Reenacting Sherman's March to the Sea

Is it really that bad down there? From what I have read there were no mass atrocities committed by Sherman's troops during the March. A few individual cases to be sure, but you get nutcases in every army. Also, I figure if the Sgt. mentioned here could do something similar not long after the war ended, then doing something similar now should be easier.
Just an innocent little marshmallow roast in Atlanta and the surrounding areas...they shouldn't mind at all!
Shermans-marsh.jpg
 
I'm not a reenactor, but the idea of retracing the steps of that march sounds interesting. Too bad there is not a trail that commemorates it. Although how practical that would be, with the different routes followed by Shermans various corps, is questionable.
 
Just an innocent little marshmallow roast in Atlanta and the surrounding areas...they shouldn't mind at all!
Shermans-marsh.jpg

I thought Atlanta's burning was an accident that happened when the fire the retreating Confederates had set to burn supplies started to spread to the rest of the city?

It was Columbia, S.C. that Sherman's men set of fire.
 
I live in Georgia. I am not a red neck nor lost causer, but had tons of Confederate ancestors. My word of advice...do this only in still occupied Atlanta. If you venture too far out from there, your folks will probably not hear from you again.
 
The 160th is in 2024. That is a long time to plan. I did briefly toy with the idea of doing next year but that would be completely insane. I would have done the 150th but I had just graduated from high school in 2014 and was off to collage (I am 22). As it is I am thinking those of us that can get time off and feel up to the March can March the entire way, some can meet us and March for some of it, and some could just come for a few of the skirmishes that happened along the way. For supplies, you could bring your own if you want but I am not completely against doing "forging" from local stores and even fast food if needed/wanted. Obviously I am still in the very early planning phases.

get a tv-crew as a sponsor, which probably means you need to do a proper reenactment with hardtack and bacon while being filmed by people munching hamburgers and drinking canned beer. if you do it that way getting time off at work might be easier but you might be shot at during the march :D
 
I thought Atlanta's burning was an accident that happened when the fire the retreating Confederates had set to burn supplies started to spread to the rest of the city?
It was Columbia, S.C. that Sherman's men set of fire.

When Sherman occupied the city in September, it was largely intact. It was only with his departure, two months later, that the real burning began.

To be clear, the wholesale destruction of Atlanta was not Sherman’s intention. He had officers draw up a plan to destroy military targets, which included a detailed map marking the structures. No private residences were among them. Captain Poe was selected to execute the plan because it was thought his engineers would be less reliant upon explosives and fire. Still, there was little doubt about the plan’s consequences: Six days earlier, when Poe first heard of the plan, he wrote his superior engineering officer in Washington that by the time his letter arrived, “Atlanta will have ceased to exist.”


The real cause of the subsequent mass destruction was Sherman’s acquiescence to widespread disobedience among his soldiers. Ever since he had been post commander in Memphis, two years earlier, Sherman had advocated a brutal approach to Confederates, both military and civilian. Since he presumed that local guerrillas were responsible for taking pot shots at Mississippi River boats, he ordered that 10 citizens be forcibly removed from the city for every incident along the river. When such an instance occurred in Randolph, Tenn., he destroyed the town, leaving only a single structure standing. Sherman’s attitude quickly filtered down through the ranks, so that by the time they left Atlanta, no orders were necessary; Sherman’s troops simply did what they had been told to do, so many times before.
Atlanta wasn’t the first North Georgia city to be razed that fall. A few days before the march began, Union troops burned Cassville, about 50 miles north of Atlanta. Five days later the manufacturing town of Rome was razed. The following day Sherman wired Maj. Gen. George Thomas in Nashville, “Last night we burned Rome and in two or more days will burn Atlanta.” The next target was the railroad connecting Atlanta to Chattanooga, which had been Sherman’s supply line since early September. The general decided to destroy miles of the line after the last train left Atlanta for the North on Nov. 12. The next day the rail town of Marietta was wrecked.

A new, politically appointed and youthful major named Henry Hitchcock joined Sherman at Marietta. Once shops and homes were caught up in the blaze Hitchcock commented to Sherman: “[The town will] burn down, sir.”

“Yes,” Sherman said. “Can’t be stopped.”

“Was that your intention?”

The general answered indirectly. “Can’t save it … There are men who do this,” pointing to a group of passing soldiers. “Set as many guards as you please, they will slip in and set fire.”
For several days prior to the Nov. 15 March to the Sea departure, the elements of Sherman’s army north of Atlanta converged on the city, destroying railroad tracks and communities as they approached. By the time they got to the city, demolition had become habitual. Gen. Henry W. Slocum, whose XX Corps occupied Atlanta after its capture, tried to protect private residences. But the provost guards, who could be relied on to carry out such orders, were concentrated downtown.

The first unauthorized fires started on Nov. 11 near the edge of town. The next morning Slocum offered a $500 reward for the capture of the arsonists, but it was never collected. By Nov. 13, when an Illinois unit marched into Atlanta, a captain in the unit wrote in his diary, “The smoke almost blinded us.” By Nov. 15, the city was on fire everywhere. By 3 p.m., officers who were distributing supplies at the commissary invited soldiers to simply take whatever they needed, because the out-of-control fires would inevitably consume the facility.

One Michigan sergeant conceded getting swept up in the inflammatory madness, even though he knew it was unauthorized: “As I was about to fire one place a little girl about ten years old came to me and said, ‘Mr. Soldier you would not burn our house would you? If you did where would we live?’ She looked at me with such a pleading look that … I dropped the torch and walked away.”

Starting with Sherman himself, many later justified the burning as military necessity. During the night of 15th, as the fire was in progress, Major Hitchcock overheard Sherman say that Atlanta deserved to be demolished because of its manufacturing capacity for military articles. The same night an Indiana sergeant wrote in his diary, “The entire city was destroyed [but] for a few occupied houses. It reminds me of the destruction of Babylon … because of the wickedness of her people.”

Others falsely minimized the damage. In his memoirs, Sherman speciously claimed “the fire did not reach … the great mass of dwelling houses.” But in a congratulatory order to his troops after arriving in Savannah, he wrote, “We quietly and deliberately destroyed Atlanta.”

Still others accepted the reality of unauthorized burning, but incorrectly claimed it was accidental, or attributed it to impersonal factors. The wind did it. Too many soldiers discovered hidden liquor caches. The fiery march through communities north of Atlanta gave soldiers the impression that the city was to get the same treatment.

Perhaps the most widely accepted justification was the inherent cruelty of war. When a society accepts war as intrinsically cruel, those involved in wartime cruelties are exonerated. Again, Sherman previously set the tone when he responded to the Atlanta City Council’s petition that he rescind his September order requiring nearly all civilians to evacuate:

shall not revoke my orders because they were not designed for the humanities of the case … War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it … Now you must go and take with you the old and feeble … and build for them … proper habitations to shield them against the [approaching winter] weather.

But not all Union soldiers were satisfied with excuses. A Wisconsin private wrote, “I believe this destruction of private property in Atlanta was entirely unnecessary and therefore … disgraceful. … The cruelties practiced on this campaign toward citizens have been enough to blast a more sacred cause than ours. … There certainly is a lack of discipline.”

Partly because most of the source documents about Sherman’s Atlanta burning are the official records of the federal armies, letters and diaries of Union soldiers, and reports in Northern publications, the story is often distorted. Since no Confederate units were present, and only a few sporadically nearby, there were few Confederate reports during the November 1864 inferno. Instead, historians must look to other primary sources, such as Southern newspapers, Georgia state documents, and civilian memoirs, diaries and letters. Their words tell a different version than the corresponding remarks of Union soldiers and newspapers.

Eventually, Sherman’s soldiers had little wish to write about the events of the first half of November 1864, because there was little to inspire pride. Sherman wrote almost nothing about Atlanta’s Nov. 15-16 blaze in his memoirs (beyond claiming that “the great majority of dwellings” were spared).

While Sherman never ordered the wholesale burning of Atlanta, he did little to stop many of his increasingly undisciplined soldiers from escalating targeted destruction into arson and rioting. It is difficult to avoid concluding that he arranged matters so that he could deny responsibility if Atlanta’s destruction became morally condemned, but accept credit if it was celebrated.

Sources: William T. Sherman, “Memoirs: Volume I”; Russell Bonds, “War Like a Thunderbolt”; Theodore Upson, “With Sherman to the Sea”; Stephen Davis, “What the Yankees Did to Us”; Michael Wortman, “The Bonfire”; Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series 1, Vol. 17, Part 1; John Walters, “Merchant of Terror”; Frances Elizabeth Gains, “We Begged to Hearts of Stone,” Northwest Georgia Historical and Genealogical Quarterly (Winter 1988); Sergeant Allen Campbell to father, Dec. 21, 1864, quoted in Mark Hoffman, “My Brave Mechanics”;William Sherman to the representatives of the City Council of Atlanta, Sept. 12, 1864.

disunion-phil-leigh-thumbStandard.jpg

Phil Leigh is the author of two Civil War books, an annotated and illustrated version of the memoirs of Confederate Private Sam Watkins entitled ”Co. Aytch” and ”Trading With the Enemy,” which is about intersectional wartime commerce between the North and South. He is currently writing a third book, ”Civil War Scandals and Controversies.”
 
When Sherman occupied the city in September, it was largely intact. It was only with his departure, two months later, that the real burning began.

To be clear, the wholesale destruction of Atlanta was not Sherman’s intention. He had officers draw up a plan to destroy military targets, which included a detailed map marking the structures. No private residences were among them. Captain Poe was selected to execute the plan because it was thought his engineers would be less reliant upon explosives and fire. Still, there was little doubt about the plan’s consequences: Six days earlier, when Poe first heard of the plan, he wrote his superior engineering officer in Washington that by the time his letter arrived, “Atlanta will have ceased to exist.”


The real cause of the subsequent mass destruction was Sherman’s acquiescence to widespread disobedience among his soldiers. Ever since he had been post commander in Memphis, two years earlier, Sherman had advocated a brutal approach to Confederates, both military and civilian. Since he presumed that local guerrillas were responsible for taking pot shots at Mississippi River boats, he ordered that 10 citizens be forcibly removed from the city for every incident along the river. When such an instance occurred in Randolph, Tenn., he destroyed the town, leaving only a single structure standing. Sherman’s attitude quickly filtered down through the ranks, so that by the time they left Atlanta, no orders were necessary; Sherman’s troops simply did what they had been told to do, so many times before.
Atlanta wasn’t the first North Georgia city to be razed that fall. A few days before the march began, Union troops burned Cassville, about 50 miles north of Atlanta. Five days later the manufacturing town of Rome was razed. The following day Sherman wired Maj. Gen. George Thomas in Nashville, “Last night we burned Rome and in two or more days will burn Atlanta.” The next target was the railroad connecting Atlanta to Chattanooga, which had been Sherman’s supply line since early September. The general decided to destroy miles of the line after the last train left Atlanta for the North on Nov. 12. The next day the rail town of Marietta was wrecked.

A new, politically appointed and youthful major named Henry Hitchcock joined Sherman at Marietta. Once shops and homes were caught up in the blaze Hitchcock commented to Sherman: “[The town will] burn down, sir.”

“Yes,” Sherman said. “Can’t be stopped.”

“Was that your intention?”

The general answered indirectly. “Can’t save it … There are men who do this,” pointing to a group of passing soldiers. “Set as many guards as you please, they will slip in and set fire.”
For several days prior to the Nov. 15 March to the Sea departure, the elements of Sherman’s army north of Atlanta converged on the city, destroying railroad tracks and communities as they approached. By the time they got to the city, demolition had become habitual. Gen. Henry W. Slocum, whose XX Corps occupied Atlanta after its capture, tried to protect private residences. But the provost guards, who could be relied on to carry out such orders, were concentrated downtown.

The first unauthorized fires started on Nov. 11 near the edge of town. The next morning Slocum offered a $500 reward for the capture of the arsonists, but it was never collected. By Nov. 13, when an Illinois unit marched into Atlanta, a captain in the unit wrote in his diary, “The smoke almost blinded us.” By Nov. 15, the city was on fire everywhere. By 3 p.m., officers who were distributing supplies at the commissary invited soldiers to simply take whatever they needed, because the out-of-control fires would inevitably consume the facility.

One Michigan sergeant conceded getting swept up in the inflammatory madness, even though he knew it was unauthorized: “As I was about to fire one place a little girl about ten years old came to me and said, ‘Mr. Soldier you would not burn our house would you? If you did where would we live?’ She looked at me with such a pleading look that … I dropped the torch and walked away.”

Starting with Sherman himself, many later justified the burning as military necessity. During the night of 15th, as the fire was in progress, Major Hitchcock overheard Sherman say that Atlanta deserved to be demolished because of its manufacturing capacity for military articles. The same night an Indiana sergeant wrote in his diary, “The entire city was destroyed [but] for a few occupied houses. It reminds me of the destruction of Babylon … because of the wickedness of her people.”

Others falsely minimized the damage. In his memoirs, Sherman speciously claimed “the fire did not reach … the great mass of dwelling houses.” But in a congratulatory order to his troops after arriving in Savannah, he wrote, “We quietly and deliberately destroyed Atlanta.”

Still others accepted the reality of unauthorized burning, but incorrectly claimed it was accidental, or attributed it to impersonal factors. The wind did it. Too many soldiers discovered hidden liquor caches. The fiery march through communities north of Atlanta gave soldiers the impression that the city was to get the same treatment.

Perhaps the most widely accepted justification was the inherent cruelty of war. When a society accepts war as intrinsically cruel, those involved in wartime cruelties are exonerated. Again, Sherman previously set the tone when he responded to the Atlanta City Council’s petition that he rescind his September order requiring nearly all civilians to evacuate:

shall not revoke my orders because they were not designed for the humanities of the case … War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it … Now you must go and take with you the old and feeble … and build for them … proper habitations to shield them against the [approaching winter] weather.

But not all Union soldiers were satisfied with excuses. A Wisconsin private wrote, “I believe this destruction of private property in Atlanta was entirely unnecessary and therefore … disgraceful. … The cruelties practiced on this campaign toward citizens have been enough to blast a more sacred cause than ours. … There certainly is a lack of discipline.”

Partly because most of the source documents about Sherman’s Atlanta burning are the official records of the federal armies, letters and diaries of Union soldiers, and reports in Northern publications, the story is often distorted. Since no Confederate units were present, and only a few sporadically nearby, there were few Confederate reports during the November 1864 inferno. Instead, historians must look to other primary sources, such as Southern newspapers, Georgia state documents, and civilian memoirs, diaries and letters. Their words tell a different version than the corresponding remarks of Union soldiers and newspapers.

Eventually, Sherman’s soldiers had little wish to write about the events of the first half of November 1864, because there was little to inspire pride. Sherman wrote almost nothing about Atlanta’s Nov. 15-16 blaze in his memoirs (beyond claiming that “the great majority of dwellings” were spared).

While Sherman never ordered the wholesale burning of Atlanta, he did little to stop many of his increasingly undisciplined soldiers from escalating targeted destruction into arson and rioting. It is difficult to avoid concluding that he arranged matters so that he could deny responsibility if Atlanta’s destruction became morally condemned, but accept credit if it was celebrated.

Sources: William T. Sherman, “Memoirs: Volume I”; Russell Bonds, “War Like a Thunderbolt”; Theodore Upson, “With Sherman to the Sea”; Stephen Davis, “What the Yankees Did to Us”; Michael Wortman, “The Bonfire”; Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series 1, Vol. 17, Part 1; John Walters, “Merchant of Terror”; Frances Elizabeth Gains, “We Begged to Hearts of Stone,” Northwest Georgia Historical and Genealogical Quarterly (Winter 1988); Sergeant Allen Campbell to father, Dec. 21, 1864, quoted in Mark Hoffman, “My Brave Mechanics”;William Sherman to the representatives of the City Council of Atlanta, Sept. 12, 1864.

disunion-phil-leigh-thumbStandard.jpg

Phil Leigh is the author of two Civil War books, an annotated and illustrated version of the memoirs of Confederate Private Sam Watkins entitled ”Co. Aytch” and ”Trading With the Enemy,” which is about intersectional wartime commerce between the North and South. He is currently writing a third book, ”Civil War Scandals and Controversies.”
Anything Phil Leigh writes is going to exaggerate the blame on the Union and minimize the blame on the confederates.

No doubt there was some blame to go around, but that author is not one to evaluate the facts objectively.
 
The real cause of the subsequent mass destruction was Sherman’s acquiescence to widespread disobedience among his soldiers. Ever since he had been post commander in Memphis, two years earlier, Sherman had advocated a brutal approach to Confederates, both military and civilian. Since he presumed that local guerrillas were responsible for taking pot shots at Mississippi River boats, he ordered that 10 citizens be forcibly removed from the city for every incident along the river. When such an instance occurred in Randolph, Tenn., he destroyed the town, leaving only a single structure standing. Sherman’s attitude quickly filtered down through the ranks, so that by the time they left Atlanta, no orders were necessary; Sherman’s troops simply did what they had been told to do, so many times before
Similar to Sheridan’s burning atrocities in the Shenandoah Valley. *Edited*
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Colonel Mustard: This is war Mrs. Peacock! Casualties are inevitable. You can not make an omelet without breaking eggs, every cook will tell you that!
Mrs. Peacock: But look what happened to the cook!
 
Well he did supply his sources which means you're welcome to check them out yourself.
I was making an observation about the author in general. Unfortunately Leigh is not someone I consider credible, based on other things he's written. He may cite sources, but that doesn't mean the material is not cherry-picked and presented in a biased way.

Regarding Atlanta, I'm sure there have been other threads here that dive into the specifics. I thought this thread was more about the March to the Sea.
 
As Moderator: No Nazi,Gestapo etc. references allowed. As if y'all didn't know that already. Threadbans are next.
 
Back
Top