The Battle of Fort Pillow (Fort Pillow Massacre)

Will Carry, you'd like investigating Lionel Booth, which isn't his real name but he was a real soldier. I've always held the opinion that Booth would have treated with Forrest when that was offered - Forrest really did not want to fight the battle if he could win the victory otherwise. He gave more than a couple opportunities for catastrophe to be averted. No way to know, of course, but I believe Booth would have taken him up on the terms and there would have been no controversy. Fielding Hurst's Worst and Bradford's infamous troops frequently operated out of Ft Pillow and they were not liked by any means in the neighborhood. Bradford had plenty of reason to use Booth's identity rather than his own - if Forrest had known who he was really dealing with, he would have done things quite differently and, yes, there would have been blood but not as much of it.
 
Studying The Battle of Fort Pillow is like watching a train wreck. It is terrible to behold but you can't take your eyes off of it. I have read every book I could find on Fort Pillow, magazine articles and posts on this web site. I think I have an understanding of Forrest's men. What I am trying to understand now is what were the Union soldiers in Fort Pillow like? Booth is a very interesting character, maybe I will start a post on him. You guys know more about the war than I ever will................
There is a relatively new book " the Terrible 13th" about the 13 Tennessee Cavalry Union. which was at Ft.Pillow. It should have an interesting account of Ft.Pillow.
Leftyhunter
 
Understanding a heated battle is at best difficult. Second guessing the motives of situations from over a century and a half ago is probably impossible.

The part of Fort Pillow that always seems overlooked is Union responsibility. Besides that they should have accepted surrender when offered as they obviously couldn't resist as borne out by events after the refusal.

There is also the total degradation of command of control. To surrender without a massacre requires a command to order a cease fire........ However as long as some are firing back they are legitimate targets, same with ones trying to escape they are legitimate targets. Its unrealistic to expect any troops to risk their lives while still under fire to try to take prisoners. Someone on the union side needed to take charge to order troops to stop fleeing and firing back, to surrender in any orderly fashion...…as long it was simply every man to do whatever, fight, flee, surrender its was going to be a chaotic mess.
 
The part of Fort Pillow that always seems overlooked is Union responsibility. Besides that they should have accepted surrender when offered as they obviously couldn't resist as borne out by events after the refusal.

There is also the total degradation of command of control. To surrender without a massacre requires a command to order a cease fire........ However as long as some are firing back they are legitimate targets, same with ones trying to escape they are legitimate targets. Its unrealistic to expect any troops to risk their lives while still under fire to try to take prisoners. Someone on the union side needed to take charge to order troops to stop fleeing and firing back, to surrender in any orderly fashion...…as long it was simply every man to do whatever, fight, flee, surrender its was going to be a chaotic mess.
I don't know much about this fight, but I suspect you have raised a couple of good talking points, Archie.
 
The part of Fort Pillow that always seems overlooked is Union responsibility. Besides that they should have accepted surrender when offered as they obviously couldn't resist as borne out by events after the refusal.

There is also the total degradation of command of control. To surrender without a massacre requires a command to order a cease fire........ However as long as some are firing back they are legitimate targets, same with ones trying to escape they are legitimate targets. Its unrealistic to expect any troops to risk their lives while still under fire to try to take prisoners. Someone on the union side needed to take charge to order troops to stop fleeing and firing back, to surrender in any orderly fashion...…as long it was simply every man to do whatever, fight, flee, surrender its was going to be a chaotic mess.

The focus of what happened at Ft Pillow is almost always on what Forrest did or did not do, not what was happening around there. It was a case of: if I show up on your porch, chances are you did something to bring me there. Forrest and other Confederate commanders had repeatedly complained to Union authorities about the excesses of outlaws as well as near outlaw Union forces such as Hurst and Bradford. The fort was supposed to have been closed but was not, there was rumored to be smuggling and other such activities by Hurlbut, who vehemently denied it. In fact, it went all the way up to Sherman. The good general would have had some explaining to do had Forrest come to trial! You can bet your bottom dollar Forrest would have had no problem grabbing Sherman's collar and dragging him into it. The Trial of Fort Pillow would have been a real seat gripper!
 
The focus of what happened at Ft Pillow is almost always on what Forrest did or did not do, not what was happening around there. It was a case of: if I show up on your porch, chances are you did something to bring me there. Forrest and other Confederate commanders had repeatedly complained to Union authorities about the excesses of outlaws as well as near outlaw Union forces such as Hurst and Bradford. The fort was supposed to have been closed but was not, there was rumored to be smuggling and other such activities by Hurlbut, who vehemently denied it. In fact, it went all the way up to Sherman. The good general would have had some explaining to do had Forrest come to trial! You can bet your bottom dollar Forrest would have had no problem grabbing Sherman's collar and dragging him into it. The Trial of Fort Pillow would have been a real seat gripper!
This seems oh-so-true to me, based on what little I know about Fort Pillow. It seems very much like the Lawrence raid: Focus on demonizing Quantrill for what he did or did not do--no focus on what his subordinates might have done, nor on what Jim Lane's and Jennison's jayhawkers or the redlegs might have done to arouse the ire of the Missourians. I think there is a real similarity in the stories that have risen up about each incident--with just enough truth to each incident to fuel the stories.
 
Weren't there Confederate deserters who had joined the Yankee army a Ft. Pillow?
Wouldn't there be a clear record of enlistments/inductions/desertions?
Some brief mention of this inquirying of my relative, 13th C, however I wondered since he was mid-30's with family nearby in W.TN. Don't begin to understand reasons behind war desertions, unless in this case it was family responsibility, but why not then appeal to return? Why enlist union? If records should exist, can it be assumed entire service was enlisted union cav?
 
There is a relatively new book " the Terrible 13th" about the 13 Tennessee Cavalry Union. which was at Ft.Pillow. It should have an interesting account of Ft.Pillow.
Leftyhunter

The "Terrible 13th" is from East Tennessee and a separate unit. Bradford's Battlion was called the 13th West Tennessee Cavalry (state designation), it was to become the 14th Tennessee Cavalry (federal designation), but it never recruited enough men to make it to regimental size.
 
Interesting the push on Forrest being wrong. The Yankee fort never truly surrendered until it absolutely had to and then you have "captured Yankees" running for the river after surrendering to try and catch a Yankee boat. The Rebs shot them. Justified.
 
Im not sure if Ive seen this post or that video from 3 years ago. The FP State Park has experienced a lot of erosion over the last two years. That road that is used to take visitors to the Inner Fort, at Time = 2:00, had a few wash outs. Tons of boulders have been hauled in to stabilize it.
I dont get out there as much as I used to nor as often as I would like. I just cant hike as much as I used to. And this time of the year, I avoid those blood-thirsty mosquitoes.
You dont hear many people talk about General James R. Chalmers’ role in this battle.
 
I have no idea on why you quoted me twice
Bill, He is a Cadet.
We should encourage the newbies to post and help teach them how to use the forum. I agree—I wasnt sure exactly what he meant. I think he meant that any action by Forrest that may look like a retreat or hesitation is actually part of Forrest’s overall plan to throw the enemy off.
 
My favorite photo of Fort Pillow State Park (reduced in size & quality for this post).
My cousin took this photo of me on the North side of the Inner Fort. We were discussing the details of the battle so I pulled out my copy of “River Run Red”.
We were tired after making the hike over two ridges. I think it was a year later, my cousin had a knee replacement. I tell him that he was the last casualty of Fort Pillow.

925E2ED6-2FD8-4C1C-8849-90416B96EAC2.jpeg
 
Bill, He is a Cadet.
We should encourage the newbies to post and help teach them how to use the forum. I agree—I wasnt sure exactly what he meant. I think he meant that any action by Forrest that may look like a retreat or hesitation is actually part of Forrest’s overall plan to throw the enemy off.

I get it.....

He just threw me a knuckleball.

Bill
 
Murray State's Digital Commons
Student Scholarship & Creative Works
Spring 4-2-2019

A Modern-day Review of The Fort Pillow Massacre - Act of War or Genocide
Austin Valentine

This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Murray State's Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Student Scholarship & Creative Works by an authorized administrator of Murray State's Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Introduction
On April 13th, 1864 Confederate Major General Nathan Bedford Forrest attacked Union held Fort Pillow in western Tennessee. The event would later be known as the Fort Pillow Massacre where a number of African American soldiers were killed while trying to surrender to Confederate forces. Forrest was one who had not been a graduate of a military academy, nor had any military
experience. He had simply been a Memphis slave trader turned Confederate sympathizer who enlisted as a private in the Confederate Army on June 14th of 1861. However, he eventually financed and organized his own cavalry unit through his riches made by the selling of slaves. He quickly rose through the ranks based on his determination and his excellent horsemanship. Forrest was known to many as the wizard in the saddle. Through his cavalry exploits Forrest would wreak havoc across portions of Tennessee and Western Kentucky, which historians continue to speak of today. Forrest had a number of skirmishes and raids in towns all across these two states from Paducah, Kentucky to Chattanooga, Tennessee. However, it wasn't until the massacre at Fort Pillow did his name become known across the country as a force to be reckoned with. After the Civil War an organization called the Ku Klux Klan was formed to promote white racial superiority and suppress the enfranchisement of the African American race during the reconstruction years of the United States. This included targeting and terrorizing African Americans across the south. The group was a tight circle that promoted white racial superiority in the majority of the south and initially former General Nathan Bedford Forrest was elected as leader of the group. However, the violence of the group got to be such that Forrest eventually tried to disband the group in 1869 but failed to do so. However, his being a part of the **** group caused many Americans to forever associate Forrest's name with white superiority and suppression of the African American race



Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

  • A Modern-day Review of The Fort Pillow Massacre - Act of War or G.pdf
    687.1 KB · Views: 30
The focus of what happened at Ft Pillow is almost always on what Forrest did or did not do, not what was happening around there. It was a case of: if I show up on your porch, chances are you did something to bring me there. Forrest and other Confederate commanders had repeatedly complained to Union authorities about the excesses of outlaws as well as near outlaw Union forces such as Hurst and Bradford. The fort was supposed to have been closed but was not, there was rumored to be smuggling and other such activities by Hurlbut, who vehemently denied it. In fact, it went all the way up to Sherman. The good general would have had some explaining to do had Forrest come to trial! You can bet your bottom dollar Forrest would have had no problem grabbing Sherman's collar and dragging him into it. The Trial of Fort Pillow would have been a real seat gripper!
That has been the essence of my responses over the years. But, propaganda prevails. and the root cause is left unspoken.
 
Back
Top