What actually happened at Fort Pillow?

Saphroneth

I thank you for again a thoughtful intelligent reply. While I like your Wellington assault of Badajoz comparison, I am afraid it is all in vain. There is simply no real profession conduct being of note here in most of the American Civil War. Especially in these small scale back woods engagement involving mostly southerners. Bedford Forrest had no intention of being professional in the ceasefire flag event. It is reported and I am inclined to agreed; that Bedford cheating during the note exchange event; by allowing his troops to steal their way to vital positions so as to soon afterwards make that final assault; that did indeed reach the main entrenchment fatally for the garrison. He knew the Federals would not surrender and he cheated to take advantage of the situation in which he had been failing to gain said advantage. Also, I assume you read Bedford’s note and surely you did not fail to understand its implication. What Bedford was saying is that if you do not surrender, I will withdraw any attempt to control my troops violent acts upon you. Therefore, as promised, Bedford allowed the commencement of the pogrom/massacre, but stopped it when he was satisfied that a point had been made to all southern former slaves that enroll in Federal Army. Everyone knew meaning and they also knew they could not trust him to surrender to him. And again, they believed they could beat him. On your point about survival of too many Federal white officers, it was because it was too dangerous to murder them, as one would face retribution more quickly and likely if that is done.

We agreed that the outlaying rifle pit line had been seized before the ceasefire flag and that the buildings were also occupied prior. Boothe and Bradford showed inexperience for not burning down the buildings quickly and not fighting for those outer rifle pits. Federals did have a thin force there but withdrew them. However, there is no evidence that the Federals were aware of how fatal this situation was until too late. Nor that the Confederates were even aware. What is added that during the note exchange Bedford again had some special troops sneak and grab even more vital positions. Once Bedford had the gain, he was ready to stop the note exchange and resume the assault.

We really do believe in sources for assertions. Could you please provide those? We've operated in this forum a long time using that technique, and I intend to continue the practice. No sources = untrustworthy in most people's eyes.
 
I can't make it any plainer that we are not debating these other areas.

But, I guess the opportunity to display an impressive depth of knowledge about how bad Unionists were treated in other parts of the South was just too much to resist.

Good point, but let's leave off the snark. We don't operate that way, either.
 
For what it's worth, the New Era (the gunboat at Fort Pillow) reported shortly after the events of the battle that she was out of ammunition. (The report of her being out of ammunition had reached Cairo Ill by April 15 - this information is in ORN S1 V26 P214). The fact she shot her ammunition dry suggests to me that she was shooting at something, and that therefore she (if no other vessel) represented a gunboat threat on the river.
 
For what it's worth, the New Era (the gunboat at Fort Pillow) reported shortly after the events of the battle that she was out of ammunition. (The report of her being out of ammunition had reached Cairo Ill by April 15 - this information is in ORN S1 V26 P214). The fact she shot her ammunition dry suggests to me that she was shooting at something, and that therefore she (if no other vessel) represented a gunboat threat on the river.

That's the one I was thinking of. Thanks!
 
Searching for

"European reaction to the Fort Pillow Massacre"

produces no results (with the quotes), though it does provide the "without quotes" results.
Yes. It is very difficult to find a specific document or many an image related to Fort Pillow without getting hits for all sorts of websites and threads that are discussions just like this rather than original sources or the item you were searching for.


It is like my genealogy search for one of my relatives who was who was Dr. Leonidas King-----all my hits are related to Dr. Martin Luther King.
 
Time to return to the basic question of this thread:
What actually happened at Fort Pillow?

I have always believed that no really knew who was at the Battle fighting on the Union side. The 13th Tennessee Cavalry was using the fort as their base for recruiting. There were obviously some new recruits whose names had not been recorded in the official records preserved back at Memphis.
This lead me to wonder how or if the commanders were able to recreate service records for the new recruits. Also there were several names found in a list of Confederate prisoners that did not match up with anyone in the records.

This leads you to believe that there had to be a few soldiers who fought and died at Fort Pillow who never were enrolled into the Army's records. Could that have happened?
Someone contacted me with proof that there was at least one such soldier. I haven't asked permission to share all the details but I will explain how it happened.

On May 24, 1865, over a year after the Battle, Mary King filed for pension for her husband. She was currently living in Indiana but she claims she married James Gilleland in Arkansas in the summer of 1860. She received a rejection by the Record and Pension Bureau but Mary continued to submit more forms and more claims for next year. She obtained documents and witnesses to vouch that she married James and he served in Bradford's Tennessee Cavalry.
One witness was Captain John Poston, formerly commander of Company E, 13th Tennessee Cavalry, who said he remembered James Gilleland. He also swore that all of Company E was killed or captured.
Another witness submitted a sworn statement. Thomas Gilleland confirmed the marriage of his brother, James, and Mary were married. He also swore that he was serving on the US Gunboat No. 7 [aka NEW ERA] on the day of the battle.

Finally on July 20, 1867, Mary was granted her pension of $8.00/month commencing on April 12, 1864.

There is no military service records on file for James Gilleland.
 
Time to return to the basic question of this thread:
What actually happened at Fort Pillow?

I have always believed that no really knew who was at the Battle fighting on the Union side. The 13th Tennessee Cavalry was using the fort as their base for recruiting. There were obviously some new recruits whose names had not been recorded in the official records preserved back at Memphis.
This lead me to wonder how or if the commanders were able to recreate service records for the new recruits. Also there were several names found in a list of Confederate prisoners that did not match up with anyone in the records.

This leads you to believe that there had to be a few soldiers who fought and died at Fort Pillow who never were enrolled into the Army's records. Could that have happened?
Someone contacted me with proof that there was at least one such soldier. I haven't asked permission to share all the details but I will explain how it happened.

On May 24, 1865, over a year after the Battle, Mary King filed for pension for her husband. She was currently living in Indiana but she claims she married James Gilleland in Arkansas in the summer of 1860. She received a rejection by the Record and Pension Bureau but Mary continued to submit more forms and more claims for next year. She obtained documents and witnesses to vouch that she married James and he served in Bradford's Tennessee Cavalry.
One witness was Captain John Poston, formerly commander of Company E, 13th Tennessee Cavalry, who said he remembered James Gilleland. He also swore that all of Company E was killed or captured.
Another witness submitted a sworn statement. Thomas Gilleland confirmed the marriage of his brother, James, and Mary were married. He also swore that he was serving on the US Gunboat No. 7 [aka NEW ERA] on the day of the battle.

Finally on July 20, 1867, Mary was granted her pension of $8.00/month commencing on April 12, 1864.

There is no military service records on file for James Gilleland.

Oh my gosh. How wild!
 
Oh my gosh. How wild!
Thanks for reminding me about my post. Now I can't recall who sent that to me but I'm sure I have it filed away somewhere.

Next week I will give a short talk about the Battle of Fort Pillow on the specific topic:
A Review of Casualties of Union Officers.
FTPillow Talk.JPG


If I have time at the end, I will describe the List of KIA's on the plaque in the Interpretive Center at the State Park.
I will summarize the total number of Union soldiers in each unit and point out that the list also includes names of MIA's. Then I will highlight some of the listed "KIA's" who actually survived the battle.
FTPillow Talk-2.JPG

This image represents the plaque showing the columns of names for Union USCT, Union white and Confederate soldiers. I've added the number of names for each column or section. For Example: the plaque lists 18 from the 2 USC Light Artillery were KIA out of the 40 who were reported to be present. The plaque is difficult to photograph because the names are printed in White on the shiny Black and Blue background.

Total Union soldiers listed on the plaque = 277 --- which is 50% of the fort's compliment of troops as reported by XVI Corps Adjutant.
However, the plaque includes many who were WIA's: 10 in 6 USCHA and 21 in 13 Tenn Cav. Now the KIA's drop down to 246 Union soldiers or 46% KIA's. After removing those who were MIA-M and not documented as being in the battle, that leaves 226 troops or 41%. This is just to show that there are names that shouldn't be on the List of KIA's and some names that are missing from it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top