanded cavalry. So I can't consider him a cavalryman without him having commanded cavalry. Not disputing any of the rest other than the details of which branch (which is not meant to be a nitpicker's distinction).

Treating him as a great cavalryman because his work was in unison with the cavalry is not unlike treating (General Henry Jackson) Hunt of the Army of the Potomac as a great infantryman.

As to Stuart being an emotional wreck and losing tons of confidence after Pelham died...

Stuart was unquestionable upset and deeply mourned Pelham's death. This is well established.

It is also well established that Beckham (Pelham's replacement) was no Pelham (which does not mean he was incompetent, but no one calls him the Gallant Robert.)

It is also well established that the Federal cavalry was on a steady climb to gaining confidence, good leaders, and competent understanding of what it is supposed to do in the field. This played far more of a role in Stuart's less successful career in 1863 and 1864 than depression over Lieutenant Colonel Pelham's untimely death.

I'm open to sources that indicate otherwise, but the fact the Federal cavalry was improving (however slowly and painfully) has to be acknowledged as helping make Stuart's job more difficult.

Somehow, the idea that Stuart was so depressed and so incapaciated by grief at the death of Pelham that he was unable to act as well as he had before feels to me (I'm pretty sure this isn't your intention, I'm just expressing how it looks to me reading it) more of an attack on Stuart's ability to deal with emotional agony and stress than proving Pelham's irreplacability.

Again, that's my impression of what it would mean about the situation for Stuart to be devastated (and it staying that way) from grief, not an attempt to say you were Stuart-bashing.

[Baggage Handler #2]

Amateurs talk tactics; professionals talk logistics.

Forrest & Stuart make very romantic, dashing figures. But if you're commanding an army in hostile territory who do you want. Only two of the choices have any track record of operating as cavalry (not scouts, not raiders, but in support of an army) in territory with hostile locals, and only one of them didn't ball it up.

Now, who would have been the best, given the opportunity... Different Q.

[5fish]

Gallant,
I am sorry your forebears had to feel the pain of Grant's "Total War" policy. Your family history does support my argument that Cavalryman James Wilson was superior to the cult figure Forrest.

Where was the vile Forrest when Wilson came through to give the punishment of "Total War"?

Once Wilson shows up on the western seen the flesh seller Forrest was nothing but second rate highwayman.

Forrest is nothing but a product of hype by some "lost cause" historians...


A accusing thought....

[ole]

Forrest is nothing but a product of hype by some "lost cause" historians...

INCOMING!!!

ole

[trice]

Originally Posted by 5fish

I see all those who worship of the highwayman Forrest have forgotten one thing.

I have notice that you Forrest worshipers seem to have forgotten a Union general James Wilson who easily check the thug Forrest during the Hood Franklin to Nashville Campaign.

Now that is inaccurate. Here's what Wilson's commanding officer said at the time:
=====
FRANKLIN, November 30, 1864--9.50 a.m.
Major-General THOMAS,
Nashville:
My trains are coming in all right. Half the troops are here, and the other half about five miles out, coming on in good order, with light skirmishing. I will have all across the river this evening. Wilson is here, and has his cavalry on my flank. I do not know where Forrest is; he may have gone east, but, no doubt, will strike our flank and rear again soon. Wilson is entirely unable to cope with him. Of course I cannot prevent Hood from crossing the Harpeth whenever he may attempt it. Do you desire me to hold on here until compelled to fall back?
J. M. SCHOFIELD,
Major-General.
=====

Originally Posted by 5fish

Not only did Union cavalryman James Wilson not only check the murder Forrest but went on to terrorized AL., MS.. and GA. with his cavalry raids until May of 1865.

On the retreat from Nashville, Wilson's pursuit suddenly became ineffective on the day Forrest arrived from Murfreesboro. Forrest did that type of thing to many people.

Originally Posted by 5fish

Where was the over-hyped Forrest when Wilson's cavalry was romping cross the south taken Selma, Columbus and destroying the infrastructure of those Southern states.

Wilson did very well on this raid, and beat Forrest handily. But then Wilson had better weapons. He captured a copy of Forrest's orders (just like McClellan before Antietam) and so knew where his forces were and what they were doing. He captured the Prussian engineer who designed the Selma fortifications -- and the Prussian was quite glad to show Wilson the weaknesses in the defense once things were explained to him.

Originally Posted by 5fish

Those who worship the criminal Forrest as the best cavalry man. You all must acknowledge that James Wilson is the best cavalry man of the war for he easily outperformed Forrest time and time again....

Actually, "time and time again" comes down to once, when all the factors were heavily in his favor. Wilson was a good cavalry commander by the end of the war -- but he wasn't all that good in Virginia, or in Tennessee, in 1864.

Tim

[larry_cockerham]

Originally Posted by 5fish

Gallant,
I am sorry your forebears had to feel the pain of Grant's "Total War" policy. Your family history does support my argument that Cavalryman James Wilson was superior to the cult figure Forrest.

Where was the vile Forrest when Wilson came through to give the punishment of "Total War"?

Once Wilson shows up on the western seen the flesh seller Forrest was nothing but second rate highwayman.

Forrest is nothing but a product of hype by some "lost cause" historians...


A accusing thought....

5fish, I thought I had enlightened you concerning N.B. Forrest previously, but apparently it didn't take.

Alas, I've taken it on myself to actually study the career and some of the thoughts and writings of James Harrison Wilson who was the commander of my great great grandfather James Patterson Cockerham, a farrier with the 10th TN US Cav. James H. Wilson was a fair general in that he followed orders, didn't get killed, and learned as best he could.

During the campaign in norther Alabama and in Tennessee from about September 15, 1864 until the war's end, he was under the indirect and sometimes very direct tutelage of Bedford Forrest. I'll be happy to send my book, most of which has been posted in the western theatre portion of this forum as I chronicled that period, mostly taken from the writings of Wilson and Forrest and the official records. Wilson turned Forrest at the Harpeth River at Franklin on November 29, 1864. That's about the only time until the battle at Selma on April 2, 1865, when Forrest was missing his army aside from the remnants of the Forrest Escort and a few men and boys who were up against the largest mounted force of the entire war. These Union soldiers had learned much from none other than N.B. Forrest during the previous 5 months.

They paid with their blood at places like Nashville, Rutherford Creek, Richland Creek, Anthony's Hill, and in the valley at Sugar Creek. Wilson performed very well at the battle for Nashville. He was opposing Hood, not Forrest.

The rest of the time he learned from the master. Wilson couldn't keep up with his own forces in early 1865. Forrest had to help him with that. These two grew to know each other quite well along with Edward Hatch. Both US generals admitted that their opponent was worthy of his fame. You should do the same.

Yes, I too was skeptical of Forrest when I first heard the hoopla around these parts. After 10 years of study, I don't hesitate to write ramblings like this one. Like the little boy who told about his granny getting run over by the reindeer at Christmas, as it relates to N.B. Forrest, GG Grandpas and I believe. (Both the one who was chasing and the one who rode in a wagon under his protection during the retreat from Middle Tennessee.) Alas, compared to Forrest, Wilson was a rookie and he freely admitted it. Read his reports. Leading his entire cavalry into the foggy creek at Sugar Creek for Forrest and Walthal to send them back up Puncheon Creek Road two miles toward Minor Hill was not Wilson's finest hour. Yes, Wilson later captured Alabama and Georgia. That's a fact, but remember that the Army of Tennessee had left for North Carolina and Wilson had 14,000 fresh men and horses at his rear. Forrest and Taylor were left at Selma with a few old men and boys and a few guns Forrest had 'borrowed' from Wilson earlier.

[larry_cockerham]

Tim, many more times that thrice, has written the truth with precision to which we have become accustomed. He is to be saluted. 'Ol Bedford sends his regards as well.

5fish, Wilson only became a calvaryman AFTER he met Nathan Bedford Forrest and Edward C. Hatch.