Pruning the Parks: Castle Pinckney National Monument (1933-1956)

Castle Pinckney, 1861. South Carolina Historical Society photo.

The Park Service acquired South Carolina’s Castle Pinckney National Monument in 1933, but was glad to see it abolished and transferred in the 1950s. Lacking a glorious past, and too expensive to restore, the old island fort now sits rotting in Charleston harbor.

In 1791, George Washington visited Charleston, South Carolina, saw that a little island in the harbor (Shutes Folly) was strategically located, and ordered that a fort be built there. The good people of Charleston, who were tasked with funding and building it, decided that it should be named Fort Pinckney in honor of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, a local planter, Revolutionary War General, and delegate to the Constitutional Convention. Charles Pinckney National Historic Site in nearby Mt. Pleasant, SC, is named in honor of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney's cousin.)

A crude log fort completed on Shutes Folly in 1804 was promptly destroyed by a hurricane. It was replaced by a brick masonry fort completed in 1810. The new fortification was dubbed Castle Pinckney because of its distinctive “castle” design, an innovation that featured multiple tiers of enclosed and protected (casemented) gun positions.

Castle Pinckney played no role in the War of 1812 and was demoted to “secondary line of defense” status in 1826. The very next year, the construction of Fort Sumter, a bigger and better fortification, got underway at a more strategic location across from Fort Moultrie at the harbor entrance. By the late 1820s it was already clear that Castle Pinckney would remain overshadowed by its bigger, better located neighbor.

Castle Pinckney was lightly garrisoned until 1836, and then not garrisoned at all until 1860. Not much was going on at the fort during the quarter-century leading up to the eve of the Civil War. Some repairs were made. A lighthouse was added to the island in 1855. The fort served as the city arsenal.

Then, remarkable things began to happen.

On December 20, 1860, South Carolina seceded from the Union. Seven days later, a small contingent of South Carolina militia “stormed” Castle Pinckney -- used ladders to climb over the parapet, that is -- and captured the garrison, which consisted of a couple of Union soldiers, some women and children, and around three dozen laborers and mechanics. Not a shot was fired by either side during this, the first seizure of Federal property in a southern state following the secession declaration.

Less than four months later, on April 12, 1861, Confederate batteries opened up on Fort Sumter and got the Civil War hotly under way. By September, Castle Pinckney was being used as a makeshift prison for 154 Union troops captured in July at the Battle of Bull Run (First Manassas), the first major land battle of the Civil War.

Though heavily bombarded during the war (twice in 1863 and once in 1864), Castle Pinckney remained in Confederate hands until Charleston fell late in the war. Whether the the fort's guns were ever fired in battle remains unclear.

Union troops reoccupied Castle Pinckney on February 18, 1865.

Following the war’s end, the Federal government seemed to have little use for Castle Pinckney beyond service as a lighthouse station and depot. The guns were left in place (some are still there today) but the fort was left to decay. By 1890 the deterioration was so advanced that the fort was sealed, filled with sand, and prepared for use as a lighthouse foundation.

An 1897 proposal to use the site as a nursing home for Union veterans came to nothing. The Spanish-American War came and went with no improvements to the fort. By 1917, the lighthouse was abandoned. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers did use the site as a base for harbor improvement projects.

Though only a pale shadow of what it once was, Castle Pinckney was still an historically significant place. On October 15, 1924, President Woodrow Wilson proclaimed Castle Pinckney National Monument. The new monument was placed under War Department administration, but in June 1933 it was transferred to the National Park Service as part of the agency reorganization.

Lacking necessary funds and any real incentive, the Park Service made no plans to preserve the property and develop it for public visitation. In 1951, Congress enacted legislation to abolish Castle Pinckney National Monument (which actually didn't go into effect until 1956) and transferred it to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

The Corps of Engineers didn’t want to keep Castle Pinckney. By 1953 it was declared surplus property, and there was a Congressional mandate to dispose of it to the state of South Carolina, the County of Charleston, or the city of Charleston.

The Park Service temporarily accepted the property back from the Corps of Engineers for a few years, but on March 29, 1956, the national monument was finally abolished. Having turned Castle Pinckney over to the General Services Administration (GSA), the Park Service was rid of it forever.

In 1956, the city of Charleston briefly considered building a sewage treatment plant on the island, but nothing came of it. Two years later, the South Carolina State Ports Authority paid the GSA $12,000 for Castle Pinckney, having decided that the property (with five additional acres) would be suitable for use as a dredge spoils disposal area.

An SCSPA-initiated project to excavate and restore the fort as a state park and museum was abandoned in 1962 when funds ran out.

During the years since, there have been various other proposed or temporary uses of Castle Pinckney. In July 1964, a private citizen said he was considering buying the fort so he could build a private residence on the island. In October 1964, the SCSPA deeded the fort to the South Carolina Shriners, who apparently intended to use it in connection with their crippled children’s program. The Shriners returned the property to the SCSPA the next year.

In 1969, the SCSPA sold Castle Pinckney to the Sons of Confederate Veterans, who intended to restore the fort, erect a museum, and (later) build an upscale restaurant. Although the SCV acquired grant monies and donations, it ran out of money for the project by 1984. The property later reverted to the SCSPA, which still owns it.

In 1970, Castle Pinckney was listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Recent decades have seen some cleanup and stabilization efforts, and even some ambitious proposals to restore the fort and open it to the public. However, restoring a structure in such an advanced state of deterioration will take a lot more money than the SCSPA or anyone else has been willing to come up with.

Today, the Castle Pinckney ruin still sits out there in Charleston harbor. Tour boat guides point it out and tell brief stories about the fort's not-too-glorious history. You can’t land on the island without special permission, though, and only a few people – mostly archeologists, cleanup crews, and Civil War reenactors – have set foot on it lately.

Postscript: Two other castle forts, both part of the New York harbor defense system, were completed at about the same time as Castle Pinckney. Castle Williams, completed in 1811 at a strategic location between lower Manhattan and Brooklyn, can be seen at Governor’s Island National Monument. The other castle fort, which was also completed in 1811, is at nearby Castle Clinton National Monument in lower Manhattan’s Battery Park.

Comments

Sad that piece of real estate would receive such sorry treatment over the years, it's only crime being the most conspicuous piece of real estate in the city. Odd that they would think of such awful uses for it over the years, instead of the natural one that comes to mind: a scenic little park, or bird refuge.

Trying to put enough money together for such a project is a sobering thought, Anon, and any proposed use of the site would have to deal with the fact that it's a National Register listed property. I'm not at all surprised that Castle Pinckney is languishing out there in the harbor. It just doesn't get any love.

Bob, I'm afraid the Pinckney name curse has struck again. The Charles Pinckney National Historic Site is named for Charles (1757-1824), son of Col. Charles and Eliza Lucas Pinckney, not Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (1746-1825). Charles Cotesworth and Charles were first cousins. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney does have an association with the National Historic Site, historically known as Snee Farm and owned by his cousin, because he was held prisoner there by British forces in 1781. If there isn't enough confusion already, NPS fans need to know that the lowcountry farm house on the site was built after Charles Pinckney's death and has no association whatsoever with his life and times. If there ever was a place that needed a pre-visit tutorial and a genealogical chart as part of the park brochure, it is CHPI. In fact, an argument could be made that some of the national significance attributes at CHPI are quite a stretch. Could the site find itself on the "Pruning the Parks" list someday? I'd say it is a candidate in the right economic and political climate.

Thanks for all your contributions to Traveler. Looking forward to more.

I have been victimized by the same curse. Charles Pinckney's mother is Frances Brewton Pinckney. Eliza Lucas Pinckney was the mother of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney. My apologies for not proofing more carefully. I am now ready to move on to another topic, quickly.

RoadRanger, there were just too damn many Charles Pinckneys for my feeble neural networks to process. Let's give this thing a rest, OK? Well, maybe not yet. Wasn't the Charles Pinckney of Charles Pinckney National Historic Site the first cousin once removed of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney? BTW, thanks for not pointing out my misspelling of the latter's name in the article.

Does anyone have a photograph or photographs of the lighthouse or the lighthouse keepers who served at the lighthouse?
We'd love to publish them to help preserve the history.
Tim Harrison
Lighthouse Digest Magazine
P.O. Box 250
East Machias, ME 04630

How does one get a permit to visit the old castle.

I'm not sure how one goes about getting permission to visit Castle Pinckney. You might try checking with the owner, the South Carolina State Ports Authority.

The Ghost Castle at Charleston Harbor, Castle Pinckney , holds a place in my memory- a small place I must admit. Being born in South Carolina, and having beloved relatives who lived their entire lives there made many things only found in SC dear to me as Im certain they must be to many residence of SC. I have not lived in SC since the mid 1960's, having been born lived near Cool Springs not far from my Grandfathers home at Galivants Ferry, SC .The Castle holds more mystery and comes to my mind as often as Fort Sumter ever has, even though Ive never set foot on Castle soil, where as I've toured Ft Sumter twice in my life- once as a young teenager w/ family and once w/ my young wife a year after our marriage. I think it is the fact that the castle was there before Sumter that makes it have some recognition due it in my mind. A little respect, a historical brochure at the very least would be great in my opinion - it would show at least that even though no single civic group or other grp has been able to restore the place, it is at least worthy of some notoriety as a place Washington took notice of , Civil War prison, etc . Ft Moultrie has its fame as does Ft Sumter. This Castle will live on in my memory as a place of purely utilitarian necessity- nothing romantic or exotic, but just an overgrown little island fort that is forgotten more easily than remembered . And it was also built ( as were Moultrie and Sumter) for the preservation of our Nation that we so dearly love - by many people ( mostly forgotten people ) who must have dearly loved our nation as much as we love it today. Maybe someday it will be restored when enough money is scraped together by enough people who come together for the purpose . Then, one of the lowest of little Forts will get a memorial for what it stood for -Let Freedom ring.

WHEN I TOURED FORT SUMTER BY BOAT....WE PASSED THE ISLAND VERY SILENTLY...THE ONLY COMMENT WAS ABOUT THE WHITE CROSS......BEING FROM THE NORTH WOULD PROBABLY CAUSE ONE TO THINK MY OPINION UNIMPORTANT...I AM ALSO A VETERAN....AND I KNOW EVERY SOLDIER AND SAILOR IN THE UNION AND CONFEDERACY WAS A VETERAN JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER WAR...SO IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT THE VETERANS ARE GIVEN THE PROPER RESPECT FOR HAPPENINGS AT CASTLE PICKNEY...THE FACT THE ISLAND WAS TAKEN BY THE SOUTH ALMOST 4 MONTHS BEFORE FORT SUMTER IS REMARKABLEY IMPORTANT...IT WAS IN FACT THE FIRST ACTION TAKEN AGAINST THE NORTH...THE VETERANS SHOULD BE AS MUCH A PART OF THE BEGINNING OF THE CIVIL WAR AS ANYONE ELSE...AND THEIR NAMES MADE KNOWN AS THE THE BRAVEST MEN,,,,ON THAT DAY IN DECEMBER...HELL I,D BUY IT FOR 12K...

]I know that these comments were from 2009 however, I am in graduate school for architecture and am planning on writing my thesis application on Castle Pinckney. I am having some trouble locating where I should file a permit to get land access so I can do a site analysis. I have seen some places saying that the port authorities have ownership of the island and others saying that GSA. I guess I start with the port authorities? Any suggestions? I'm planning on conducting this during December when I'm in between semesters (I'm from Florida so trying to plan ahead).

The article above states:
"On December 20, 1860, South Carolina seceded from the Union. Seven days later, a small contingent of South Carolina militia 'stormed' Castle Clinton…"
Was that suppossed to say Castle Pinckney?

A very good catch, Query Quest, particularly in light of the comments that were made back when the post was fresh. Obviously no one else spied it. We'll see that's fixed. Thanks!

Like Kurt, I'm surprised that this typo remained unnoticed -- or at least unreported -- for so long. Thanks very much.