The American Civil War -- what's widely misunderstood about it?

at least in GA where there were a lot of scorched earth & pillaging tactics in use all around

But his men still fixed their bayonets and charged.

he didn't know another way to fight, but iirc he was closer than his classmates to understanding the sheer volume of death required by the way they did know? maybe just by dint of tending to misery anyway. immediately after fort sumter he was predicting a v long and terrible war. i guess such pessimism (or resignation) prob became less unusual after bull run 1?
but sherman's still enough of an outlier to get relieved for suicidal depression, and back home "convalescing" he's talking+writing outright apocalyptically, which was prob the sane frame of mind. of course by then the war was going on, for anyone to see.

Buy this:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07D6QQT77/ref=oh_aui_d_detailpage_o00_?ie=UTF8&psc=1

(not a part of this current discussion)

Recommended -- I read a couple of outstanding Civil War books by Stephen Sears: "Gettysburg", and "Landscape Turned Red" (which is about Antietam.) This is very much blow-by-blow, field level stuff, blood and violence and fools and cowards and incompetent leaders and natural-born genius strategists.

On the strategy side, Sears takes a fairly harsh view of McClellan, views Meade very strongly, gives Lee solid marks but not as strong as others might. He saves a lot of his sympathy for the soldiers who were thrown into what seems like the most hellish battles anyone had ever seen up to that point. The guy is a very very good writer imo.