Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
Dawna, I'm sorry that I don't see Shermans man as any worse than countless other Armies through history; before or after. My biggest problem w/ giving credence to so many of the stories of Atrocity by Shermans men is that there is so little legitimate evidence.
All too often I have read accounts of atrocity but then have been unable to corroborate it at all. So much hate and bile is put into so much of it and too much of it has an obvious post CW agenda in its meaning. I have read enough of the letters of the men to call into question the entire Lost Cause premise about the March to the Sea. I have no doubt atrocities and depradations happened; 60,000 odd men together you are bound to end up w/ a percentage of scum among them. Too much doubt in my mind to lend credence to 60,000 men being crucified by lesser men and enough doubt to keep me proud of them. I'm more inclined to believe the words of men I can verify who were there than letters written after or during by people who were passing on rumours.
__________________ Few take the trouble to understand or to view the American scene with perspective. And we Americans love to find ourselves guilty of something. However, it is never I who am guilty, but those other Americans, the past or present government or the other political party. Americans almost never find other countries guilty. It is always ourselves or our fancied influence in other countries. Louis L'amour
Johan,
What would qualify as evidence to you?There were no video cameras around in the 1860s.There were documents around in the North and South which spoke of the atrocities.Question why would the Union soldiers speak of some of these acts if they didn't occur?Why would Lincoln make sure to protect Sherman and others from prosecution if they hadn't committed dubious acts?It just wouldn't make sense for Lincoln to have taken that step unless he had credible evidence that these atrocities did occur.It should also be noted that many of these accounts were personal diaries which didn't see the light of day during the author's lifetime.It's not like the authors were on Opra(you've got to love that woman)or the news trying to garner attention.So looking at the evidence either Lincoln,the civilians who wrote these accounts,and the Yanks who talked of theses atrocities were all delusional or these events happened.I guess if you believe all of these Southerners were liers then that's you're right to choose your opinion.But you still have to account for the words and actions of Union soldiers which give some validity to the accounts as does Lincoln's action himself.
I also don't give soldiers a free ride to abuse women and children because they're in the army.I don't COMMIT murder just because someone has murdered before.The Franco-Russian War,the Mexican War, and Franco-Prussian War were fought in close proximity to the CIVIL WAR. I don't recall all of the accounts of atrocities in those wars do you?
REGARDS,
ASHLEY
Just one question. Again, I hate to keep bringing this figure up, but it has been mentioned that it was read that perhaps 50,000 civilians were killed by Sherman's men as they marched through Georgia and up through South Carolina.
Where are the bodies? Where are the mass graves? What happened to all those family bloodlines and families? No, I'm sorry, that is three questions, but they do relate to one thing.
Where are the bodies?
As to the charges of abuse by soldiers, I will grant you, having one's home taken over by soldiers, being forced to flee, watching food and livestock taken, perhaps even family valuables, would more than likely be considered a form of abuse. But where are the rapes? Where are all those who were killed? No, there were no video cameras, but the Civil War is one of the most documented wars in our history. Where are the reports of mass graves and all of the horrible things that happened in the reports, orders, newspapers, etc? By now, I would expect the findings of a mass grave or some such, or some written detail that would equate to some proof as evidence to such horrible happenings.
No one argues that the civilians during Sherman's march suffered, agonized and were tramuatized by the war and violence that swept around them. The loss of home, property, your very way of life would be terrible and no one can deny that. But the charges leveled against the men who marched with Sherman are not backed up with any credible evidence when charges of atrocities are made or thousands of civilian deaths. Why? Because they are not there. If they are, please direct me to them. In all seriousness, as such evidence would convince me totally in such charges.
But statements without proof are emotionally charged without fact and they are very satisfying but lack substance. To make such charges without proof is not history, but pure speculation. In my opinion.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
__________________ "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
What would qualify as evidence to me would be claims I could verify, not second hand accounts, not accounts that are proven as fiction, not letters by Union soldiers who were never there or who never existed.
The verifiable letters speak of property destruction and not all of it wanton; those I have read don't speak about rape or murder and as Neil put it & I before; where are the mass graves of civilians? 100,000, 50,000 10,000... less than 1000 and I say less than 1000 because that is what I consider the most reasonable upon the letters & diaries I have read.
THe definition of a military target is anything that can be of use to the enemy. Barns, mills, bridges, cotton gins, livestock, RR, RR engines all fit that definition.
I don't give a soldier a free ride either; I do give his letter more credence than a civilian who was never there or passing on "My cousins best friend said:..." THat is the kind of Here say that would never stand up in a court of law and too much of it is blatant propoganda.
Like I've said many times before 60,000 men are bound to have a percentage of criminals in their midst but the majority were not murderers, rapists, looters etc. And put in context w/ the men of other times of other similar armies... Shermans men were angels. Incidently, what the Germans did to civilians in the Franco Prussian War... shudder. Some of it was anti German propoganda but enough of it was true to put a chill on the soul. The French in Spain during the Penensuila Campaign, Brits in India & China etc. That is the context I speak of. Does it give soldiers a free pass? No, but I will be ****ed if I will slander them or allow them to be slandered by such weak evidence.
As to the looting, where did it go? Who carried it and how? How was it shipped home or how was it sold off? Who bought it? All questions that no one thought needed to be asked when the Lost Cause came up w/ their US hating propoganda.
1 Wagon per Regiment... 1 & the Hospital ambulances... that one wagon equaled about the same space as a single modern pickup. They left Atlanta carrying ammunition and rations of hardtack. They reached Savannah still carrying those rations and ammunition. OK so someone will say that they carried it... LOL, I challenge anyone who says so to do it for more than a 5 mile route march. Put on that uniform & drawers carry a catrtridge box w/ ammo, haversack, canteen, blanketroll & rifle... you will come up w/ about 60 lbs. Now march 12-15 miles per day... with a box full of family silver over your shoulder. The charges just don't hold up to reasoned study or practical experiment.
The charge that they took the wagons to fill the loot w/ from the populace... LOL again from me. Yes the bummers had a tendency to arrive back to their regiments in all kinds of splendor. Sometimes in fancy carriages or atop standard farm wagons. Again they were foraging for rations and those wagons & carriages were typically abandoned or broken up for firewood. There are no accounts of massive baggage trains following Sherman into Savannah.
There are other factors to the looting, rape & murder and IMHO they do not bode well for the Lost Cause idea of Shermans men being the children of the anti-christ or of the Southern man being pure as the driven snow. CS deserters, as many as 10,000 passed through the area prior to, during & after the march. No discipline to contain their anger at seeing people who had not seen the horror of war... but angry Alabamans, Texans, Mississipinans, etc never stole food or "forage" from a populace they considered less than hospitable. They didn't have the money to buy it... they weren't likely to let themselves starve. They filled their stomach somehow.
Now you have to look to Wheelers Cav... they drew no rations while pursuing Shermans men... they had to get food for themselves and fodder for their horses from somewhere. THey also had not been paid for most of a year... so they didn't pay for what they took. They already had a pretty bad reputation among the populace. "The only thing worse than Shermans Army is a Regiment of Wheelers Cav..."
Then there is the final factor, 25,000 freed slaves followed Sherman. Men and women who had never been paid... payback time.
With those considerations Shermans men suddenly don't look like the only guilty parties. But it is too convenient for the Lost Cause to pin everything on those **** yankees. Too many people look to sources dredged up by the Lost Cause as pure as the driven snow because they are closer to the contemporary. I have a bad tendency to discount those sources completely when their may be a glimmer of truth in them buried beneath all of the hate and bile.
I pray to God that generations down the road don't look to Michael Moore or George Soros as US history... In short I think something like that is what has happened over Shermans march.
__________________ Few take the trouble to understand or to view the American scene with perspective. And we Americans love to find ourselves guilty of something. However, it is never I who am guilty, but those other Americans, the past or present government or the other political party. Americans almost never find other countries guilty. It is always ourselves or our fancied influence in other countries. Louis L'amour
Johan,
Thanks for your post.I can understand where you're coming from better now.I don't think there was widespread murder so I'm sorry if I gave you that impression.What exactly did you think Sherman meant when he said "he was going to make Georgia howl?"Is he not credible or are his owm words second hand?There were scumbuckets in both armies so we agree on that.The difference is you don't see the Confederate high command sanctioning,approving, or ordering these atrocities.I also can't help but notice many more of these atrocities were committed on Southerners than visa-versa.
I also find it hard to believe Lincoln would go to the trouble of protecting Sherman and the like from prosecution if he foolishly believed the atrocities were "lost cause" rhetoric or simple hearsay.
Regards,
Ashley
While one of Sherman's infantryman might burden himself with heavy loot; gold rings, precious stones, watches and other lighter-weight loot wouldn't be very difficult to manage. The U.S. Mail could manage a small box of loot, sent home to a relative.
I talked to Elizabeth Adams whose Grandmother lived on Pine Mountain, Georgia in 1864. Mrs. Adams told me in 1976: One evening the Yankee army came by their (grandmother's) home. The Yankee officer dismounted, stepped upon the front porch and demanded entrance into her home. She stoically denied this officer entrance. The Union officer backed-down, stepped off the front porch and said his men would camp in her yard that night. Mrs. Adams' Grandmother told the officer he didn't have permission, but she couldn't stop them. The U.S. soldiers 'camped' in the front lawn and left at daybreak. In the aftermath, Mrs. Adams said ALL livestock, foodstuffs & anything not "nailed-down" was taken. The house and barn were left standing. Later, next day...Confederate Cavalry riding along, stopped by the house and inquired "what did the Union men take?" and after receiving an answer, rode after them.
My point: First, I wish I knew the ID of the Fed Company and that of the CS Cavalry! (I was very interested in history very early-on!) :-)
Second: The Fed Forces probed meticuosly the mettle of Civilians, while foraging. Some civilians were courageous and most weren't. The ladies/old people who weren't courageous were usually criminally violated by looting/robbing, etc...Civilian's robbed by US troops had whom to report the crime? Walk 5 miles to a U.S. Hd. Qtrs. and report it; while dodging 'highwaymen' & runaway slaves as well as invading army hot-heads? This would be dangerous and very unrealistic. Where would you leave small children/babies while you walked...as your transportation was gone? If you did report the crime, what were the chances of the crime being properly followed-up by an officer who was sympathetic to the culprit(s) in the first place?
As Ashley and I agree, molesting civilians was un-necessary and cowardly, period! Military targets were acceptable warfare tactics. Tax-in-kind type destruction provided a very loose interpretation to a particular situation; as women/children usually possessed enough food for themselves. Whether liberal or slight foraging ocurred was up to the Fed officer, and strictly up to his conscience. Read how many times was the Masonic 'secret sign' given by both sides? The crime reports, officially reported by Southern civialians are grossly understated, IMO. Raping a Southern woman would have been an easy crime for a Fed bummer to 'evade.' Again, who witnessed it? Who would she report it to? Out of wedlock pregnancy in Victorian times was a VERY social taboo. THIS is where WHEELER'S CAVALRY came to bear; after hearing testimony & viewing these atrocities.
Alabaman & Mobileboy, Shermans Army sent mail home prior to their departure to the Sea and not again until they reached Savanna. 300 odd miles; I can see a gold watch & some rings, maybe even a bit of silverware tucked away into a haversack or bedroll... but much more than that I question.
One question I would ask about a woman of the South who was raped and it is a harsh question one which I'll likely get beat up for. When her husband came home would it be better for her to tell him she had been raped by a Union soldier, one of Wheelers men, a CS deserter or worse still a slave? The answer is glaring to me, It's ugly no matter the answer, but I can see where most Southern women would say a Union soldier in order to spare their husband some pain. But regardless of what I think their just isn't enough evidence of mass rape anywhere along the line of advance to Savannah or through SC. While it happened it wasn't commonplace and I don't think it went unpuinished where it was known. It just wasn't an acceptable act by anyone.
I've read accounts of Shermans men taking chandeliers and pianos (I can barely even type that w/ a straight face) of men taking furniture, family paintings, family bibles, fine china, brass and bronze busts etc... all large, heavy & less than easily portable objects. I have no doubt there was major minor pilfery going on. But minor pilfery and vandalism don't equal murder and rape. I have little sympathy for destruction of military targets and food, forage and livestock equate to military targets. THe CS was very enthusiastc about it's tithing program and they weren't terribly effecient about keeping records... so it wasn't unusual for a family to find themselves 10 percented out of their livestock.
Early & other CS Generals ordered several towns held for ransom; often $500,000 at a pop. If they failed to pay up they were burned, public buildings, homes and all. Chambersburg is the most well known example. Wheelers men were guilty of some pretty bad depradations (ironically against Southerners and not just Pro-Unionists).
I wish I could lay my hands on the letter that details a foraging detail coming across some other bummers in the act of rape, they strung them up on the spot. No fuss, no muss, no trial. The woman was clothed in the hanged officers jacket and handed over to some of Wheelers Cav that appeared on the scene. IIRC there was a tense few minutes when Wheelers men were contemplating attacking and the situation was defused when the hysterical woman was delivered to them. So I know the bad things happened; my wonder and irritation is just how much they have been inflated over the years.
In 1860 rape was a far worse crime in the minds of the citizen than today. Today a rapists MIGHT go to jail for a couple years. In the 1860's he was facing a death sentence; especially from the western troops, both Union & CS. THere are many instances where men were strung up on the spot by their own comrades. Almost all of the losses to Shermans Army were hanged men. All of those hangings are officially blamed on Wheelers men... I personally think only 2/3 to 3/4 were by Wheeler w/ the rest being boys in blue.
I'm reminded of another instance I've read about; some Union boys came across a hanged man w/ a sign across his chest "Death to Bummers" problem was no one recognized the man and he wasn't wearing a Union uniform but a civilian jacket. None of the officers that came to id the man recognized him. He didn't appear to be a Union soldier... so who was he and why did Wheelers men think he was a Union soldier?
I believe that most men are inherently good men... but given a chance w/ no one looking and if the belief is there that he can get away w/ it he will do no good. MOst of those men were from the same towns & counties, they knew each other and each others families. Hard to justify doing business w/ a man you know is a murderer or rapist. In my mind that is much of what kept men in check. The question remains, where did that loot go? How many depradations were commited by people that weren't in Shermans Army?
I've read several accounts of widows along the line of the march painting their husbands name, Regt and place of death on their front door. One at least w/ the caption "You already took all that is dear to me. Leave me my dignity." IIRC the widow ended up w/ more livestock in her pen after Shermans men left than when they arrived and the sign worked w/ Wheelers men as well.
Another well known, at least among the AoT was the breaking open of several Atlanta banks and parcelling out the CS script among the men of the Division... there are enough accounts of men paying for what they foraged w/ CS script to lend it credence. At least some men paid for what they too. Albeit w/ what they knew to be worthless script, but so did the ANV both times they invaded northward.
Both of you bring up good points as does Dawna; I find it frustrating to come across sources detailing actions that either cannot be verified or can be easily discounted. I know there are enough real accounts out there to lend credence to a less than innocent element w/ Shermans Army. Perhaps, that more than anything is what frustrates me about the reputation Shermans men holds; too much of it wasn't earned and was post war slander.
__________________ Few take the trouble to understand or to view the American scene with perspective. And we Americans love to find ourselves guilty of something. However, it is never I who am guilty, but those other Americans, the past or present government or the other political party. Americans almost never find other countries guilty. It is always ourselves or our fancied influence in other countries. Louis L'amour
I share your amusement at some of the charges leveled at Sherman's men. It reminds me of the story told by Tony Horwitz in his book, Confederates in the Attic, in which he was talking with a southern lady about Sherman's March in which the lady insisted that every house within miles had been burned to the ground by Sherman's troops. Then she suggested they go outside and view the stately Antebellum homes in her neighborhood. There is some sort of cognitive disonance going on about Sherman's March. Prof. Lee Kennett documents that in Georgia at the time of the March the Georgians regarded Wheeler's Cavalry as being worse than Sherman's men. "By the end of the campaign Wheeler's cavalry was regarded by most Georgians who had made its acquaintance as more rapacious and destructive than the Yankees." [Lee Kennett, Marching Through Georgia: The Story of Soldiers & Civilians During Sherman's Campaign, p. 278] Where is the outrage among our proconfederate friends regarding Wheeler's making war on his own fellow southerners?
I read it a bit differently. I read that there was $20 million in property, such as cotton to use one example, that was taken and used for the advantage of the US Government, such as by selling it on the open market. The other $80 million in damage was simply destruction of public property and war materials.
Cash:
I don't see anything simple with respect to $80 million in damage to public property, war materials, and complete destruction to the Southern transportation system. Besides cotton, what do you estimate the damage in civilian property to be; and what of the destruction to communities including churches?
"No, ma'am, the Lieber Code's purpose was not to protect civilians. That was one function it performed, but its purpose was to codify the rules and regulations for conducting warfare, including treatment of prisoners of war and use of weapons."
Part of the rules and regulaltions for conducting warfare (including treatment of prisoners) includes the behaviour towards civilians - the Leiber Code is very specific about this and public property.
Leiber Code of Conduct - General Order No. 100:
Secion II
Public and private property of the enemy - Protection of persons, and especially of women, of religion, the arts and sciences - Punishment of crimes against the inhabitants of hostile countries.
Art. 35.
Classical works of art, libraries, scientific collections, or precious instruments, such as astronomical telescopes, as well as hospitals, must be secured against all avoidable injury, even when they are contained in fortified places whilst besieged or bombarded.
Art. 37.
The United States acknowledge and protect, in hostile countries occupied by them, religion and morality; strictly private property; the persons of the inhabitants, especially those of women: and the sacredness of domestic relations. Offenses to the contrary shall be rigorously punished.
Art. 44
All wanton violence committed against persons in the invaded country, all destruction of property not commanded by the authorized officer, all robbery, all pillage or sacking, even after taking a place by main force, all rape, wounding, maiming, or killing of such inhabitants, are prohibited under the penalty of death, or such other severe punishment as may seem adequate for the gravity of the offense.
A soldier, officer or private, in the act of committing such violence, and disobeying a superior ordering him to abstain from it, may be lawfully killed on the spot by such superior.
Art. 47
Crimes punishable by all penal codes, such as arson, murder, maiming, assaults, highway robbery, theft, burglary, fraud, forgery, and rape, if committed by an American soldier in a hostile country against its inhabitants, are not only punishable as at home, but in all cases in which death is not inflicted, the severer punishment shall be preferred.
"What you would have to do is show me a provision of the Lieber Code that prohibited demoralizing civilians. I don't think you can. If not, then, demoralizing civilians is not a violation of the Lieber Code."
Maybe I'm misunderstanding Sherman's total warfare policy, and you can explain the difference to me between this policy, and the demoralization of civilians. Are you suggesting that this was the purpose of Sherman's army - 'to confuse and debase the morals of the enemy?' Since Sherman openly admitted to be at war with every Southern man, woman, and child; his sweeping warfare strategies seem to have been well practiced by the time he was confronted with the "Indian problem" - starve the enemy and destroy their way of life.
"It depends on the invasion. And are you talking long term or short term? For example, Sherman's invasion of Georgia caused a great deal of destruction in the short term, but as it paved the way for ultimate victory and the removal of slavery, in the long term its results were promotion and betterment."
What do you consider long term - over a decade of martial law and reconstruction?
Sherman's statement that 'war is cruelty and that it cannot be refined' is most curious to me. In stating that civilians would inexorably be harmed, Sherman believed that advantage should be taken not only of the military effect, but to augment the psychological effects as well. Demoralization, or total warfare?
I didn't even know what a latigo was until I just now looked it up in the dictionary. Oh, please don't ever give up your spurs and latigo, Dawna. It just wouldn't be right.
Another trip back to the dictionary Cash? I think you could be having way too much fun!
I don't recall "leveling" charges against Gen. W.T. Sherman's men. If you read my reply closely I have offered a theory that "light-weight" gold jewelry could be easily carried and/or mailed, after looting from homes.
My only reference to Gen. Joseph wheeler concerned this interesting story told to me years ago. Do you perceive my post as one of gross exageration? This wasn't my intention.
Shane,
Relax...I would never "beat up" on you. I don't like bullies! ;-)
Re: Rape: To accurately answer your question would perhaps remove the truth from historical fact. My answer would only be a guess & would prove nothing. I have no idea, is my answer.
Shane, I haven't mentioned "mass" rape, murder or anything remotely similar. I'm perplexed at your response? 1864 had an invading army frequently confronting lone women. The females usually had husbands in the Confederate Army and were considered hostile or friendly. Many homes contained valuable jewelry and possibly other small valuables. These soldiers were amoung thousands of other soldiers in the area and most of these were on the march. Identificaion would have been a must for any criminal charge to stick. Draw your own conclusions as to what would/could have transpired? What are the chances of the 'right' thing being done as opposed to the criminal act upon pocketing valuables from an enemy? Now, consider the more serious act of rape or murder. How do invading armies treat civilians historically and was the American Civil War any different? If so, how and why was it different?
I'm aware of Chambersburg, Pa. being ransomed and subsequently burned by CS forces but were there many others burned? Chambersburg received Federal funds for it's losses. Have Southern Cities that were destroyed received Federal funding?
I'm not attempting to paint all of Gen. Sherman's men as criminals as this crtainly would be untrue. In the same thought all of Gen. Wheeler's men weren't criminals either. I've read where civilians reported some of Wheeler's Cavary as thieves, but this usually involved in liberally foraging food.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
