Civil War History - "What if..." DiscussionsWhat if they had attacked instead of digging in...? What if he was in charge of the army instead...? Did you ever have a "What if..." question, and you weren't sure where to post it? Here's the place to ask these speculative questions!
One must remember that Nathan Bedford Forrest was not part of General Joe Johnston's army in Georgia. Joe Wheeler, a West Point graduate, was in charge of the Confederate cavalry.
Forrest was still learning his way around organized combat early in 1864 having seen only Shiloh and Chickamauga. Again, because of his lack of credentials from West Point and his good sense to not embrace outdated Napoleonic warfare, he didn't fit into the crowd.
I believe Forrest got shelved by the Confederate leadership, early in 1864, and put in command in Mississippi and Alabama.
I don't believe he was shelved, he simply had never risen to a point where he could have been "shelved". He was operating as a more or less sole cavalry operation, yes, raiding if you will, in Tennessee and northern Mississippi and Alabama. He and Wheeler were covering a large territory which was crucial to the outcome of the war, particularly Nashville which Forrest was never able to recapture, nor stop for very long the Nashville-Chattanooga railroad which essentially remained in Union control the entire war.
As great as some say Forrest was in command, the Confederacy never gave him a command of great importance. Union cavalry general Benjamin Grierson, a capable officer, was also bypassed for any greater command. Another volunteer, not a West Point graduate. Pedigree counted for something in the Civil War; both sides.
Yes, Forrest had no pedigree, just good sense.
Some may say the battle of Selma was unfair. But war is unfair. Valor doesn't always carry a battle. Nathan Bedford Forrest lost at Selma.
By April 2 1865 in Selma, Forrest had no army, just old men, worn out soldiers and boys. That, as others have stated, wasn't a contest, therefore he couldn't have "lost". The cards had long since been dealt.
I'm must writing here to make this silly software think my message is longer.
I don't believe he was shelved, he simply had never risen to a point where he could have been "shelved". He was operating as a more or less sole cavalry operation, yes, raiding if you will, in Tennessee and northern Mississippi and Alabama. He and Wheeler were covering a large territory which was crucial to the outcome of the war, particularly Nashville which Forrest was never able to recapture, nor stop for very long the Nashville-Chattanooga railroad which essentially remained in Union control the entire war.
Larry,
Forrest had proposed to Bragg that he be detached to Mississippi and West Tennessee in August of 1863. It appears that when the storm blew up between Forrest and Bragg (early October), it was merely one more piece in the command chaos that led to the removal of Polk, Hindman and D. H. Hill. Jefferson Davis had arrived at the Army about then, and asked Bragg about the August proposal. Bragg said the request could now be granted; Davis met Forrest at Montgomery to discuss it, and on Oct 29 Davis wrote Bragg from Atlanta approving Forrest's plan.
It appears that this proposal from August was revived as a way to get Forrest away from Bragg and make use of his services somewhere else, probably by Davis. Bragg went along with it, but seems to have taken the opportunity to get rid of some troops he didn't want by swapping units for those requested.
While Forrest did do some raiding up into Tennessee at this time, he spent more effort defending Mississippi against Federal forays. This included Sherman's *******n expedition as well as the repeated thrusts Sherman aimed into northern Mississippi to keep Forrest tied down. As a result, Forrest didn't even get to make an attempt on Sherman's RR until after Atlanta fell.
The approval of Forrest's plan to raid the railroads came on the evening of September, 5th when he and General Richard Taylor met at Merdian, Mississippi. Forrest was on his way to Mobile.
This was a renewed effort to convince the Confederate high command that the rail lines that were supplying Sherman's forces should be destroyed. In fact, many of the Generals such as Hood and Bragg were beginning to consider that Forrest was correct in his thinking. General Joe Johnston had approved such a raid at least five time, but it had fallen on deaf ears. Now Johnston had been pushed back into Atlanta and Atlanta had fallen. It was then that General John Bell Hood took command of the Army of Tennessee.
In light of the fact that Forrest had proposed raids against the rail roads many times before and that they had been brushed aside each time, he was reluctant to take such an undertaking. The two men conferred for sometime. Forrest wanted to know how his command would be supplied and what other resources would be made available to him.
__________________ Located near Indianapolis, home of Col. Eli Lilly and the Eli Lilly Civil War Museum
Actually, I think that his cavalry was much like a football or B'ball team. You take the same players and put them with a different coach and they play better or worse but not the same. Take example of Buford in September of '64 after the raid into Middle Tennessee.
He headed to Huntsville, surrounded the town, told the garrison that he was Forrest and to give it up. After being rebuked twice, he left.
I just think that Forrest had a way of getting more out of his men than anyone else could. In fact, He may have gotten more from them that they could do. I also should add that I don't think that if he had had a West Point or VMI education, that he could have done much better, maybe worse.
__________________ Located near Indianapolis, home of Col. Eli Lilly and the Eli Lilly Civil War Museum
Did he not beat him at Franklin/Nashville?
I'm wondering if Forrest's greatest strength was in his own Cavalry raiding, not in organized battle under command of whatever general.
General Wilson graduated from West Point in June of 1860. He entered the Topographical Engineers, and spent his career from then through December of 1863 as either an engineer officer or a staff officer (ADC to both McClellan and Grant along the way).
He was then appointed to be Chief of the Cavalry Bureau in January of 1864 -- an administrative command -- where he remained until 17 April 1864. His experience in the field with cavalry consisted entirely of service under Sheridan in Virginia/the Shenandoah from then until September 30. He and Sheridan seem to have caused sparks to fly, and Sheridan was probably happy to see him go West to command the AoC cavalry in October of 1864.
As a result, Wilson has only about 5 months of in-the-field cavalry experience at any level when he comes to Tennessee in 1864. If you throw in his three months in Washington in charge of the Cavalry Bureau, he has some eight months with the Cavalry. He was a tough, intelligent soldier who learned quickly. He was not up to Forrest's level yet by a long shot.
In November, Hood's invasion of Tennessee starts. In the opening of that, at Spring Hill, Forrest completely baffled Wilson. On November 30, having just escaped from Spring Hill and arrived at Franklin, General Schofield wired this to General Thomas: "... 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. ..."
Forrest was not present at the battle of Nashville, having been sent off towards Murfreesboro on a fool's errand by Hood. Wilson's cavalry did moderately well there, and he engaged in a hard pursuit afterwards that is quite good. Yet when Forrest himself rejoins Hood and takes over command of the rearguard (December 20), all of Wilson's success slows and then stops. We see instead a stiffening rearguard gaining time for the retreat of the army. On December 25th, Forrest ambushed Wilson 7 miles south of Pulaski. On the 26th, he did it again at Sugar Creek. Wilson backed off. On the 27th, Forrest crossed the Tennessee unmolested.
There is absolutely nothing that happens in the Franklin & Nashville Campaign to lead anyone to believe Wilson could fight it out on equal terms with Forrest.
Tim, your summary of the Tennessee campaign is quite concise and accurate. The difference in these two generals is relatively simple.
A West Point graduate with a good military education but little field experience except what he learned dealing with Forrest and Wheeler in north Alabama after he came west;
versus N.B. Forrest with 3 months of formal education somewhere near Chapel Hill in what is now rural Marshall County, Tennessee but who started his command career in the Battle at Shiloh and gained increasing hands on lessons from his somewhat unconventional stye, just trying to use logic and trying not to make the same mistake twice.
After 2-1/2 or so years of fierce combat, albeit small battles, aside from Shiloh, Chickamauga and Missonary Ridge, Forrest was "trained" for field command. His actions are legend. That's why I agree with your assessment. With equal supplies, horses and his own recruited men, Forrest was by far the superior. The table wasn't level at Selma in 1865, but by then the 'war' was over.
Tim, your summary of the Tennessee campaign is quite concise and accurate. The difference in these two generals is relatively simple.
Thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by larry_cockerham
A West Point graduate with a good military education but little field experience except what he learned dealing with Forrest and Wheeler in north Alabama after he came west;
Not quite. He'd commanded a cavalry division under Sheridan in 1864 from Wilderness to the Shenandoah, facing Stuart, Hampton, and the rest of the boys. He was far from green when he came West to the AoC, but it was the first time he was "the man" for all the cavalry except when he was on a raid or while Sheridan was away from Grant's army on the Trevalian Raid.
I think he never faced Wheeler as well. He was still in Virginia when the September raids took place, and I think he was at HQ in Nashville for the Johnsonville raid in early November.
So, realistically, his first time where he was the commander of an army's cavalry in the field was in the Franklin & Nashville Campaign.
versus N.B. Forrest with 3 months of formal education somewhere near Chapel Hill in what is now rural Marshall County, Tennessee but who started his command career in the Battle at Shiloh and gained increasing hands on lessons from his somewhat unconventional stye, just trying to use logic and trying not to make the same mistake twice. [/quote]
Forrest, by contrast, had been operating as an independent corps commander over a wide area for the last year, with victories such as Brice's Crossroads and Okolona studding his record, preceded by more than two years as an active commander of cavalry at the brigade, division, and corps level both independently and with an army.
Forrest was a much older and more mature man. He had been a fantastically successful business man in both the slave-trader and then the cotton plantation businesses, being accorded a millionaire in 1860. His businesses succeeded because he ran them very well, with great attention to detail and a lot of energy. He was also very good at recognizing and using the talent of others, and inspired great loyalty.
The keys to Forrest's success are usually swift action and savage fighting based on detailed preparation beforehand. He attracted a number of veteran soldiers as subordinates, using their experience and knowledge to fill in the gaps in his own. And he rarely repeated mistakes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by larry_cockerham
After 2-1/2 or so years of fierce combat, albeit small battles, aside from Shiloh, Chickamauga and Missonary Ridge, Forrest was "trained" for field command. His actions are legend. That's why I agree with your assessment. With equal supplies, horses and his own recruited men, Forrest was by far the superior. The table wasn't level at Selma in 1865, but by then the 'war' was over.
Yes, that's pretty much so. He was on his way to Mississippi when the battle of Chattanooga was fought, though, or he might have shot Bragg in a fury. <g>
"I think he never faced Wheeler as well. He was still in Virginia when the September raids took place, and I think he was at HQ in Nashville for the Johnsonville raid in early November."
In a sense Wilson had "met" Forrest and Wheeler through his subcommander Edward Hatch who in turn had a long "association" with this pair of southern cavalrymen. The story of Hatch and Forrest has long interested me as an ancestor of mine was briefly in the command of one or the other of these men for a brief period. Both were fine officers as was Wilson.
"I think he never faced Wheeler as well. He was still in Virginia when the September raids took place, and I think he was at HQ in Nashville for the Johnsonville raid in early November."
In a sense Wilson had "met" Forrest and Wheeler through his subcommander Edward Hatch who in turn had a long "association" with this pair of southern cavalrymen. The story of Hatch and Forrest has long interested me as an ancestor of mine was briefly in the command of one or the other of these men for a brief period. Both were fine officers as was Wilson.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
