View single post by Albert Sailhorst
 Posted: Thu Feb 22nd, 2007 02:26 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
Albert Sailhorst

Joined: Mon Sep 12th, 2005
Location: Aledo, Illinois USA
Posts: 554

  back to top

What Forrest did at Ft. Pillow was a military engagement. As to a "massacre", that is still a subject of debate, the outcome of which will probably never be agreed upon.

For the sake of argument, let's pretend to agree that Ft. Pillow was a massacre. Let's compare the military action of Gen. Forrest at Ft. Pillow against Sherman's "March to the Sea". Sherman's war on the civilian population is inexcusable. He burnt women and children out of their homes, etc. Caused more damage and hardship against civilians than did Forrest commit against soldiers. So, I do not think Forrest has to be absolved of any guilt whatsoever. He committed a military action against military personnel.

Having read "River Run Red" by Andrew Ward, I am still not convinced that Ft. Pillow was a massacre. In that book, I feel that the author "fashions" the action into a massacre in order to fulfill his own wishes, as he says, in the beginning of the book, that he has always been facsinated with massacres; hence, he wrote the book about about Ft. Pillow, and called it a massacre in order to justify his facsination and completion of the book. I still like that book and would recomend it to anyone. The research he did was good; however, I didn't find enough evidence to conclude, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that there was a "massacre" or that Forrest ordered it to be a massacre. Again, I do not think Forrest needs absolution for Ft. Pillow.


Albert Sailhorst, Cannoneer, Scott's TN Battery

 Close Window