Cuppels's posting of September 27 tries to exonerate Forrest at Ft.
Pillow and blame Major Bradford. We do, of course, disagree sharply on
this topic.
It is a very old argument that Forrest did not give a direct order to his
men to slaughter the black and white troops there. As Cornish said, "He
didn't need to. He had sought to terrify the Fort Pillow garrison by a
threat of no quarter, as he had done at Union City and at Paducah in the
days just before..." Cornish _Sable Arm_ 175.
>I think, however, they [McPherson and Foote] focused upon the legions of
>anti-Forrest "grumps." PCs who can hardly wait to attack a man unable to
>defend himself.
Where are those "legions of anti-Forrest grumps" lurking? A PC is, I
suppose, the current curse for those who disagree with you. As for Forrest
being "undalbe to defend himself," isn't Major Bradford also dead? How does he
defend himself?
McPherson's writings do not come close to sustaining your argument. In
_Battle Cry of Freedom_ McPherson states that at Ft. Pillow "some of his
[Forrest's] men murdered black soldiers after they surrendered.: p.748 & n.
Later, in the context of discussing Sec. of War Seddon's order that black
soldiers should receive "summary execution," McPherson states "hundreds were
massacred at Fort Pillow, Poison Spring, the Crater and elsewhere. p.793 & n.
>West Tennessee, at the time of Ft. Pillow's capture,was under brutal military
>occupations.
This may be a plausible explanation for part of the ferocity of Forrest's
soldiers at Ft. Pillow. But there will have to be much "more substance" to
sustain this argument.
>As for the metaphor regarding Lee, it was intended to show the absurdity of
>faulting a military commander for maximizing the tactical situation.
Sorry, but this is not a metaphor; it is a direct comparison of
Forrest's and Lee's behaviors that just does not stand up under scrutiny.
Is it really "maximizing the tactical situation" [any jargon here?] when
your troops slaughter their surrendering opponents, many of whom were black
soldiers?
Three days after the event, Forrest wrote of the Mississippi being "dyed
with blood of the slaughtered for 200 yards." And he hoped that "these facts
will demonstrate to the Northern people that Negro people cannot cope with
Southerners." [_O.R._ cited in Cornish, _Sable Arm_, 175 & n.] Not only was
Forrest's hope not realized, the actons of his troops accelerated the war
practices further toward "no quarters given" policies.
Furthermore, Lee's men killing Burnside's attacking Union men is NOT
the same as Forrest's men killing surrendering men. The reactions of Lee
and Forrest to the situations speaks to the topic: As the killing
continued at F'burg, Lee commented, "It is well that war is so terrible -
we should grow too fond of it." [McPherson, _Battle Cry_, 572] In contrast,
Forrest appears to be delighted with the with the river running red with
blood.
>As for Major Bradford, he is at fault. ...
>His actions approached a criminal dereliction of duty among other possible
>charges.
So you think that Bradford should have surrendered. Since he did not, you
would have him charged with criminal dereliction of duty? Is it criminal
dereliction of duty for a military commander to resist a call for surrender?
Does it not cause you to pause when you think about Bradford himself being
captured then shot "while attempting to escape," the timeworn excuse for
killing a prisoner. McPherson, _Battle Cry_, p.748n.
> As for Forrest Gump, what does he have to do with anything other than
>Hollywood's money-making venture? I fail to see where Forrest Gump figures in
>this discussion.
I hope he doesn't, but movies are far more influential in opinion
formation than email exchanges. I plead guilty to using it to goad you.
Neither of the two recent works on Forrest gives any credence to your
blaming Bradford. Wills' _A Battle from the Start_ and Hurst's _Nathan
Bedford Forrest_ refer to the "massacre" [Wills, 193], and "Ft. Pillow was
indeed reprehensible" [Hurst, 382]. The action at Ft. Pillow still
belongs under the black flag, although it was not carried openly.
Lou Athey
(l_athey@acad.fandm.edu)