Regards,
Dennis

Your defense of Sheridan and your criticism of Forrest as a racial “terrorist” seems to me to be entirely unsupportable.

You compliment Sheridan for being “energetic and combative” as if such things are particularly meritorious rather than being simply basic expecations, which they were. I think we can agree at aleast that few were more “energetic and combative” than Forrest.

But your support of Sheridan as non-despicable falls apart when one recalls his despicable post-war comment (and related actions) “The only good Indian is a dead Indian.” That sure sounds like “racism” and barbarism to me. Yet you excoriate Forrest as a “racial terrorist” and give a pass to Sheridan. Indeed, how does one explain the black men who were pall bearers at Forrest’s funeral and the many hundreds of black attendees at the same event? Had they forgotten that Forrest was a “racial terrorist?”

Seems like there’s a bit of cognitive dissonance at work in your comments- but then again, this is the very age of cognitive dissonance.

Best Regards,
Dan

No to all three, on the whole. None were responsible for anything quite like Fort Pillow, not to mention a postwar career (albeit fairly brief) in racial terrorism.

I read your deconstruction of Phil Sheridan and while acknowledging that “Little Phil” was a self-promoting blowhard, how does that make him all that much different from many other 19th century military figures? (Or some 20th century generals as well?) I certainly believe he was miscast as commander of the Cavalry Corps; Grant should have given him command of an infantry corps in the Army of the Potomac. & no one can disagree that he had an overwhelming numerical advantage in the Valley campaign. Still, he was combative and energetic in a war in which too many of his contemporaries were not, and the fact that Grant (and others) held him in fairly high regard ought to count for something. _Little Phil_ was a thought-provoking book, but speaking frankly it did not come across (to me) as even-handed history — not in the same class as _Plenty of Blame_, to which (on Amazon) I gave a very enthusiastic 5-star review.

Butler’s military record needs no further condemnation, but his character — if his reconstruction role is any guide — was certainly far from despicable.

Best regards,
Ralph

Congrats on your blog anniversary.

Nathan Bedford Forrest was the greatest cavalry commander of the War (with all due respect of course to JEB Stuart).

RE Lee thought Forrest was the greatest general of the war. I’ll stand by Lee’s assessment.

Best Regards,
Dan

Chris