Explore the vast range of titles available.

At the end of the Civil War, Union general William Tecumseh Sherman was surprisingly more popular in the newly defeated South than he was in the North. Yet only thirty years later, his name was synonymous with evil and destruction in the South. Here, historian Wesley Moody examines these perplexing contradictions and how they and others function in past and present myths about Sherman. Demon of the Lost Cause reveals the machinations behind the Sherman myth and the reasons behind the acceptance of such myths, no matter who invented them. In the case of Sherman's own mythmaking, Moody postulates that his motivation was to secure a military position to support his wife and children. For the other Sherman mythmakers, personal or political gain was typically the rationale. In tracing Sherman's ever-changing reputation, Moody sheds light on current and past understanding of the Civil War through the lens of one of its most controversial figures.--From publisher description.

At the end of the Civil War, Union general William Tecumseh Sherman was surprisingly more popular in the newly defeated South than he was in the North. Yet, only thirty years later, his name was synonymous with evil and destruction in the South, particularly as the creator and enactor of the \"total war\" policy. In Demon of the Lost Cause, Wesley Moody examines these perplexing contradictions and how they and others function in past and present myths about Sherman. Throughout this fascinating study of Sherman's reputation, from his first public servant role as the major general for the state of California until his death in 1891, Moody explores why Sherman remains one of the most controversial figures in American history. Using contemporary newspaper accounts, Sherman's letters and memoirs, as well as biographies of Sherman and histories of his times, Moody reveals that Sherman's shifting reputation was formed by whoever controlled the message, whether it was the Lost Cause historians of the South, Sherman's enemies in the North, or Sherman himself. With his famous \"March to the Sea\" in Georgia, the general became known for inventing a brutal warfare where the conflict is brought to the civilian population. In fact, many of Sherman's actions were official tactics to be employed when dealing with guerrilla forces, yet Sherman never put an end to the talk of his innovative tactics and even added to the stories himself. Sherman knew he had enemies in the Union army and within the Republican elite who could and would jeopardize his position for their own gain. In fact, these were the same people who spread the word that Sherman was a Southern sympathizer following the war, helping to place the general in the South's good graces. That all changed, however, when the Lost Cause historians began formulating revisions to the Civil War, as Sherman's actions were the perfect explanation for why the South had lost. Demon of the Lost Cause reveals the machinations behind the Sherman myth and the reasons behind the acceptance of such myths, no matter who invented them. In the case of Sherman's own mythmaking, Moody postulates that his motivation was to secure a military position to support his wife and children. For the other Sherman mythmakers, personal or political gain was typically the rationale behind the stories they told and believed. In tracing Sherman's ever-changing reputation, Moody sheds light on current and past understanding of the Civil War through the lens of one of its most controversial figures.

For Slavery and Union: Benjamin Buckner and Kentucky Loyalties in the Civil War.A respected Civil War historian once lamented to me that most current Civil War books should be journal articles and most journal articles should be footnotes.Buckner, like so many in the postwar South, fought to preserve as much of the antebellum way of life as possible.

This dissertation will examine the formation of the myth that William T. Sherman laid waste to the state of Georgia in 1864, and almost single-handedly invented the concept of \"total war.\" It will also examine how Sherman's reputation has evolved over the years from accusations of being a Southern sympathizer and traitor at the end of the Civil War to the modern image of Sherman as the destroyer of the old South. William Tecumseh Sherman was the most controversial general of the American Civil War. The modern image of Sherman is either a destructive monster who violated the laws of civilized warfare or a strategic genius who invented modern warfare. Both of these images have evolved over the years. In large part, they have been the product of Lost Cause writers trying to reinterpret the history of the war, but also the product of Union generals and politicians attempting to glorify their own place in the history of the war, men with personal grudges against the general and modern historians using Sherman to make their own arguments about contemporary society. The sources used for this dissertation were the journals, letters and memoirs of the participants. The Official Records of both the Union and Confederacy were examined as well as nineteenth and twentieth century newspapers and magazines. This dissertation will show that the modern conception of General Sherman is not the same as the historical fact, but rather a post-war creation. Individuals' agendas have created and sustained the myth of Sherman to explain defeat in the Civil War, justify later military strategy, condemn later conflicts and for personal gain. It is not enough to know that historical events as commonly understood are inaccurate; it is important to understand how and why these inaccuracies came about. INDEX WORDS: William T. Sherman, Civil War, Lost Cause, Memory, Memoirs, March to the Sea, Total War, Atlanta Campaign, United Daughters of the Confederacy

Lieutenant Colonel George Armstrong Custer divided his command at the Little Bighorn River into four parts, of which Major Marcus Reno and Captain Frederick Benteen were each given command of three companies of about 120 men. Reno was ordered to cross the Little Bighorn and charge up the valley toward the village, which was still about two miles away. Reno's men were only on the bluff about 10 minutes before the arrival of Benteen and his battalion. Along the path of Reno's retreat, wounded men faced death and mutilation at the hands of the enemy. Reno's court of inquiry is a treasure trove for researching the Battle of the Little Bighorn. For the historian who realizes that Reno and Benteen have been unfairly portrayed, there is a strong urge to err in veering to the other direction. To portray the two as heroic and faultless is also inaccurate.