Who was the greatest Cavalier Buford, Custer, Gregg, Stuart, Hampton, Ashby, Forrest, And Why?

Who was the Greatest cavalier of the American Civil War?

  • Buford

  • Custer

  • Gregg

  • Stuart

  • Hampton

  • Ashby

  • Forrest


Results are only viewable after voting.
I don't know. I lurked on this forum forever because it was intimidating as bejammers. In this thread I can't even ' like ' a lot of posts because it implies I knew the information in the first place, which would be clear nonsense. ( Although yes, @War Horse , Sickles as a swear word existed in the Huson family for 150 years. Mom kind of polishes the animosity, like the family silver. You don't wish to be there. )

The thing is, it's astonishing how many clippings from threads like this there are in my files- it's Civil War text book. No one is over-complimenting anyone, it's just that has anyone had as neat a synopsis of why in blazes Spotsylvania was such a mess? I never knew although hysterically inherited a loathing for Sheridan, too. Never connected the two. Getting bogged down in defining words drags the sheer fascination to a stroll- and I don't mean to be snarky or critical, honest.

Btw, War Horse. It's possible to edit the thread title? How funny would that be, after 10 pages of discussion?
 
In some circles a guy like Forrest could be called a glorified guerilla.
I hear you, but not what he did in north Alabama and with the AOT and afterwards practically running a small army on his own.
... I definitely don't consider Forrest to be a cavalryman. He typically performed none of the usual roles of cavalry and was generally only effective when operating in independent command as a guerrilla and raider. He no more qualifies as conventional cavalry than does Mosby.

My impression to the contrary is that during the summer of '63 and through the Tullahoma and Chickamauga campaigns Forrest was very much filling the traditional and conventional role of cavalry acting as Bragg's left flank. In this capacity he not only supported the army but actually brought about the Battle of Chickamauga, during which he performed almost identically as had Buford at Gettysburg by acting in the mounted infantry role until the footsoldiers came up. On the first day corps commander Lt. Gen. Daniel Harvey Hill supposedly asked who the infantry protecting the right flank of his corps was and was told it was Forrest's cavalry, whereupon he rode over to congratulate its commander. High praise indeed from one of the Whoever saw a dead cavalryman? school!

Following Chickamauga when Bragg stripped Forrest of most of his command (and inspiring Forrest's notorious comments) he removed to Alabama-Mississippi and reverted to the raider role, although retaining the mounted infantry tactics that proved so successful at Brice's Crossroads in June, 1864.
 
I have to cast my vote for Gen. Buford. He knew his mission AND stuck with it. He had the foresight to equip his men with repeating rifles and was superb at Gettysburg.

Oy. That myth again.

I hate to burst your bubble, but there was not one single Spencer in Buford's command at Gettysburg. Not one. The only Spencers in the Army of the Potomac were all of the 5th Michigan and four companies of the 6th Michigan.

Before I wrote my book on Buford's division at Gettysburg, I examined the ordnance returns of the Army of the Potomac for June 30, 1863, and there was not one single Spencer reported in Buford's division. About 65% of his command was armed with Sharps carbines, and the rest were armed with other similar single-shot breechloading carbines.

IMHO, that only makes what Buford accomplished all the more remarkable.
 
Oy. That myth again.

I hate to burst your bubble, but there was not one single Spencer in Buford's command at Gettysburg. Not one. The only Spencers in the Army of the Potomac were all of the 5th Michigan and four companies of the 6th Michigan.

Before I wrote my book on Buford's division at Gettysburg, I examined the ordnance returns of the Army of the Potomac for June 30, 1863, and there was not one single Spencer reported in Buford's division. About 65% of his command was armed with Sharps carbines, and the rest were armed with other similar single-shot breechloading carbines.

IMHO, that only makes what Buford accomplished all the more remarkable.

This thread proves why @Eric Wittenberg is one of or perhaps the leading expert on Civil War Cavalry. I don't say this lightly. He also has a firm grasp/understanding of military discipline and insubordination (that must the lawyer in him).

'Fortune Favors The Bold' and audacity is a quality which Stuart and Forrest had. This doesn't make them great commanders.

Some men make great peacetime soldiers, while others are born for war. I have known and served with both.

"I'd like to have two armies: one for display with lovely guns, tanks, little soldiers, staffs, distinguished and doddering Generals, and dear little regimental officers who would be deeply concerned over their General's bowel movements or their Colonel's piles, an army that would be shown for a modest fee on every fairground in the country. The other would be the real one, composed entirely of young enthusiasts in camouflage uniforms, who would not be put on display, but from whom impossible efforts would be demanded and to whom all sorts of tricks would be taught. That's the army in which I should like to fight.”

―by Jean Lartéguy

I-Grande-12957-jean-larteguy-le-dernier-centurion.net.jpg
 
This thread proves why @Eric Wittenberg is one of or perhaps the leading expert on Civil War Cavalry. I don't say this lightly. He also has a firm grasp/understanding of military discipline and insubordination (that must the lawyer in him).

Thank you for the kind words. I've spent my entire adult life trying to learn and understand these things. And yes, the lawyer in me is strong. It's who and what I am, whether I like that or not. :smile:
 
I didn't know that, Eric. Thanks.

You're welcome. I've spent years trying to defeat that particular myth, which, thanks to Shelby Foote's inaccuracy, which was then repeated by Ed Longacre, refuses to die or go away. There's an entire appendix to my Buford book that addresses this issue in detail, including spelling out what weapons were carried by each of the regiments in Buford's two divisions on July 1.
 
This thread proves why @Eric Wittenberg is one of or perhaps the leading expert on Civil War Cavalry. I don't say this lightly. He also has a firm grasp/understanding of military discipline and insubordination (that must the lawyer in him).

'Fortune Favors The Bold' and audacity is a quality which Stuart and Forrest had. This doesn't make them great commanders.

Some men make great peacetime soldiers, while others are born for war. I have known and served with both.

"I'd like to have two armies: one for display with lovely guns, tanks, little soldiers, staffs, distinguished and doddering Generals, and dear little regimental officers who would be deeply concerned over their General's bowel movements or their Colonel's piles, an army that would be shown for a modest fee on every fairground in the country. The other would be the real one, composed entirely of young enthusiasts in camouflage uniforms, who would not be put on display, but from whom impossible efforts would be demanded and to whom all sorts of tricks would be taught. That's the army in which I should like to fight.”

―by Jean Lartéguy

View attachment 119340
Sounds like he would have voted for Forrest! Lol!
 
My impression to the contrary is that during the summer of '63 and through the Tullahoma and Chickamauga campaigns Forrest was very much filling the traditional and conventional role of cavalry acting as Bragg's left flank. In this capacity he not only supported the army but actually brought about the Battle of Chickamauga, during which he performed almost identically as had Buford at Gettysburg by acting in the mounted infantry role until the footsoldiers came up. On the first day corps commander Lt. Gen. Daniel Harvey Hill supposedly asked who the infantry protecting the right flank of his corps was and was told it was Forrest's cavalry, whereupon he rode over to congratulate its commander. High praise indeed from one of the Whoever saw a dead cavalryman? school!

Following Chickamauga when Bragg stripped Forrest of most of his command (and inspiring Forrest's notorious comments) he removed to Alabama-Mississippi and reverted to the raider role, although retaining the mounted infantry tactics that proved so successful at Brice's Crossroads in June, 1864.
James N. . . that's a great synopsis of Forrest's attempts to operate as a classic, albeit untrained Cavalry Commander.
He tried to fulfill the same role at Shiloh as well.

I agree that in the end, he was a master of using mounted infantry in an unconventional way . . . 1860's special forces for lack of a better word.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top