Forrest Was Forrest a Bad Commander?

[Stone in the wall]

There's a little more to the story. Lots of wealthy guys enlisted as private then raised their own company/battalion/regiment and were all of a sudden colonel. Forrest was one of those guys. He didn't rise from private to high officer status through efforts in the field.

Not quite. Forrest enlisted as a private in the Tennessee Mounted Rifles and helped to equip them. Later he was promoted to Lt Colonel and placed in charge of raising and training his own battalion.

Private to Colonel was just the Governor of Tennessee giving Forrest a commission in exchange for recruiting, it's not a rising-through-the-ranks story.

Seems fair, you wouldn't send a private out recruiting now would you? Command of a battalion is a officer rank of Lt Colonel.

 

[GwilymT]

Not quite. Forrest enlisted as a private in the Tennessee Mounted Rifles and helped to equip them. Later he was promoted to Lt Colonel and placed in charge of raising and training his own battalion.

Seems fair, you wouldn't send a private out recruiting now would you? Command of a battalion is a officer rank of Lt Colonel.

Exactly. "Promoted" to lead a battalion he raised and equipped. Rich guy raises a battalion and made a Colonel. Let's not pretend Forrest's story is that of some lowly private who worked his way up to Colonel through fighting and service.

 

[Enoch L. Cade]

That's fine and all, but the effect of Forrest's operations on Sherman's was...?

Not sure what's with the scare quotes, but 7th Mississippi seems to feel Sherman's comments prove some significance to Forrest that just isn't there.

The "scare quotes" were to indicate that I was quoting you, my good man, as is usually the case with quote marks. And I believe 7th Mississippi was interrogating Uncle Billy's own (voluminous) writings for his feelings or attitude toward Forrest. That's not "insignificant," although I certainly recognize your point about examining the actual effect of Forrest's activity on the operations of the great Union general and liberator of Georgia.

 

[breckod]

Not quite. Forrest enlisted as a private in the Tennessee Mounted Rifles and helped to equip them. Later he was promoted to Lt Colonel and placed in charge of raising and training his own battalion.

Seems fair, you wouldn't send a private out recruiting now would you? Command of a battalion is a officer rank of Lt Colonel.

The "later" was in fact almost immediately. He didn't really spend any time as a private or see any action at that rank, or serve at any intermediate ranks. Forrest more or less just bought a rank. It was a perfectly typical thing to do (whether that was paid for in money or by a locally significant figure raising troops) and there's nothing contextually wrong with it, the problem is that people are presenting the private-to-general thing as some kind of rising through the ranks story, when Forrest actually got rank right off the bat in the same way other prominent and powerful men did.

 

[Enoch L. Cade]

The "later" was in fact almost immediately. He didn't really spend any time as a private or see any action at that rank, or serve at any intermediate ranks. Forrest more or less just bought a rank. It was a perfectly typical thing to do (whether that was paid for in money or by a locally significant figure raising troops) and there's nothing contextually wrong with it, the problem is that people are presenting the private-to-general thing as some kind of rising through the ranks story, when Forrest actually got rank right off the bat in the same way other prominent and powerful men did.

Perhaps I missed it, but which people in this thread presented Forrest's rise from private to Lt Colonel as a sort of military Horatio Alger story?

I took the liberty to review "That Devil Forrest," by John A. Wyeth, which happened to be on a shelf nearby. (I believe this would qualify as what someone above referenced as "lost cause mythology," although again I am not sure on the meaning of term.) Mr Wyeth does not present Forrest's rapid promotion as a "rising through the ranks story" (I am quoting you, so please don't describe them as "scare quotes.")

So who does?

 

[breckod]

Perhaps I missed it, but which people in this thread presented Forrest's rise from private to Lt Colonel as a sort of military Horatio Alger story?

Climbed to rank of a General from the rank of Private. Must have been doing a good job.

 

[Cavalier]

@Aelfwin Well, I believe it is the idea that myths were created by former Confederates after the war glorifying certain people or events and denigrating other people or events as they related to the cause of Southern independence, in order to make that cause appear more "glorious" than it actually was.

So a subscriber to the lost cause might say N.F.B. was the greatest cavalry man in the entire war, whereas an opponent of the lost cause would say that's just one of many myths used to glorify everything about the Confederacy.

That probably not a very adequate or accurate description but its the best I can come up with.

Personally, I'm on the fence about most of this "lost cause" stuff myself because the term is thrown around so much, but that's just an opinion. In regards to N.F.B., I just happen to believe his reputation as a military genius is exaggerated, regardless of how it relates to the "lost cause'.

John

 

[Enoch L. Cade]

Thank you. (That was for Mr Breckrod)

 

[Enoch L. Cade]

@Aelfwin Well, I believe it is the idea that myths were created by former Confederates after the war glorifying certain people or events and denigrating other people or events as they related to the cause of Southern independence, in order to make that cause appear more "glorious" than it actually was.

So a subscriber to the lost cause might say N.F.B. was the greatest cavalry man in the entire war, whereas an opponent of the lost cause would say that's just one of many myths used to glorify everything about the Confederacy.

That probably not a very adequate or accurate description but its the best I can come up with.

Personally, I'm on the fence about most of this "lost cause" stuff myself because the term is thrown around so much, but that's just an opinion. In regards to N.F.B., I just happen to believe his reputation as a military genius is exaggerated, regardless of how it relates to the "lost cause'.

John

Thank you, that's very helpful.

There are certainly no shortage of myths flying about.

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

And I believe 7th Mississippi was interrogating Uncle Billy's own (voluminous) writings for his feelings or attitude toward Forrest. That's not "insignificant,"

Hah !

Thanks @Aelfwin.
I never intended myself to be an issue within this thread.

A few years ago, we convinced Mike to create a Forrest Forum.
I was one of the three original hosts that searched and consolidated random NBF threads into one place.

Yeah, I understand NBF is probably the most controversial figure of the War, but I've never meant to insult another member of CWT that has a differing opinion about the General.

But I do think NBF's 2023 legacy has become a platform form for virtue signaling from many that have never learned the
entire history of this man.

 

[Enoch L. Cade]

Hah !

Thanks @Aelfwin.
I never intended to be an issue within this thread.

A few years ago, we convinced Mike to create a Forrest Forum.
I was one of the three original hosts that searched and consolidated random NBF threads into one place.

Yeah, I understand NBF is probably the most controversial figure of the War, but I've never meant to insult another member of CWT that has a differing opinion about the General.

But I do think NBF's legacy has become a platform form ... for virtue signaling from many that have never learned the
entire history of this man.

7th Mississippi: indeed, the legacy of Gen Forrest -- not to mention those of General Lee, Gen Jackson, every soldier who served in the Confederate Army, ever Southern civilian on the home front, every Southerner living or dead and the South itself -- has become a platform for the behavior you described. I can understand it, human nature being what it is and sinners that we all are; societal benefits accrue to the participants. One can make a career of it, eg Ty Seidule.

And it is sad, but over the last seven or so years -- and this is against my preference to always grant the benefit of the doubt -- I've come to regard those covertly or overtly mock, denounce and sneer at Genls Forrest, Lee, Jackson, et cetera -- to be engaged in precisely that sort of activity, rather than the quest for historical truth and accuracy. (and please note, I am not referring to anyone in this thread, least of all Mr Breckod.)

I suppose, though, this means that I am a captive of "lost cause mythology." Such is the state of discourse in "this fair land of freedom."

On the subject of hyperbole, I do not think anyone can rival Gen U.S. Grant, who said that Phil Sheridan's military skill was on the level of Napoleon Bonaparte: "I rank Sheridan with Napoleon and Frederick and the great commanders of history." (The quote is from Little Phil by Eric Wittenberg, in the prologue.) At least, I assume Gen Grant was engaging in hyperbole; I mean no slight against Gen Sheridan when I say that no student of military science could consider Fighting Phil, the terror of the Shenandoah and the tribes of the Great Plains, in the same class as the victors of Austerlitz and Leuthen. I do think Sheridan would have been a perfectly acceptable commander of hussars in le Grande Armee, however. Perhaps under Soult or Augureau, both of whom enjoyed a good plunder (in contrast to, eg, Davout, Ney and Oudinot, who did not., but they were the exceptions among the Marshalate and higher officers.)

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

I hear ya !

Other than the many amateur military historians on this forum, I honestly doubt an average American has ever heard of Austerlitz.

 

[Stone in the wall]

Exactly. "Promoted" to lead a battalion he raised and equipped. Rich guy raises a battalion and made a Colonel. Let's not pretend Forrest's story is that of some lowly private who worked his way up to Colonel through fighting and service.

How many other privates made it to become a Lt General at this time?
I know of only two who came close:
Pennypacker-quarter masters clerk to Brig General
Cleburne-Private to Major General

 

[UCVRelics]

General Robert E Lee stated that the best Southern Cavalry Commander there was, is General Nathan Bedford Forrest.

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

On the subject of hyperbole, I do not think anyone can rival Gen U.S. Grant, who said that Phil Sheridan's military skill was on the level of Napoleon Bonaparte: "I rank Sheridan with Napoleon and Frederick and the great commanders of history." (The quote is from Little Phil by Eric Wittenberg, in the prologue.)

Well... each has his/her opinions.

But that kind of sounds like a reverse "Lost Cause" mentality

 

[GwilymT]

How many other privates made it to become a Lt General at this time?
I know of only two who came close:
Pennypacker-quarter masters clerk to Brig General
Cleburne-Private to Major General

If you think it appropriate to portray Forrest as some hard scrabble enlisted man who worked his way up through the ranks to Colonel then enjoy that fantasy.

This isn't taking anything away from Forrest or his abilities, it's just that such an idea is not historically accurate.

 

[UCVRelics]

Follow up:

Forrest did his best service in the first half of 1864. The man raised a corps of cavalry almost from scratch and was able to win two major cavalry fights (Okolona & Brice's Crossroads), taking Fort Pillow, and sneaking into Memphis and capturing the Union department commander. He did suffer a defeat at Tupelo, and historians suggest he could have operated in direct support of Johnston & Hood around Atlanta, but he was given the task of defending the interior of Mississippi & Alabama from Union raids, to keep the major rebel armies fed. And this he did superbly.

That said, he does have his issues. His actions at Chickamauga, shanghaing a small infantry division from Walker's Corps for a fruitless effort around Jay's Mill, and leaving the two brigades all but combat ineffective for the rest of the battle. He performed well during the initial stages of the Franklin-Nashville Campaign, removing Wilson's cavalry from the board and allowing Hood's infantry to make their blunder around Spring Hill (though Forrest had also involved himself in that debacle early in the battle). At Overall Creek, he commanded his cavalry and a reinforced division of infantry under General Bate. When Union forces attacked, Forrest was routed, with only one brigade of infantry (T. B. Smith's) keeping their organization.

On other campaigns, I cannot say too much, as I have not read enough in that regard. He's not the Union equivalent of John Pope, nor is he the reincarnation of Antoine Lasalle.

Don't forget what he did at Murfreesboro at the first battle.

 

[GwilymT]

Eric Wittenberg has come up more than once in this thread. I think most hold him in high regard as an expert in CW cavalry. From what I remember, and correct me if I'm wrong, Wittenberg doesn't hold Forrest in high regard as a commander.

 

[10th Michigan Infantry]

Heck, I understand he even go some unacknowledged children out of his efforts.

From all the research I've done on the issue, it is likely a myth that he had any children with any slaves

 

[Biscoitos]

So I came across this article which proclaims Forrest to have been the worst general of the war. Reading it, it just seems like a hitpiece on Forrest rather than actual history, though I thought I'd share it anyways for discussion.

This Beloved Confederate General Was One of the Worst Military Leaders in History

Nathan Bedford Forrest was pretty bad at his job.

slate.com

Brice's Crossroads