Forrest "We Don't Have Enough Contempt for NBF"

Forrest didn’t want to go to Pillow at all. His men were mostly from that area and complained about the how the Union Soldiers were treating their women folk. His men talked him into going to fort pillow. Also the occupants of the Fort called out “ No quarter” if you attack.
I don’t doubt one bit about there being a bloody mess. The sharp shooters were doing the most of that before the attack.

Be careful with blogs. Stick to the books.
Convenient that Forrest had two garrison's threaten him with no quarter if he attacked are their any sources for the Union threats Reb?

We do have the Forrest's words and Hicks and Bradford.

Forrest said this on Apr 04th.

"There is a Federal force of 500 or 600 at Fort Pillow, which I shall attend to in a day or two, as they have horses and supplies which we need."

It seems Forrest had every intention to attack Pillow and did not need persuading by his men.

I still don't understand people denying a massacre took place Forrest lost 15 men the Union 220-300 dead 65-70% US Coloured troops I mean you don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out what happened the only contentious point is what role Forrest played in the Massacre that's the sticking point but given the fact he had form for offering terms of no quarter to Garrisons it seems his men took him by his word literally.
 
Lies or Truths its a fine line when dealing with historical figures.

Fort Pillow is a prime example of some people denying or dismissing the eye witness accounts as Northern Propaganda even when a Confederate serving with Forrest confirms the massacre directly after it happened its simply dismissed by the Forrest mob as lies and untruths.
....
Facts but ignored how else should we judge history?.
Even today there are "historians" who claim 300 to 400 black soldiers were killed at Fort Pillow. The problem with that is there were not 300 black soldiers there.

A few years after the war the federal government exhumed the bodies at Fort Pillow and reburied them at the Memphis National Cemetery. They found 250 of which only about 190 could have been killed at the fort on April 12, 1864 - others died in previous years from other causes. 109 were identified as African-American.
 
Even today there are "historians" who claim 300 to 400 black soldiers were killed at Fort Pillow. The problem with that is there were not 300 black soldiers there.

A few years after the war the federal government exhumed the bodies at Fort Pillow and reburied them at the Memphis National Cemetery. They found 250 of which only about 190 could have been killed at the fort on April 12, 1864 - others died in previous years from other causes. 109 were identified as African-American.
No you are right i would imagine the Northern propaganda machine went into full overdrive exaggerating the dead and taking full advantage of the massacre bit like the Southern press did with Sherman's march to the sea swings and roundabouts so to speak.

As far as I'm aware having read various reports on the Massacre the common number seems to be 220-250.
 
Quote:

Sir, I have this moment received yours of this instant, in which you demand the unconditional surrender of forces under my command. I can answer that I have been placed here by the government to defend this post, and in this as well as all other orders from my superiors, I feel it to be my duty as an honorable officer to obey. I must, therefore, respectfully decline surrendering as you may require."

End Quote

At what point was this threat made by the Union Garrison? And by who? It certainly was not Hick's.
No. I said that the charge for no quarter against the Union was made by several Confederates.

This charge is included in the Achilles V Clark letter to his sisters that you quoted earlier:

"The Yankees refused <surrender> threatening that if we charged their breast works to show no quarter. " & also "Our men were so exasperated by Yankees' threats of no quarter that they gave but little"

It was also included in a number of other first hand accounts. There are numerous reports from survivors from both sides, however, they disagree on some points. Even so, I am sure that you agree that threats of no quarter from one side do not justify a black flag in response.

Mr. Clark was a sergeant on the Confederate side. He had only recently quit college to join the cavalry. At 22, Fort Pillow was his first major battle. Achilles was known as "Kill" by his planter family back in Paris TN. He stayed with Forrest until the surrender in Gainsville and was eventually promoted to Captain. After the war he married but died at only 32 years of age. The letter is part of the Civil War Collection of the Tennessee State Library and Archives. I am not sure of its provenance but I accept it on face value like all the reports from participants in the battle. It should be weighed in that context.

Do you know of reports on Fort Pillow from either side that were unvarnished and demonstrable lies?
 
I believe it is assumed that A V Clark wrote the letter based on the text - though his signature is not on the letter.
 
I believe it is assumed that A V Clark wrote the letter based on the text - though his signature is not on the letter.
I know that some have questioned the letter but I have not researched it personally. I have heard that only a part of the original letter exist and that it does not include the signature page. I have also been told that it exists only as a transcription. I don't know.

I will accept it as is unless it is proven a fraud.
 
Last edited:
No. I said that the charge for no quarter against the Union was made by several Confederates.

This charge is included in the Achilles V Clark letter to his sisters that you quoted earlier:
At no point were any any threats made by the Union commanders however a few Yankees shouting at their attackers cant be classed as official rhetoric so to speak.

Forrest on the other hand did make official written down threats to the Union garrisons their is a difference here if Hicks or Bradford had threatened Forrest then I would agree with you but they didn't , As for Clarks letter it just backs up the casualties figures and gives more credence to the Massacre.

Do you know of reports on Fort Pillow from either side that were unvarnished and demonstrable lies?
I agree even generals exaggerated or denied the reports of the the massacre.

What we do know is Forrest lost very few men and the Union lost anywhere from 220-300 men dead that's a fact.

The sticking point is what part Forrest took in the whole affair and that can be debated till the cows come home.
 
Forrest on the other hand did make official written down threats to the Union garrisons their is a difference here if Hicks or Bradford had threatened Forrest then I would agree with you but they didn't , As for Clarks letter it just backs up the casualties figures and gives more credence to the Massacre.

Here is Forrest note to the defenders of Fort Pillow:

April 12, 1864

Major Booth, Commanding United States Forces Fort Pillow:

Major,

The conduct of the officers and men garrisoning Fort Pillow has been such as to entitle them to being treated as prisoners of war. I demand the unconditional surrender of this garrison, promising you that you shall be treated as prisoners of war. My men have received a fresh supply of ammunition and from their present position can easily assault and capture the fort. Should my demand be refused, I cannot be responsible for the fate of your command.

Respectfully,

N B Forrest

Major General Commanding
 
Here is an example of lies concerning Forrest at Fort Pillow that were manufactured to advance an agenda.

In 1871 a Congressional investigation was convened to look into Forrest's alleged involvement with the Klan and to revisit the Ft. Pillow "massacre." The investigation was chaired by Forrest's old enemy, William Tecumseh Sherman, who told the press that, "We are here to investigate Forrest, charge Forrest, try Forrest, convict Forrest, and hang Forrest." They then were supposed to have found him innocent for lack of evidence.

The problem is that this never occurred.
 
Here is another example. It was claimed to be a report written by Forrest about the attack.

"We busted the fort about ninerclock...and the boys is acillin' the n_____s" down in the woods.

This is definitely fake and was probably originally written by Bill Arp but later picked up and presented as fact.
 
Here is an example of lies concerning Forrest at Fort Pillow that were manufactured to advance an agenda.

In 1871 a Congressional investigation was convened to look into Forrest's alleged involvement with the Klan and to revisit the Ft. Pillow "massacre." The investigation was chaired by Forrest's old enemy, William Tecumseh Sherman, who told the press that, "We are here to investigate Forrest, charge Forrest, try Forrest, convict Forrest, and hang Forrest." They then were supposed to have found him innocent for lack of evidence.

The problem is that this never occurred.
That investigation Is on line. I don’t have a link to it. And it did occur.
 
Here is an example of lies concerning Forrest at Fort Pillow that were manufactured to advance an agenda.

In 1871 a Congressional investigation was convened to look into Forrest's alleged involvement with the Klan and to revisit the Ft. Pillow "massacre." The investigation was chaired by Forrest's old enemy, William Tecumseh Sherman, who told the press that, "We are here to investigate Forrest, charge Forrest, try Forrest, convict Forrest, and hang Forrest." They then were supposed to have found him innocent for lack of evidence.

The problem is that this never occurred.
How do you hang a LT General with a ton of influence in the area the North was trying to subdue or reconstruct?.

The answer is you don't.

Champ Ferguson was a nobody so he hung.

Politics is quite simple really they needed Forrest to enforce and order of some sort after the war.

Saying that we have no evidence to suggest Forrest ordered the Massacre however I think the US coloured troops understood Confederate Law that any Negro caught in a Federal Uniform would be killed along with any White offices in charge of them.

I hope that's crystal clear to you just as it was to the Union troops inside Fort Pillow.

Surrender really wasn't an option and Forrest little note pointless unless of course your suggesting Forrest was not going to follow Confederate Law and spare the Black troops?.
 
I have looked in vain. I think that this was conflated with the ku klux hearing. Forrest never testified about Fort Pillow to Congress and Sherman never said any of that...
Agree. Neither Grant nor Sherman were very interested in persecution of men who had put on a uniform and taken the risks of war, over things that had happened during the war. The lines given to Josey Wales in cinema, were appropriate. Both sides had things happen that were hard to explain.
After the war conduct was a different story. And Grant was one time persuaded to impose peace on South Carolina. Forrest was probably warned to stay out of it.
 
Here's another Fort Pillow liar --- Colonel Thomas J Jackson, Commander 6th US Colored Heavy Artillery.

After the war Col. Jackson became a radical Republican and made numerous speeches, newspaper editorials and letters about his experience in the fight at Fort Pillow. He was an officer of the Indiana legislature and later elected a representative in the Kansas legislature. He described the action in gory detail and portrayed the Confederates as depraved monsters. He cautioned that a Democrat vote was a vote for Butcher Forrest. This is extracted from his obit in the Newton Kansan newspaper, November 2, 1905:

"...until he was promoted to lieutenant colonel of a negro regiment, the Eleventh U. S. infantry, with which he fought until the massacre at Fort Pillow, when he was so severely wounded that he was incapacitated for service. The following is an account of his wounds he received in the battle. He was shot bayoneted, smashed in the side of the head by the butt of a musket and kicked into the river to drown. In that particular bunch of men which was surrounded in this fight he and one of the negro privates were all that were left alive. Col. Jackson was found 48 hours after he had been kicked into the river, by a federal gun boat lying in the stream, his arms clinched around a log and in dying condition. He was brought back to life and went to a hospital for a long time. Here a silver or metal plate was placed in the side of his head where the rebel musket had made a hole. This metal plate, or others that were substituted, was worn up to the time of his death. He was also nearly killed as a man could be to live, but he survived to again enter the war and be captured in a later fight. This time he was thrown in a prison at Memphis. After a time he managed to escape to be again captured by blood hounds and returned. The hot-headed southerners had then never learned that he had been in command of a negro regiment or he would never have lived over night. He finally managed to escape the second time by jumping into a cess-pool through which he managed with an Irish man from a West Virginia regiment, to reach the Mississippi river. They finally got across and after days of wandering, reached an old darky's home...."

The problem was that he was not at Fort Pillow. He was safe in Memphis when the attack occurred. He spent the rest of his life highlighting the atrocity for personal and political gain.
 
Here's another Fort Pillow liar --- Colonel Thomas J Jackson, Commander 6th US Colored Heavy Artillery.
What's the point here?.

Of course you will get people trying to take advantage or exaggerate or dismiss.

Stick to the facts.

Forrest lost 15 men the Union 220-250.

Under Confederate Law Black Union troops taken in federal uniform should be put to death and white officers who led them also.

Their were also loyal West Tennesseans in the garrison.

Forrest had done this before but was repulsed at Paducah that didn't stop him offering the same terms.

Troops in the Fort must have known they would be killed if they Surrendered that's why Bradford tried and failed to get them out.

The massacre happened as to Forrest role in it we don't know.

What does confuse me with Fort Pillow is that the women and children were evacuated the day before which means they knew he was coming so why didn't Booth get his men out when he could their were steamers available and why didn't he burn the barracks when he had a chance not at the last minute I can only presume he was told to hold the fort at all costs even if the Fort was untenable which it was unless of course Booth made that decision by himself.
 
What's the point here?.

Of course you will get people trying to take advantage or exaggerate or dismiss.

Stick to the facts.

Forrest lost 15 men the Union 220-250.

Under Confederate Law Black Union troops taken in federal uniform should be put to death and white officers who led them also.

Their were also loyal West Tennesseans in the garrison.

Forrest had done this before but was repulsed at Paducah that didn't stop him offering the same terms.

Troops in the Fort must have known they would be killed if they Surrendered that's why Bradford tried and failed to get them out.

The massacre happened as to Forrest role in it we don't know.

What does confuse me with Fort Pillow is that the women and children were evacuated the day before which means they knew he was coming so why didn't Booth get his men out when he could their were steamers available and why didn't he burn the barracks when he had a chance not at the last minute I can only presume he was told to hold the fort at all costs even if the Fort was untenable which it was unless of course Booth made that decision by himself.
District of Tennessee Commander General William T. Sherman ordered the fort abandoned in January, but his orders were disregarded, which proved to be a tragic mistake.
 
Back
Top