And even those numbers are grossly exaggerated speculation.
If you go looking for the names of confirmed civilians who died directly as a result of the Civil War, you could muster a few dozen names -- at most.
All the rest of those 50,000 or 100,000 alleged deaths are just statistical speculations, based on the population's growth rate from 1850 to 1860, versus the lower growth rate from 1860 to 1870.
Sure, with their menfolk off at war, women had fewer children.
And with disruptions in food & other supplies, some older people got sick, and died sooner than they would have in peacetime.
And there were occasional stray bullets in battle which struck and killed unfortunate civilians nearby.
But there were very few, if any, incidents of soldiers wantonly murdering civilians, incidents which in every other war have been considered unavoidable "collateral damage".
Even Sherman's army at its worst were under orders to make sure houses were unoccupied before they set them on fire. There is only a documented case or two of occupants either too frail to respond or too stubborn to leave who got caught in these fires.
I was trying to avoid the usual claims of whitewashing the suffering of southern civilians during the war by erring on the side of generosity in calculating civilian deaths.
Comparison with any other great civil war in history is just not in the books.
Even at Lawrence, where close onto 200 unarmed men and boys were murdered, the raiders, even though generally drunk, treated ladies with due courtesy. Often tipping their hats to them before tossing their husbands and sons into burning buildings.
Compare that to months of mass rapes in Berlin in WWII.