Sherman Bummers total war? Corruption what do you think.

[War Horse]

That's what the raiders were called. Nothing but wandering thieves. What do you think?

 

[Stony]

Yes I agree.

 

[War Horse]

I understand Sherman's army had to sustain themselves. There is line and I think it was crossed.

 

[marinegrunt]

I understand Sherman's army had to sustain themselves. There is line and I think it was crossed.

There is indeed a line. But in view of the resistance on the part of the Confederates to acknowledging their cause was lost it does seem like it needed to be kicked out of them.

 

[marinegrunt]

I understand Sherman's army had to sustain themselves. There is line and I think it was crossed.

I do think that the answers you get are going to lie along Union/Confederate sympathies. Might not be the best question to ask.

 

[War Horse]

Well it certainly was.

 

[War Horse]

I do think that the answers you get are going to lie along Union/Confederate sympathies. Might not be the best question to ask.

Yes, but interesting don't you think?

 

[nextcity]

He spared Savannah. He spared Charleston. Very few recorded accounts of violence against women by Bummers. Aside from the incident at Ebenezer Creek, I think the March was performed admirably.

 

[War Horse]

The History channel documentary I am watching as we speak seem to feel differently.

 

[brass napoleon]

That's what the raiders were called. Nothing but wondering theaves. What do you think?

If I recall correctly, the term "bummers" is one that Sherman's troops proudly used to describe themselves. I don't agree that it was anything near "total war", and from all of the documented evidence I've seen, I don't think they "crossed the line" as a whole in Georgia (although there certainly were exceptions). But I do believe they crossed the line in South Carolina. Here's an excerpt from a letter home written by a colonel of a USCT regiment during the Carolina part of that campaign:

"I confess I have been disappointed in the action of our army while marching through the enemy's country. The plundering and pillaging have been fearful - it seems to me disgraceful. The army of course has lived on the country as far as possible. This is right. Contributions would be demanded from the civil authorities and in case they failed to make them then there should be a system of foraging organized.

But the people should in no case be stripped of the means of subsistence. I fear Sherman's army has impoverished the whole country which he has traversed. For thirty miles in rear of Sherman's army, the country is full of "foragers". They have stripped everything from the people. I do not see how the people can live during the summer. Now I am not at all sure but the people merit this and it is perhaps the just retribution of the Almighty. Still, I believe it is cruel and wicked on the part of our army.

I have prevented this sort of action in my own regiment and have gained the ill will of many officers and men in doing so. While on the march the men in the regiments next to ours would break from the ranks and rush into houses and strip them of every particle of provisions. Of course it seemed surprise to my men that they should be made an exception, while rations were short and they were worn out with hard marching. I detailed men - placed them under an officer and sent them to plantations away from the road with instructions to leave all that was necessary for the subsistence of families. In this way I obtained all that was necessary for my men and injured no one - while I maintained discipline of my regiment. In many cases hundreds of country cured hams would be found buried on plantations."

- Union Colonel Giles Shurtleff, commanding officer 5th USCT, March 29, 1865

Source: Catherine Durhant Vorhees, The Colors of Dignity, pp. 186-188 (Nookbook version)​

 

[Georgia Sixth]

He spared Savannah. He spared Charleston. Very few recorded accounts of violence against women by Bummers. Aside from the incident at Ebenezer Creek, I think the March was performed admirably.

You might want to look into the new research here.

http://lsupress.org/books/detail/civilian-war/

 

[kholland]

Yes, but interesting don't you think?

I don't understand your use of that word "corruption" in the title of your post.

 

[nextcity]

I think McPherson's march from Bruinsburg to Jackson Mississippi was worse on the locals.

 

[War Horse]

I don't understand your use of that word "corruption" in the title of your post.

Perhaps misused I don't argue that. But there is a standard weather written or not. Wright is wright and wrong is wrong. I am reading Theodor Upsons letters. All were confused as to where the line was defined. It's very interesting. Thanks Brass, not meaning to confuse anyone.

 

[johan_steele]

Total war... hardly. The only way to call it total war is to have a total lack of historical knowledge in the field of military history.

 

[hrobalabama]

The Civil War war was a "total war." This country has not had "total war" since WWII. It seems for the past 60 years we have not fought a war to win.

 

[War Horse]

Total war... hardly. The only way to call it total war is to have a total lack of historical knowledge in the field of military history.

Total war as defined in the 1860's Jackson suggested it. He called Black Flag war meaning no prisoners and no quarter. Fact!

 

[rbasin]

Total war... hardly. The only way to call it total war is to have a total lack of historical knowledge in the field of military history.

Agreed. In many wars that came before the Civil war in comparison, this was relatively lame.

 

[kholland]

Agreed. In many wars that came before the Civil war in comparison, this was relatively lame.

And the Civil War has been considered on the border of the old style Napoleonic version of war versus the modern version. And in that version war was not made on just soldiers but in the hearts and minds of the civilians who supported those same soldiers.

 

[War Horse]

And the Civil War has been considered on the border of the old style Napoleonic version of war versus the modern version. And in that version war was not made on just soldiers but in the hearts and minds of the civilians who supported those same soldiers.

The ACWwas a redefining war. Nepoleantic style fighting still employed but fastly being replaced by more modern tactics. Hale the King of Sapdes.