Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Fort Pillow --- some citations
- Several unfair statements or as Forrest was reported as preventing before the war, an old fashioned lynching.Several points on the recent anti- Forrest posts.:The letter in question was or was not presented as evidence during war or post-war inquiries.If the letter in question was introduced ,then was the author sworn under oath as to the validity of his remarks and cross examined.If not introduced ,then why not.Was the letterwriter's presence at Ft. Pillow during the battle proven.If an authentic letter, was the writer predjudiced to the attackers. An account from the opposite predjudice such as a Forrest trooper would seem to counter the Northern account.If the letter is authentic and not disputed by the previous, then what. Was it a massacre. It would seem.The writer states that after the Southerners reached the walls, the forts occupants then surrendered. This seems to say you shoot at me and when I start to return the fire ,you surrender.Like a duel with single shot pistols where one shoots first and then runs begging for mercy.The letter continues with damning evidence of some Confed. soldiers deep hatred. Disturbing.Wasn't long ago when many posts dwelled on the aspect of war, how unhospitable and to be specific , to make them howl and howl they did.War to both sides was a living h*ll..To the losers..a massacreTo the winners... warTo historians.....?I dont see Ft. Pillow as a massacre in the text of U.S. Army and Native warriors as delivered to women and children on each side.Yet , I dont see Ft. Pillow as a victory with honorable purpose or deserving admiration.Hooper-------------- Original message --------------
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "cashg79" <CashG79@a...> wrote:
> Unfortunately, it's convincing for those who are open to
> believing it. For those who want to disbelieve it, it's not
> convincing at all.
Nothing will convince the True Believers. However, as a personal
letter (as opposed to something written for publication) it has
a lot of inherent authority and veracity. In addition, it was
written in the "window" between the battle and when the public
outcry started (roughly 4/25, IIRC). I'm going to try and
get the article out of the UM library tonight.