Generals Ulysses S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman used a total war strategy during the American Civil War primarily to expedite the end of the conflict and to break the will of the Confederacy. Here are several key reasons and explanations regarding their use of this strategy and its contribution to the war's conclusion.
Reasons for Using Total War Strategy
-
Destruction of Resources: Total war aimed to destroy not only enemy troops but also the resources that supported them, including supply lines, infrastructure, and civilian morale. By targeting railroads, farms, and industrial centers, Grant and Sherman sought to cripple the Confederate war effort.
-
Psychological Impact: The brutal nature of total war was intended to demoralize the Confederate civilian population and soldiers. The belief was that if the Southern populace felt the direct consequences of the war, they would pressure their leaders to surrender.
-
Shortening the War: Both Grant and Sherman recognized that a swift and decisive end to the conflict would save lives in the long run. Prolonged warfare led to higher casualties and suffering; thus, aggressive tactics were seen as a way to force a quicker resolution.
-
Shifting Strategies: Early in the war, Union strategies had often adhered to traditional military engagements and battlefield tactics. However, as the war dragged on, leaders like Grant and Sherman adapted their approaches to encompass a broader spectrum that included economic and psychological warfare.
Implementation of Total War
-
Sherman’s March to the Sea: One of the most notable examples of total war was Sherman’s infamous march from Atlanta to Savannah in late 1864. His troops destroyed railroads, confiscated food supplies, and destroyed infrastructure to render the South unable to sustain its army. This march epitomized total war and caused significant disruption to the Southern economy and morale.
-
Grant’s Overland Campaign: Grant’s strategy during the Overland Campaign also reflected total war principles. His relentless pursuit of Confederate General Robert E. Lee through battles such as the Wilderness and Spotsylvania Courthouse aimed to engage and attrition the Confederate Army while moving closer to Richmond, the Confederate capital.
Contribution to the End of the War
-
Decisive Victories: The application of a total war strategy led to significant Union victories that undermined the Confederate military capacity. The loss of key battles, combined with the destruction of resources, weakened the Confederacy’s ability to continue fighting.
-
Disruption of Civilian Support: By targeting infrastructure and supplies, Grant and Sherman effectively dismantled the logistical capabilities of the Confederacy. This led to significant shortages in food and supplies for both soldiers and civilians, further eroding the South’s ability to sustain resistance.
-
Erosion of Morale: The total war strategy not only aimed at the military but also at civilian morale. The psychological impact of the devastation in the South contributed to growing disillusionment with the war, ultimately affecting public sentiment towards continuing the fight.
-
Forced Surrender: Ultimately, these strategies culminated in Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Court House in April 1865. The relentless pressure exerted by Union forces, combined with the deterioration of Confederate morale and resources, made continued resistance untenable.
In summary, Grant and Sherman adopted a total war strategy to decisively undermine the Confederate military and civilian infrastructure, hastening the war's resolution and leading to the eventual defeat of the Confederacy. Their tactics not only reshaped the course of the Civil War but also influenced military strategies in future conflicts.