1
Who is the “lunatic” William T. Sherman? Research Question: During the Civil war, Sherman was often called, "insane" and a "lunatic.” His perception from the North and South was constantly changing from battle to battle. There are some events that were more critical in defining Sherman. From these event we hope to determine what the general public's perspective of William Tecumseh Sherman was during the Civil War? You decide….. Breakdown at Bull Run (1861) The battle of Bull Run was Sherman’s first in the Civil War. It ended in disastrous defeat. The historian, Stanley Hirshon believes that Sherman questioned his own judgment as an officer. (2) But what did the people think? As he went forward, he had military responsibility for Kentucky. He made assessments on what Kentucky needed to be protected. From his assessments people made the judgment he was “insane.” March to the Sea(1864) Sherman’s March to the sea was were Sherman hoped to break the Southern’s moral by marching from Atlanta to Savannah. Showing the Southern’s that their confederate cause had no hope. The historian, David J. Eicher wrote that he destroyed much of the South’s physical and psychological capacity to wage war. (3) But what did the people think of it at the time? Joseph Johnston Peace Treaty(1865) William Sherman made a controversial decision when he made a peace treaty with Joseph Johnston to end the fighting in the Civil War. The terms Sherman gave were viewed as to lenient. Sherman viewed the terms as the best representation of Lincolns wishes, who a day before was assassinated. However, what did the public think of the treaty? Account of how many troops Sherman was asking for to protect Kentucky. From The Local News, October 31, 1861 Recounting of how Sherman was portrayed as Insane. From Highland News, December 29, 1964 Account of Sherman marching through a Georgia home. Dolly Sumner Lunt, A Women’s Wartime Journal (Macon Ga, 1927), November 19, 1864 The “Northern’s” view of the march. Form Highland News, December 29, 1964 Record of the damage Sherman was causing on his March to the Sea. From The Soldiers Journal, March 16, 1864 Sherman’s response back to General Hoods criticism over Atlanta. From The Vermont Transcript, September 30, 1864 Statements from the secretary of War, Stanton, over the peace treaty. From New York Daily Tribune, May 26, 1865 Evidence that Sherman went against order to resume hostilities. From Belmont Chronicle, May 4, 1865 A summary of how the public reacted with horror to the treaty after Lincoln's death. From Belmont Chronicle, May 4 1865 1. Woodworth, Steven E.. Nothing but victory: the Army of the Tennessee, 1861-1865. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2005. 2. Hirshson, Stanley P.. The White Tecumseh: a biography of General William T. Sherman. New York: J. Wiley, 1997. 3. Eicher, John H., and David J. Eicher. Civil War high commands. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2001.

Who is the “lunatic” William T. Sherman?

  • Upload
    felton

  • View
    42

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Who is the “lunatic” William T. Sherman?. Breakdown at Bull Run (1861) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Who is the “lunatic” William T. Sherman?

Who is the “lunatic” William T. Sherman?

Research Question: During the Civil war, Sherman was often called, "insane" and a "lunatic.” His perception from the North and South was constantly changing from battle to battle. There are some events that were more critical in defining Sherman. From these event we hope to determine what the general public's perspective of William Tecumseh Sherman was during the Civil War?

You decide…..

Breakdown at Bull Run (1861)The battle of Bull Run was Sherman’s first in the Civil War. It ended in disastrous defeat. The historian, Stanley Hirshon believes that Sherman questioned his own judgment as an officer.(2) But what did the people think? As he went forward, he had military responsibility for Kentucky. He made assessments on what Kentucky needed to be protected. From his assessments people made the judgment he was “insane.”

March to the Sea(1864)Sherman’s March to the sea was were Sherman hoped to break the Southern’s moral by marching from Atlanta to Savannah. Showing the Southern’s that their confederate cause had no hope. The historian, David J. Eicher wrote that he destroyed much of the South’s physical and psychological capacity to wage war.(3) But what did the people think of it at the time?

Joseph Johnston Peace Treaty(1865)William Sherman made a controversial decision when he made a peace treaty with Joseph Johnston to end the fighting in the Civil War. The terms Sherman gave were viewed as to lenient. Sherman viewed the terms as the best representation of Lincolns wishes, who a day before was assassinated. However, what did the public think of the treaty?

Account of how many troops Sherman was asking for to protect Kentucky. From The Local News, October 31, 1861 Recounting of how Sherman was portrayed as

Insane. From Highland News, December 29, 1964

Account of Sherman marching through a Georgia home. Dolly Sumner Lunt, A Women’s Wartime Journal (Macon Ga, 1927), November 19, 1864

The “Northern’s” view of the march. Form Highland News, December 29, 1964

Record of the damage Sherman was causing on his March to the Sea. From The Soldiers Journal, March 16, 1864

Sherman’s response back to General Hoods criticism over Atlanta. From The Vermont Transcript, September 30, 1864

Statements from the secretary of War, Stanton, over the peace treaty. From New York Daily Tribune, May 26, 1865

Evidence that Sherman went against order to resume hostilities. From Belmont Chronicle, May 4, 1865

A summary of how the public reacted with horror to the treaty after Lincoln's death. From Belmont Chronicle, May 4 1865

1. Woodworth, Steven E.. Nothing but victory: the Army of the Tennessee, 1861-1865. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2005.2. Hirshson, Stanley P.. The White Tecumseh: a biography of General William T. Sherman. New York: J. Wiley, 1997.3. Eicher, John H., and David J. Eicher. Civil War high commands. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2001.