Sherman Calling all Sherman Haters

[wausaubob]

The Mississippi Brigade we are referring to is Tucker's (7th, 9th, 10th, 41st, 44th MS, & 9th Batt MS Sharpshooters). This is normally a rock solid formation, it's nickname was the "High Pressure Brigade" and the better part of the brigade had been with Bragg since Pensacola. In fact it was probably one of the most Pro-Bragg in the army. But I have no doubt that they were affected by the malaise that hit the Army of Tennessee after Chickamauga. But then I also doubt anything Sherman had done in MS had shaken them. Looking at the rolls of the 9th Batt Sharpshooters, it looks like their greatest number of KIA in a single battle was on Missionary Ridge, which indicates to me that while they were fighting, they fought hard.

Powell wrote that some of regiments in the front line trenches did very little fighting. Other regiments on the ridge were parolees from the Vicksburg garrison. I think the Confederates had problems re-equipping the regiments formed of men the Confederates claimed were exchanged. I wonder if some of these regiments were paper thin, after the Tullahoma campaign and the blood letting at Chickamauga.
I don't think officers on either side allowed the execution of prisoners, not even General Sherman. But a man who was thought to have violated his parole probably was not going to be paroled or exchanged again.

 

[Mississippian1861]

Powell wrote that some of regiments in the front line trenches did very little fighting. Other regiments on the ridge were parolees from the Vicksburg garrison. I think the Confederates had problems re-equipping the regiments formed of men the Confederates claimed were exchanged. I wonder if some of these regiments were paper thin, after the Tullahoma campaign and the blood letting at Chickamauga.
I don't think officers on either side allowed the execution of prisoners, not even General Sherman. But a man who was thought to have violated his parole probably was not going to be paroled or exchanged again.

None of the Vicksburg regiments were in the main area of the breakthrough. Moore's brigade moved to try to contain the breakthrough on the northern shoulder, but the collapse of Jackson's Brigade doomed the effort.

 

[JeffBrooks]

I have often wondered how soldiers violating their parole would be identified. The use of fingerprinting in criminal investigations was in its infancy, and it would obviously have been logistically impossible to check through thousands of fingerprints even if they had taken them. They obviously couldn't do any DNA tests and were not taking photos of every single person who signed a parole. Any paroled soldier with half a brain would not be carrying any papers that could identify him. And if they captured a fellow named "Bill Rogers", how could they be sure it was the same "Bill Rogers" listed in the parole paperwork?

It's impressive how much men of that era felt bound by their word of honor. I recall reading in Stephen Sears's book on Antietam that a Union officer captured and released under parole felt himself unable to warn the commander of a unit he passed on the road that there was a Confederate unit dug in ahead of him and he was essentially walking into a trap.

 

[gc45]

No dislike of Sherman for this war, but for his works afterward out west. He is responsible for deaths to many American Indians, including women and children.

 

[wausaubob]

I have often wondered how soldiers violating their parole would be identified. The use of fingerprinting in criminal investigations was in its infancy, and it would obviously have been logistically impossible to check through thousands of fingerprints even if they had taken them. They obviously couldn't do any DNA tests and were not taking photos of every single person who signed a parole. Any paroled soldier with half a brain would not be carrying any papers that could identify him. And if they captured a fellow named "Bill Rogers", how could they be sure it was the same "Bill Rogers" listed in the parole paperwork?

It's impressive how much men of that era felt bound by their word of honor. I recall reading in Stephen Sears's book on Antietam that a Union officer captured and released under parole felt himself unable to warn the commander of a unit he passed on the road that there was a Confederate unit dug in ahead of him and he was essentially walking into a trap.

The other factor operating at Chattanooga was that most soldiers knew the exchange protocol had been suspended, so that getting captured mean going north to a POW camp in winter. A soldier had to consider fleeing before capture, or having a plan to possibly take the loyalty oath and sit out the rest of the war.

 

[wausaubob]

I have often wondered how soldiers violating their parole would be identified. The use of fingerprinting in criminal investigations was in its infancy, and it would obviously have been logistically impossible to check through thousands of fingerprints even if they had taken them. They obviously couldn't do any DNA tests and were not taking photos of every single person who signed a parole. Any paroled soldier with half a brain would not be carrying any papers that could identify him. And if they captured a fellow named "Bill Rogers", how could they be sure it was the same "Bill Rogers" listed in the parole paperwork?

It's impressive how much men of that era felt bound by their word of honor. I recall reading in Stephen Sears's book on Antietam that a Union officer captured and released under parole felt himself unable to warn the commander of a unit he passed on the road that there was a Confederate unit dug in ahead of him and he was essentially walking into a trap.

Which leads to the speculation that there was a wide gap between suspecting a person to have violated his parole, and the provost officers being certain of the violation. Its not credible to think anyone was summarily shot who was in uniform and under the control of officers.

 

[Stryker65]

I have often wondered how soldiers violating their parole would be identified. The use of fingerprinting in criminal investigations was in its infancy, and it would obviously have been logistically impossible to check through thousands of fingerprints even if they had taken them. They obviously couldn't do any DNA tests and were not taking photos of every single person who signed a parole. Any paroled soldier with half a brain would not be carrying any papers that could identify him. And if they captured a fellow named "Bill Rogers", how could they be sure it was the same "Bill Rogers" listed in the parole paperwork?

It's impressive how much men of that era felt bound by their word of honor. I recall reading in Stephen Sears's book on Antietam that a Union officer captured and released under parole felt himself unable to warn the commander of a unit he passed on the road that there was a Confederate unit dug in ahead of him and he was essentially walking into a trap.

I would think that Union officers recorded which regiments were paroled, and if someone from that unit popped up again somewhere else in too short a period of time, they'd go back and check the records for someone of that name in that regiment. Or description. Did they put physical descriptions in parole records?

 

[tony_gunter]

I have often wondered how soldiers violating their parole would be identified. The use of fingerprinting in criminal investigations was in its infancy, and it would obviously have been logistically impossible to check through thousands of fingerprints even if they had taken them. They obviously couldn't do any DNA tests and were not taking photos of every single person who signed a parole. Any paroled soldier with half a brain would not be carrying any papers that could identify him. And if they captured a fellow named "Bill Rogers", how could they be sure it was the same "Bill Rogers" listed in the parole paperwork?

It's impressive how much men of that era felt bound by their word of honor. I recall reading in Stephen Sears's book on Antietam that a Union officer captured and released under parole felt himself unable to warn the commander of a unit he passed on the road that there was a Confederate unit dug in ahead of him and he was essentially walking into a trap.

In the case of the hastily issued paroles between Raymond and Vicksburg May 12 - May 18, these were soldiers captured by some of the units engaged at Jackson.

Paroles issued inside Vicksburg after the capture would be a different story.

That's why I lament that there's not more detail about these alleged soldiers executed at Jackson.

 

[G Low]

How many regiments were paroled in Vicksburg then returned to fighting elsewhere? I seem to recall one ancestor who was paroled from Vicksburg only to be killed in Reseca.

 

[Stryker65]

How many regiments were paroled in Vicksburg then returned to fighting elsewhere? I seem to recall one ancestor who was paroled from Vicksburg only to be killed in Reseca.

By the time of Resaca, all of the Vicksburg garrison had been exchanged.

 

[genbeau]

No dislike of Sherman for this war, but for his works afterward out west. He is responsible for deaths to many American Indians, including women and children.

Well, he was the same character in both theaters of the war. Its just that killing Native Americans is not protected behavior.

 

[gc45]

Well, he was the same character in both theaters of the war. Its just that killing Native Americans is not protected behavior.

Agree with Sherman being the same character, the killing of Native Americans had to be protected behavior then, but certainly not later. Sherman participated, in fact authorized genocide as the Commander of the Army, I can't forgive that.

 

[genbeau]

The other factor operating at Chattanooga was that most soldiers knew the exchange protocol had been suspended, so that getting captured mean going north to a POW camp in winter. A soldier had to consider fleeing before capture, or having a plan to possibly take the loyalty oath and sit out the rest of the war.

Agree with Sherman being the same character, the killing of Native Americans had to be protected behavior then, but certainly not later. Sherman participated, in fact authorized genocide as the Commander of the Army, I can't forgive that.

yet, some think sherman was honorable. Despite all the evidence to the contrary.

 

[13 IL Cav & 64 GA Inf]

At Chattanooga a large number of Confederates surrendered, (or deserted before the battle for Missionary Ridge). The Confederates suffered very few KIA in that battle. As I mentioned elsewhere, its not obvious where the Confederates fought the battle, except possibly on the east end of their line where they were holding open the escape route. Men from Kentucky and Tennessee in Bragg's army would seem to most likely to surrender. Men from the once paroled regiments would have been less likely to take their chances proving they had been exchanged.

According to a quick lookup the Confederates fought the battle hard enough to inflict 5,824 casualties on the Union army (although they sustained a larger number, 6,667). They did have low morale, and it would have been even lower for those starving soldiers had they known that General Bragg had a million pounds of salted pork and beef in a warehouse just down the railroad in north Georgia, and he refused to release it to his army.

 

[gc45]

yet, some think sherman was honorable. Despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Agreed. Perhaps a sign of the times or perhaps though media just like to day, people form hatred in their minds believing in what they read. It's no secret many wanted the lands occupied by western NA peoples as far back as early Texas, same as before in the eastern lands and troubles brewed from then on but post war America was full of immigrants made promises for fighting in our civil war, also the poor farmers left with nothing looking for a new start; the government, including Grant and Sherman then working thru the Army's gave it to them.

 

[DanSBHawk]

Agreed. Perhaps a sign of the times or perhaps though media just like to day, people form hatred in their minds believing in what they read. It's no secret many wanted the lands occupied by western NA peoples as far back as early Texas, same as before in the eastern lands and troubles brewed from then on but post war America was full of immigrants made promises for fighting in our civil war, also the poor farmers left with nothing looking for a new start; the government, including Grant and Sherman then working thru the Army's gave it to them.

You can go even further back to see that Americans were killing Native Americans far before Sherman. Southern colonists were killing Cherokee in the 18th century.

Sherman was certainly no less honorable than those individuals that betrayed the country for slavery, and they killed many more loyal Americans than Sherman killed Native Americans.

 

[G Low]

You can go even further back to see that Americans were killing Native Americans far before Sherman. Southern colonists were killing Cherokee in the 18th century.

Sherman was certainly no less honorable than those individuals that betrayed the country for slavery, and they killed many more loyal Americans than Sherman killed Native Americans.

Hey…. This thread is for Sherman hater's..Where's the moderator?

 

[genbeau]

You can go even further back to see that Americans were killing Native Americans far before Sherman. Southern colonists were killing Cherokee in the 18th century.

Sherman was certainly no less honorable than those individuals that betrayed the country for slavery, and they killed many more loyal Americans than Sherman killed Native Americans.

So Sherman is roughly equivalent to traitors. Got it.

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

The Mississippi Brigade we are referring to is Tucker's (7th, 9th, 10th, 41st, 44th MS, & 9th Batt MS Sharpshooters). This is normally a rock solid formation, it's nickname was the "High Pressure Brigade" and the better part of the brigade had been with Bragg since Pensacola.

For what it's worth, my friend Ron Skellie was writing a book about the "High Pressure Brigade".
It's apparently been "put on hold".

I have no idea what may have happened, but I was looking forward to reading his next book.

 

[Stryker65]

So Sherman is roughly equivalent to traitors. Got it.

That depends on what he's a traitor of -- traitor to honor, yes, but as that and supposed "traitors to country" are different things they can hardly be compared. Discussions on "which is worse" rarely end well.