For those of you who have not read it, I highly recommend "Return to Bull Run: The Campaign and Battle of Second Manassas" by John J. Hennessy. Hennessy's book talks a great deal about Lincoln's desire to wage "Total" or Hard War on the South. Lincoln noted that the Western Union generals were more ruthless or at least, apathetic, in their dealings with the Southern civilian population. He chose John Pope for the specific reason that he had been most outspoken on how harshly he would deal with the enemy and their leadership. Pope's actions in Northern Virginia are legendary and his treatment of the population was so severe that his own generals and members of the government in Washington were his primary detractors. But Lincoln, was Pope's strongest backer and overlooked, even encouraged the harsh treatment as a way to break the Southern will and end the war sooner. Though I believe his reasoning to be "warped", Lincoln justified war on the civilian population as life saving and good thing, as he thought it would bring the war to an end sooner. Of course, another way Mr. Lincoln could have ended the bloodshed was to grant the South its independence.

Pope, and his big mouth, were sent scurrying back to the defenses of Washington, and McClellan resumed command of the Union forces facing Lee, consolidated again in the Army of the Potomac. It didn't take long; however, for Lincoln to dismiss "Little Mac", appoint Burnside and after the fiasco at Fredericksburg, begin the "Republicanizing" of the army. I'm sure many of you know that the Democrats, who dominated the upper command in the Army of the Potomac, were weeded out after Fredericksburg, primarily due to their unwillingness to practice war as prescribed by the commander in chief. Those Dems who did survive, submerged their personal, political and views of "civilized war" and fought according to the edicts emanating from Lincoln and the radical Republicans.

I've always had a problem with demonizing Sherman, because I see him strictly as a pragmatist, fighting the war according to instructions from Washington. Sherman and Grant were both failures, men of little renown, apart from the military. I can understand fully their willingness to fight a hard war, as this was Lincoln's desire and everything they had they owed to Lincoln's support.

Maybe one of the great differences between Lee, Jackson and "some" of the Confederate military leadership,especially in the East, is that they refused to conduct the war as instructed to by Jeff Davis. I think it's clear that Davis, in the West, was in control and responsible for some of the worst defeats suffered by the Confederacy, either due to his choice of Confederate commanders or due to his meddling in the movements and disposition of the army. I am sure, that Lee would have refused waging "Hard War" on the Northern civilian population, just as some of the Democrat Union generals had prior to the "night of the long knives" and Republicanizing of the army. I'm not so sure that Jackson would have refused "Hard War" even "no quarter" against the union army. I doubt he would have abused the civilian population.

But, I do think such commanders as Bragg, Hood and Van Dorn would have had no compunction to wage "total war" to retain their position and relationship with Richmond.

I do not excuse, what occurred in Georgia, the Shenandoah Valley, the burning of Jackson and Meridian, MS and a host of other unjustifiable excesses; however, I believe the idea of "Total War" was not Grant's, Sherman's or Sheridan's, it was Lincoln's, his Cabinet and the Radical Republicans. There were a host of Union generals, looking for advancement and fame, who would have gladly taken Sherman's place. And, if one of the abolitionist generals with even harsher views had been in command, it might have been much worse. Who knows, if a Judson Kilpatrick or a James Blunt had risen to the command of a major Union army what the result might have been. What if Grant and Sherman were actually buffering what the Radical Republicans really wanted to do to the South?

Just my thoughts, but I think these things are worth pondering.

Jim