Forrest Army Command

Would Forrest have made a good Army commander? What if he had taken command of the Army of Tennessee before Chickamauga? Or if he was chosen to lead the army over John Bell Hood toward the end of the war?
Not very likely, especially in the beginning of the war. Although the standard West Point training of most commanders has probably rightly been pooh-poohed as a necessity, it nevertheless provided officers of the Old Army with the necessary appreciation for the red tape and paperwork necessary for the functioning of the bureaucracy that was a nineteenth-century army. An example of this was John B. Hood, a notable failure as army commander, of whom it was said when he commanded one of Lee's nine infantry divisions that his had the worst paperwork of any in the army. Forrest's business background was enough to have made him a wealthy man, but was probably inadequate for running such a large enterprise as an army. For the most part, his experience throughout the war was as the commander of a much smaller formation and he probably had little in the way of running what might be called combined operations involving infantry, cavalry, artillery, engineers, supply, etc.

Welcome to the forums!
 
Last edited:
Hi and welcome. I think Forrest proved himself very handily in his role. He commanded a lot of troops, too. Would he have made an army commander? ...of what sized army? Do you mean instead of Lee? Or compared to someone like Grant or Sherman? I think these "what if" threads never lead us very far, but they can be entertaining, so I will try to follow to see what happens here.
 
Would Forrest have made a good Army commander? What if he had taken command of the Army of Tennessee before Chickamauga? Or if he was chosen to lead the army over John Bell Hood toward the end of the war?
Hello Eddy.
Welcome to CWT & the Forrest Forum.

My answer to your question would be no.
I agree with what James N. said.

Forrest was a corps commander at both Chickamauga and again at Tupelo.
He performed well in this role at Chickamauga, but at Tupelo . . . not so much.

Forrest was at his best when he was commanding an independent force of his own choosing.

@diane, any thoughts ?
 
Last edited:
I feel certain he wouldn't have wanted any part of commanding an Army.
You wouldn't think so, right? I think he might have had a very different career if he had much responsibilty
Forrest's noted semi-literacy would likely have proven to be a stumbling block too. He would've required the services of some highly literate chief-of-staff, something that he may not have had instant access to. If he inherited one from A.S. Johnston or Beauregard it might've gone well, but that's by no means certain, especially since those such as Beauregard's tended to remain with their chief, even when he moved or was replaced.
 
Forrest as an army commander wouldn't be that far-fetched. Quite a few military historians have noted he had real talent, and that his younger brother Jeffrey and son Willie also seemed to have the same remarkable abilities. I don't think Forrest would have sought such a command if he could have - like many military geniuses, he knew where he belonged and that was in the cavalry.

His background as a slave trader was something that, maybe not so surprisingly, gave him certain military-useful training. He knew how to get men who didn't like him to do as he wished, knew the right combination of carrot and stick, and the psychology. He also knew how to move large bodies of men quickly and keep them fed and supplied. His lack of education did hold him back but it proved to be surmountable - Forrest was very adept at getting people in his staff who could fill in where he was deficient. His clerk was George Cable, very good with words and his chief staffer was Major Armstrong, who usually drew up the battle reports and official letters. Forrest dictated these - they are mostly his words - but the spelling and grammar was fixed. He would have whatever he had dictated read back to him 'to get the pitch' - he didn't read them over himself because his slow reading would give away his poor education. Semi-literate folks have little tricks to hide the problem and that was one of Forrest's.

Forrest could be a bully and could be more than some difficult, especially if he was dealing with someone he felt was inept. He positively hated following stupid orders, like Wheeler's order to re-take Dover. That went poorly indeed. His command of a corps at Chickamauga went well, and he even covered for some slip-shod commanders - like Ector. Ector needed somebody to plug a hole and mind a battery, which Forrest did, but Ector was fretful, kept sending messengers to ask about it. "Tell him I am here," Forrest said to the first, second and third guy. The fourth guy got the battle field roar: "Tell him I am by God HERE!!!" He sure was - he was wearing a tan linen duster and when he took it off, there were fourteen bullet holes in it. But he did well.

Tupelo - Forrest made a rare blunder that probably cost the fight. It wasn't that he was handling his corps badly but that he did not have his heart in the fight. He had just seen the Kentuckians get chewed up and spit out, and believed if he sent in more men they would meet the same fate. He wouldn't send any trooper where he wouldn't go himself, and that was one of those places he wouldn't go. Hindsight indicates that had he sent in those extra troops, the outcome might well have been a win.

Overall, I'd say Forrest was right where he was supposed to be. I do think he could have handled an army but the bureaucracy that went with high command would be intolerable to him. Up to a point, but beyond that he would have wished he was back in the saddle again! This is where military training would have solved the problem mostly - he would have learned to suffer fools. Not gladly, but suffer them. Soldiers say yes, sir a lot! He was certainly more used to hearing that than saying it.
 
Overall, I'd say Forrest was right where he was supposed to be. I do think he could have handled an army but the bureaucracy that went with high command would be intolerable to him. Up to a point, but beyond that he would have wished he was back in the saddle again! This is where military training would have solved the problem mostly - he would have learned to suffer fools. Not gladly, but suffer them. Soldiers say yes, sir a lot! He was certainly more used to hearing that than saying it.
Thanks Diane.

Well said.
 

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