Settle this... Between Stuart and Forrest

[1SGDan]

So who would you rather fight under. That equates to who was the better commander.

I'm not so sure that the second part of your statement is correct. A better commander to do what? Service is mission directed. Who would be the better commander for a particular type of mission is open to debate.

 

[gunny]

I'm not so sure that the second part of your statement is correct. A better commander to do what? Service is mission directed. Who would be the better commander for a particular type of mission is open to debate.

Perhaps so, but given the hindsight that we actually have - which of the two had you rather serve?

 

[1SGDan]

Perhaps so, but given the hindsight that we actually have - which of the two had you rather serve?

Neither they were both Confederates. I am a Union man.

 

[diane]

Neither they were both Confederates. I am a Union man.

How about Minty, then? He's a really under-rated commander, very successful but no press!

 

[diane]

I'm not so sure that the second part of your statement is correct. A better commander to do what? Service is mission directed. Who would be the better commander for a particular type of mission is open to debate.

For mission direction, I'd suggest both Stuart and Forrest were pretty good. Stuart had his ride around McClellan, got lots of valuable information and poked the Union in the eye; Forrest had his West Tennessee Raid and screwed up Grant's logistics for a good spell. Give either one of them a mission and they would accomplish it - there were some exceptions, but they both had a good record of getting done what they were supposed to get done.

 

[Tennessee_Mountainman]

I voted Forrest to break the tie Diane and other people I talked to can tell you why

SO RAISE YOUR SABERS, AND GET THERE FIRST WITH MOST!​

 

[Jordan M.E. Williams]

Well I wouldn't want to massacre Fort Pillow....
So Stuart.

 

[MissREP]

What a toss up---the Last Cavalier or the man with the steel blue eyes who got shot off his saddle but stayed on board?? The Episcopal or the not-yet-regenerate Presbyterian? I guess if I wanted to harry ol' Sherman I'd have to pick Forrest...if I wanted to thumb my nose at McClellan--Stuart. Both had young and awesome artillery majors...

Honest. I can't make up my mind....though I lean toward Forrest! (Didn't vote...)

 

[civilken]

if you try to look at this series gen. Stuart wwas no slouch received this training fighting Indians in the West and was a hell of a commander. After the war a lot of stories about him being a showoff and a popinjay romantic maybe a little true but he was still a very good commander who Robert E Lee respected and that's why he was promoted. But when it comes to audacity coverage a fierce fighter and a master of topography there are few who can match for forest

 

[captaindrew]

Very tough choice, voted for Forrest but can't talk horsemen without a mention to the Grey Ghost. One of my favorite characters of the war.

 

[jackt62]

Not sure how to answer this question, they were both highly effective cavalry commanders. But Forrest may have done a consistently better job over the years at exasperating federal logistics in the west and frustrating commanders from Buell to Sherman. Forrest was a maverick and a more ruthless and independent commander than Stuart, who worked close at hand with Lee and the ANV. I guess I would have to vote for Forrest since he was a greater master of innovative tactics such as using cavalry as dismounted infantry, and staging elaborate deceptions to ensnare his enemies.

 

[1NCCAV]

I guess I would have to vote for Forrest since he was a greater master of innovative tactics such as using cavalry as dismounted infantry, and staging elaborate deceptions to ensnare his enemies.

I'm not sure Forrest should be considered a greater master of innovative tactics than Stuart based on Forrest's employment of cavalry units as mounted infantry.

Stuart served with the Regiment of Mounted Riflemen on the frontier pre-ACW, plus he delivered an outstanding performance as a corps commander at Chancellorsville, so I believe Stuart understood infantry and could have been a masterful commander of mounted infantry had he needed to be. But Lee needed Stuart to use his cavalry in a more traditional role.

 

[Irishtom29]

Horsemen used as mounted infantry is at least as old as the 15th Century when French and English men at arms often fought afoot in open field battle. In the age of black powder dragoons were cavalry intended to fight mounted with swords and dismounted with carbines.

Forrest was the more talented soldier but Stuart probably the better cavalryman operating as part of an army.

 

[Nathanb1]

Gee whiz. They're like children... can't pick. Advantage to Stuart being classic cavalry... and Jine the Cavalry is so catchy. Might give him points for having his music and singing go along with him. I also give him points for not only doing an excellent job taking over from Jackson at Chancellorsville, but singing while he did it.

Forrest? Well, I have seen some photos of reunions... lots of old men, including my Mr. Gattis, served under him and survived. That might sway me a tad... besides, he sent his mother to Texas...I still feel badly about not taking care of her. Besides, I love moxie, and he had it in spades. And Roderick and King Phillip. Love them...

 

[5fish]

Stuart was the classic cavalry commander and work will with the army he was supporting. When I read about Forrest he never seems to work well in support of the army he is with. Stuart could screen for the army and collect information on the other army and cover the flanks of the army while still raiding the supply lines of the other army. Forrest does not seem to screen well, collect information well, or cover the flanks well but he is great as an independent command causing havoc with the union supply lines and communications. Forrest was a highwayman while Stuart was a cavalryman...

 

[1NCCAV]

Forrest was a highwayman while Stuart was a cavalryman...

Good line.

Thread hijack (gotta do something to keep it going ): Remember Lt Col Kilgore from Apocalypse Now? Was he a highwayman or a cavalryman? A Forrest or a Stuart?

 

[diane]

I think you have to figure in the boss man, too. Lee had complete confidence in Stuart and it was deserved - in fact, Lee may have had too much confidence in him. That boo-boo at Gettysburg might be some proof of that...which boo-boo was not Stuart's fault. Forrest, on the other hand, was saddled with Bragg and Hood, neither of whom appreciated his talents. With the right commander, Forrest was not insubordinate, wrathy or anything but pretty good. If Forrest had had a commander like Lee, particularly Lee as he knew how to get the rough edges off a diamond - like he did with Jackson, Forrest would have been less difficult. He would have never threatened to smack Lee's face around and Lee wouldn't have given him reason to want to!

 

[Irishtom29]

As I recall Forrest didn't usually act as part of the Army of Tennessee but was usually off doing other things, often in Mississippi and western Tennessee and Kentucky. Anyway, I think of Forrest and Stuart as having different jobs and not being comparable.

 

[zburkett]

I don't think I would have the nerve to tell either that they were not Cavalrymen. When it comes to who would I want to ride with, neither. I choose Mosby.

 

[Irishtom29]

I don't think I would have the nerve to tell either that they were not Cavalrymen. When it comes to who would I want to ride with, neither. I choose Mosby.

I'm not so sure partisans who get around mounted qualify as cavalry.