Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
What he did, so to say, was give Grant a wakeup call of sorts. He sent Wilson to take control and rebuild the Union Cavalry. And build he did. One of the major problems at that time was a large percentage of the Union Cavalry was dismounted, untrained and poorly armed. Wilson did a remarkable job in the short time before Nashville. Even after Nashville when most of the Cavalry was moved to Gravely Springs and Waterloo, they were still short of mounts. The chase of Hood used up a large quantity of mounts. Lack of forage in Northern Alabama during the winter of '65 was another factor facing Wilson.
Once the refitting and remounting of the Cavalry was complete, it made them a force to be dealt with. It could be said that the raid into Middle Tennessee by Forrest helped bring him down in the end.
__________________
Located near Indianapolis, home of Col. Eli Lilly and the Eli Lilly Civil War Museum
Ole's answer is pretty much dead on. Hood did not disregard Forrest's flanking idea, he simply did not think there was sufficient daylight for such a maneuever. Cleburne is a realist. He knows the frontal assault will be a bloody affair and voices his concerns as a division commander should.
Right or wrong, Hood believes that Franklin is his last opportunity to crush Schofield. Seems to me a Virginian named Lee thought the same thing about Meade on July 3, 1863.
During the course of the war, Patrick Cleburne proved himself a very fine brigade and divisional commander with the strength of character to handle small independent commands. He was a s hard-hitting a divisional commander as the South had, and a tough defensive commander.
He might have made a good corps commander -- but that is a major step up in warfare. Many brilliant corps commanders don't do well when they move up (Hood, for example, who was nothing special as a Corps commander and pretty rotten as an Army commander). Although I am sure the political mess after Cleburne's arm-the-slaves proposal interferred with any move to promote him, his immediate commander and guru, Hardee, didn't seem to push very hard for him. Cleburne being brilliant at a higher level is a good guess, maybe, but not a slam-dunk.
Regards,
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
Nathan Bedford Forrest was at least as good as any cavalry commander in the Civil War, and far better than most.
Guessing what various lower-level commanders who never exercised large independent commands might have done does not cut it here. Forrest proved himself on major battlefields (Chickamauga, Shiloh and Ft. Donelson) as well as small ones. He excelled on raids -- and produced the most devastating defeat of a raiding force in the war (the Pursuit of Streight). He fought loyally under others as well as commanding independently. No one else had the success and breadth of cavalry command Forrest had except the following men: Stuart, Hampton, Wheeler, Sheridan, maybe Wilson at the end of the war.
If there is an outstanding example of how to fight a small force against a large one, Brice's Crossroads would be it. If you are looking for runner-up examples, most of them will also feature Forrest.
If you are looking for examples of great strategic cavalry raids, Forrest's name comes up often. No one ran those operations like Forrest. Stuart and Hampton had raids on a much lesser level, shorter and much more tactical. Wheeler never had a success to match any of Forrest's raids -- and often showed that he lost control of his troops and rode them into uselessness. Sheridan and Wilson showed some success -- but always against inferior forces, which Forrest never faced.
Wheeler was essentially a Bragg loyalist promoted beyond his ability because of his West Point background. Hood and Beauregard wanted him replaced in 1864, and Hampton was deliberately promoted over his head to take command in the Carolinas in 1865.
Perhaps most of all, pay attention to the respect Union commanders gave him. Sherman's comments are often seen. Grant's staff in 1864 noticed that Grant scarcely seemed to listen to reports about enemy cavalry movements -- unless he heard the name Forrest. Then he would stop whatever he was doing and listen carefully until he knew what was going on.
The South should have wished for a few more soldiers like "Old Nathan".
Regards,
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
Cleburne supports the strategic move, but opposes the tactical decision to actually make the headlong assault at Franklin.
Forrest is trying to flank but is checked by Union calvary.
Forrest's troops are short on ammo at Franklin, after their actions of the last few days. They almost ran out at Spring Hill the day before, and are going with what they have been able to scrounge or borrow from other commands. Their trains had been left behind with S. D. Lee at Columbia, and were not up yet.
Two of Forrest's three divisions are actually on the flanks of the assault at Franklin, while Forrest is trying a wider movement to cross the river with a single division. Not surprisingly, he is driven back after some initial success by the heavier force he encounters.
Forrest's proposal seems to have been to take 2 cavalry divisions and an infantry division to cross the Harpeth to the East. That would probably have succeeded, but likely would have just confirmed Schofield in his decision to abandon Franklin during the night. It *might* have then resulted in a running fight along the road to Nashville that night and the following day. We can speculate how that might turn out. But if Schofield can get back near Nashville intact, Thomas and his newly arrived reinforcements (A. J. Smith and 2 divisions) will save the situation.
Regards,
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
Ole wrote concerning N.B. Forrest: "Did Sherman come back? Did Thomas panic? What exactly did he do except disrupt the sleep of a few generals?"
Ole, your piercing yankee intellect is still alive and well. Great question.
No, the day-to-day results of Forrest's efforts were not all that evident. What he did that mattered most, in my humble opinion, was the saving of lives. That kind of statistic never makes the news. First example, obviously, was Ft. Donelson. This man took charge of the situation when his fellow officers ducked their heads in surrender.
After December 18, 1864, he, (with a little help from E.C. Walthall) saved the lives and futures of the surviving men of the Army of Tennessee through his rear-guard action. No small feet or feat either. He was feted for that effort by an upping of rank to Lt. General. I doubt his take-home pay increased significantly, but through his actions thousands of men had a future that might not otherwise have occurred. I certainly wouldn't be typing this message had Whit Parker not been assisted by Forrest during that time. That might not sound like much to many folks, but it is to me. You can record me as a Forrest fan, warts and all.
__________________
Ancestors in US Army: 13th TN Cav; 10th TN Cav; 3rd NC Inf
Ancestors in CSA Army: 48th VA; 63rd VA, 5th NC Cav; 37th NC
Wife and Grandson's CSA: 15th AL, 51st GA, 41st TN; 36th TN; GA Mil 1197 Dist
Forrest merits hero status. He just wasn't the greatest.
ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
I don't hand out "greatest" awards. Not my job, mon.
ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
