Forrest Was Forrest a Bad Commander?

Status
Not open for further replies.
General Forrest had a "foot in the face" simply because he wasn't a trained West Pointer. Or any other military school as far as that goes. He was a born warrior.
It is remarkable how effective he was with no military training. But I think you raise a good point for why Lee would have never called him the best general in the war. As a career military man who was commandant at West Point for part of his career, I find it ludicrous that he would have said a non-West Pointer was better than every West Pointer in the war. This ignores the fact that Lee had no first hand experience with Forrest and that Bragg and Hood, who Lee did respect, had poor opinions of him.
 
Great, so you're dropping the following claim?

Or are you claiming the details and facts don't matter? Odd thing to say on a history forum.
Facts are Forrest started at the bottom of the ladder by enlisting as a private and rose to the rank of Lt General, and nothing changes that. Even if you think an officer recruiting enlistments isn't a doing a "job".
 
Don't have a great many real strong opinions about Forrest one way or the other but after giving it a lot of thought I still have a really tough time believing that Lee expressed the opinion that NBF was the "greatest Confederate officer" as that Englishman claimed. That seems like one h--- of a stretch to me.

John

If true, wonder in what sense was meant by the term, 'greatest Confederate officer'.

Perhaps it was meant as a reference to Forrest's undeniable fighting prowess in battle. As a mounted officer, he led on the field and was frequently involved in the thick of an engagement.

The statistics might bear evidence to his fighting prowess. During the war, he reportedly killed (or seriously wounded) at least 30 men in hand-to-hand combat, supposedly had 29 horses shot from underneath him and was wounded 6 times as well as injured on five other occasions .

Thought this was a personal record that might be hard to beat by any other Confederate officer.
 
Last edited:
Was John B. Hood a good commander; was Dick Ewell; was Joe Hooker a good commander or was John Pope? IMO they were good commanders until they were promoted into positions where they were not so good. I think that Forrest was very good as a raider and disrupter of Union supply lines. As the commander of a cavalry wing of a full, regular army, not as much.
A century would pass before the Peter Principle would be elucidated............
 
Facts are Forrest started at the bottom of the ladder by enlisting as a private and rose to the rank of Lt General, and nothing changes that. Even if you think an officer recruiting enlistments isn't a doing a "job".
Forrest bought a commission in the same way as other powerful and prominent men did. That he enlisted as a private before he did that is an interesting detail but does not somehow change his story into one of rising through the ranks as an enlisted man. That he rose from Lt. Col to Lt. General should be impressive enough but truth isn't good enough for you apparently.
 
What exactly is the role of a cavaly leader? I had understood that raiding, scouting, skirmishing and pursuing the enemy were the requirments of a cavalry commander.
If I am wrong---quite possible---please enlighten me. Forrest's exploits in the Western Theater are legendary and well known by most Civil War students. I look forward to reading responses
Regards
David
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top