Sherman and the Burning of Columbia

By Marion Brunson Lucas

Book Overview

In this edition of his widely acclaimed study, Marion B. Lucas tackles one of the most debated questions about the Civil War: Who burned South Carolina's capital city on February 17, 1865? Before the fires had finished smoldering, Confederates and Federals accused each other of starting the blaze, igniting a controversy that has raged for more than a century. To determine the actual origin of the fire, Lucas sifts through myriad official records, newspapers, and eyewitness accounts. The evidence he amasses allows him to debunk many of the myths surrounding the tragedy. Unlike generations of South Carolinians and students of the Civil War, he does not assign particular blame to William Tecumseh Sherman but implicates both Confederate and Federal troops. Lucas traces the damage not to a single blaze but to a series of fires--preceded by an equally unfortunate series of military and civilian blunders--that included the burning of cotton bales by fleeing Confederate soldiers.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1570033587
• ISBN13: 9781570033582
• Release Date: May 2000
• Publisher: University of South Carolina Press
• Length: 200 Pages
• Weight: 0.80 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.6" x 6.2" x 8.1"

Customer Reviews

Great Book!

Very well-written book re:Sherman's treck through Columbia, SC during the Civil War. Highly recommend it!!

PLENTY OF BLAME FOR ALL INVOLVED

Professor Lucas has written a well researched analysis of the burning of Columbia, SouthCarolina by the Federal army. There were strategic military reasons for Sherman's marchthrough central South Carolina. Columbia "was an important war manufacturingcenter--one of the few still in Confederate hands--providing munitions, equipment, anduniforms....central South Carolina contained the last Confederate sources of fooduntouched by war." Governor Magrath pointed out to Jefferson Davis that the borders of South Carolina were Richmond's second line of defense which was confirmed whenRichmond fell less than two months after Columbia surrendered. The author outlines the wartime conditions in Columbia noting that both the civilian andmilitary authorities were tardy in realizing the obvious danger to the city and even slowerto act. Finally the author writes "The missing ingredient with the Confederate camp....wasa belief in the possibility of success. The defeatism of Beauregard's leadership wasabundantly clear...."Chapter 2 gives a succinct account of the evacuation of Columbia noting that inspite ofthe desperate condition of the Confederate armies, the large arsenals and war supplies inColumbia were not evacuated. The cotton in storage was moved into the streets withorders for it to be burned which contributed to the later fires. Columbia Mayor Goodwynsurrendered the city while scores of bewildered Columbians, in an ill-conceived attempt toplacate a dreaded conqueror, began distributing alcoholic beverages to the soldiers. Thisprecipitated an insurmountable problem.A balanced account of the burning of Columbia is given. The most damaging fire beganabout eight p.m.on February 17th, was of inexplicable origin and was not extinguished forsix or seven hours when the wind abated. With drunken men roaming the streets, riotingand acts of personal violence were bound to occur. Confusion reigned and most controlover the city was lost . The extent of the damage following the fire is reviewed. Aboutone-third of Columbia was destroyed with the business community virtually wiped out and265 residences burned.Regarding who burned Columbia, the conclusions were (and still are) along partisan lines. South Carolinians charged Sherman as "morally responsible for the burning of Columbia".Union officers and troops felt that while the events in Columbia were regrettable theywere the results of acts of war. Sherman entered South Carolina to disrupt the state'stransportation system and bring an end to the war by destroying Southern morale.However, Professor Lucas notes "The failure of Sherman's psychological warfare, a newkind of war which Southern civilians did not understand, was that the hatred generatedduring the invasion did not terminate with the war's end."The post war criticisms of and charges against Sherman and the Union army are reviewed.The author notes that the Confederates as they evacuated the city began the looting andplundering then the entering Federal troo