The revisionists tend to leave out the atrocities committed by the invading union armies.
“The revisionists tend to leave out the atrocities committed by the invading union armies.”
That’s a fact. The history books used in the public schools never mention the Yankee tactic of forced starvation enacted upon the Southern civilian population. They never mention the few reported incidents of starving people being reduced to cannibalism. But, the victors get to write the history books, so it’s no wonder some things were ignored or glossed over.
War is hell.........
The winners write the history.
There was a Colonel Turchin of the 19th Illinois who was known for his aggressiveness towards civilians. Reports of his atrocities against the civilian population of Athens, Alabama got back to senior Union officers who immediately condemned Turchin and eventually stripped him of his command. However, that consumate reprobate Abe Lincoln not only reinstated Turchin but promoted him to Brigadier general.
I do wish to point out that in general senior Union officers went pretty much by the book when it came to the treatment of civilians and did not tolerate their abuse(though, for example, the murders of civilians by order in Palmyra, Missouri civilians would prove that not all Union generals thought that way). But, generally speaking, senior Union officers, especially West Point graduates, adhered to the established rules of war vis-a-vis civilians and did not tolerate crimes against them).
Sherman’s idea of “total war,” though, caused great suffering among the civilians of the South, including starvation, but that is explained away by saying his actions were directed against the entire Confederacy (within his area of operations) with the intent to bring it (the Confederacy) to its knees. Thus, it was reasoned that his actions did not specifically target civilians, as did those of Turchin and others.
Amen!