For Lou Athey: By "substance," I mean primary evidence or something
approaching it. I mean something other than contemporary polemical
jargon. As for the "fair hearing" I referred to by Mcpherson and Foote,
you might ask them. I think, however, they focused upon the legions of
anti-Forrest "grumps," PCs who can hardly wait to attack a man unable to
defend himself.
West Tennessee, at the time of Fort Pillow's capture, was under brutal
military occupations. Many of Forrest's detractors fail to understand the
ramifications of this.
Forrest was not an angel. He understood that "War means fighting and
fighting means killing." So did Grant. As for the metaphor regarding
Lee, it was intended to show the absurdity of faulting a military
commander for maximizing the tactical situation. Lee masterly did it at
Fredericskburg, and Forrest did the same at Fort Pillow.
As for Major Bradford, he is at fault. He was not required to
defend un untenable position. Can anyone produce an order for him to defend
the position to the last man? If so, it will also clear Forrest. Bradford was
in command of the fort and responsible for the men under his command. His
actions approached a criminal dereliction of duty among other possible charges.
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.
Thanks,
Doug Cupples>From: IN%"H-CIVWAR%UICVM.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu" "Civil War
History
discussion list" 24-SEP-1994 11:26:35.23
>Subj: RE: Jos. Frank's question RE black flags (fwd)
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 11:25:46 -0500 (EST)
>From:L_ATHEY@ACAD.FANDM.EDU
>To: H-CIVWAR%UICVM.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
>Subject: Re: Jos. Frank's question RE black flags (fwd)
>
> RE: the argument below. Can we not help but wonder what is meant by "a
>fair hearing for Forrest at Ft. Pillow?" Surely, to blame a "so-called"?
>massacre on a major succeeding to command, however incompetent, is awfully
>close to "blaming the victim." The analogy to blaming Lee for
>Fredericksburg appears to be at best disingenuous. Was Forrest NOT
>responsible for his men at Ft. Pillow? "More substance" perhaps is
>needed, some of which might be used to disabuse popular culture addicts of
>the notion that Forrest Gump is a direct descendant of Bedford Forrest as
>presemted in the hit movie.
>
> > I would appreciate more substance regarding General Nathan Bedford
>>Forrest and the so-called "Fort Pillow Massacre." No credible evidence
>>has surfaced showing Forrest ordering, "Put them all to the sword."
>>Forrest's demand for surrender to the fort's commander stated that he
>>could not "be responsible for the fate of your [Major Booth, however he
>>was dead, and Major Bradford was then in charge] command.
>
> On a trip to the Fort Pillow site with James McPherson and Shelby Foote,
>both agreed that Forrest had not received fair coverage based upon the
>evidence. Brian Wills' book, "A Struggle From the Start," charges, at
>worst, that Forrest had lost "control" of him men as analogous to the
>famous lack of control of his temper.
>
> I do not subscribe to Wills' thesis, not can the congressional
>sub-committee sent to investigate the "massacre" be relied upon for
>credibility. There can be no doubt, however, to the incompetence of the
>Union commander after Booth's death, the tactical advantage enjoyed by the
>Confederates, and the garrison's refusal to surrender after losing the
>works.
>
>> The Confederates paid the price for a poor commander at Franklin, Grant
>>bled his men at Cold Harbor, and the Fort Pillow garrison suffered the
>>incompetence of Major Bradford. To blame Forrest for Fort Pillow is like
>>faulting Lee at Fredericksburg.
>
> Lou Athey
> (l_athey@acad.fandm.edu)