Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
Rose, Trice has ilustrated one of my points that Sherman's men were not the only men in Georgia destroying crops etc. What do you think of such? Does it in any way broaden your view of what happened in Georgia in the fall of 64?
Shane, I'm aware of the Confederate army's drain on the farmers. All I can say is that the Southern soldiers used what was necessary to live and destroyed what Sherman's men would have taken anyway. They paid with the only currency they had and it was unfortunate that by the fall of '64 that currency was all but worthless. The main difference in Wheeler's army and Sherman's is that Wheeler wasn't looting and burning houses and he wasn't being vindictive or malicious by taking what he needed.
Rose
__________________ "Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names".--J.F.K.
The War Between the States established... This principle that the Federal Government is, through its courts, this final judge of its own powers.
-- Woodrow Wilson
__________________ "Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names".--J.F.K.
The War Between the States established... This principle that the Federal Government is, through its courts, this final judge of its own powers.
-- Woodrow Wilson
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
The Confederacy was out numbered, out supplied and had out financed. Losing the war ruined the Confederacy.
Pollard must certainly hold a place of honor on your bookshelves.
Quote:
What Sherman did do was guarantee poverty to the Southern states for decades to come.
And Sherman had a great deal to do with their losing.
I don't remember the exact number, or what its composition was, but it seems I've read that around 100,000 Confederates were missing from the army when Sherman started from Savannah. That's 100k that wouldn't face battle again. Factor in the Federals that wouldn't be killed fighting them. It would seem that forcing their absence did indeed save lives.
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
All I can say is that the Southern soldiers used what was necessary to live and destroyed what Sherman's men would have taken anyway.
In other words, Wheeler's men also left the Georgia women without food. I fail to see the difference between Wheeler destroying what Sherman could use, and Sherman destroying what Wheeler could use.
The letter posted complaining about Wheeler's men clearly states that Wheeler was carrying out a scorched earth policy where he thought Sherman was going to be. How often did he do that, I wonder?
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
It seems to keep returning to the excuse that "the end justifies the means". But, it still seems to me that the mighty Union could have won the war without targeting civilians. Sherman and the others you mention didn't have to demonstrate invincibility and vulnerability in order to win. That was the method of their choice. Yeah, I know. Sherman claims to have saved lives by using harsh methods to end the war earlier than was otherwise possible. And here we are again, the end supposedly justified the means. I believe saving lives was the last thing on Sherman's mind when he burned private homes, destroyed a family's food and crops. He did it out of vindictiveness (how dare the rebel traitors stand up to the Federal government). They had to be taken down a notch. Winning a war against them wasn't enough. They had to pay more dearly than that and how better to crush the Confederate soldier than to attack his wife, mother and children?
What you are describing seems like normal war to me. The American Civil War, as fought by both sides, is actually fairly mild on the civilian population if you compare it to average experience elsewhere, both then (1840-1880, say) and at other times in history. Essentially, being a civilian in the way when the armies come through is fraught with danger. It stinks.
Yet you have a desire to demonize Sherman and the Union. This is understandable for one of Southern heritage, but it is quite misplaced if you try to integrate it into world history and see it against the experiences of other people. If you think not, spend some time and effort looking at what American volunteers did in parts of Mexico less than a generation earlier, what the European armies did in suppressing revolution not much more than a decade before the ACW, what the French were doing in Mexico in 1863-65, the various Balkan wars of the era, and what American soldiers did in the Philippines after the Spanish-American War.
Shane, I'm aware of the Confederate army's drain on the farmers. All I can say is that the Southern soldiers used what was necessary to live and destroyed what Sherman's men would have taken anyway. They paid with the only currency they had and it was unfortunate that by the fall of '64 that currency was all but worthless. The main difference in Wheeler's army and Sherman's is that Wheeler wasn't looting and burning houses and he wasn't being vindictive or malicious by taking what he needed.
Yet Southern civilians in Georgia in late 1864 saw "Wheeler's robbers" as the thieves you say they were not. That was shown in the letter to President Davis I posted to you, as well in the need for Wheeler himself to send this circular out to his own troops:
-----
CIRCULAR.] IN THE FIELD,December 10, 1864.
Soldiers! While you have been engaged gallantly fighting the enemy a band of thieves and stragglers have spread over the country robbing and insulting the wives and children of your brother soldiers who are opposing the invaders upon other fields. These soldiers expect protection from you, and I appeal to every officer and soldier of this command to assist in arresting and bringing to justice these depredators, who claim to belong to the command, and by their conduct are bringing disgrace upon you and distress upon citizens, the families of comrades in arms.
JOS. WHEELER,
Major-General.
-----
Why is it that what you want to believe is so at odds with what the Georgia civilians felt about his men?
Shane, I'm aware of the Confederate army's drain on the farmers. All I can say is that the Southern soldiers used what was necessary to live and destroyed what Sherman's men would have taken anyway. They paid with the only currency they had and it was unfortunate that by the fall of '64 that currency was all but worthless. The main difference in Wheeler's army and Sherman's is that Wheeler wasn't looting and burning houses and he wasn't being vindictive or malicious by taking what he needed.
Again, look at this paragraph from the letter to President Davis I posted to you yesterday:
===== Since August last there have been thousands of cavalry and wagon trains feeding upon our corn-fields, and for which quartermasters and officers in command of trains, regiments, battalions, companies, and squads have been giving the farmers their receipts, and we were all told that those receipts would pay our Government taxes and tithing; and though many of those receipts were signed by bonded quartermasters, yet not one of them will be taken by our collector. But again: When General Sherman left Atlanta Wheeler's cavalry commenced their retreat before him, and but a handful of Sherman's men ran W[heeler's] whole command down to Griffin, and while S[herman's] army was marching through Fayette, Clayton, Henry, and Butts, Wheeler's cavalry was burning up all the corn and fodder, driving off all the stock of the farmers for ten miles on each side of the railroad, all of from ten to twenty-five miles to the right and rear of Sherman's forces. Worse than all, the stock of mules and horses which General Wheeler's forces carried off, nine out of ten they have appropriated to their own use. In consequence of which there will be thousands upon thousands of acres of lands uncultivated the next year for the want of plow stock, which has been stolen from them by men claiming to act under orders from those high in authority. There are hundreds of families that have not one ear of corn left, whose husbands are now in the Army, and have been for the last three years, and now we are notified that our tithing must be paid. Our corn eaten up, or rather wasted or burnt, our fatting hogs shot down because too fat to drive, I ask, how can we pay our tithing? And yet we are threatened with having our lands sold for taxes. Our scrip for corn, used by the orders of our generals, will not be taken.
=====
Note that this is, as the writer complained, "all of from ten to twenty-five miles to the right and rear of Sherman's forces". Clearly your claim that this would have been done by Sherman's forces anyway is wrong in this case. How then do you explain this abusive thievery by Wheeler's men? What need is there for them to be burning corn and shooting hogs they can't drive off with them?
Shane, I'm aware of the Confederate army's drain on the farmers. All I can say is that the Southern soldiers used what was necessary to live and destroyed what Sherman's men would have taken anyway. They paid with the only currency they had and it was unfortunate that by the fall of '64 that currency was all but worthless.
I don't think this part holds water.
If one Confederate official gives you a paper that he says you can pay your taxes with, and another Confederate official refuses to accept it, you have been cheated, flim-flammed, lied to by your own government. This is theft, nothing less -- and the Yankees have nothing to do with the theft. No wonder Confederate civilians were outraged and disillusioned.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
