How much longer could the American Civil War have lasted?

What if, during his march to the sea, Sherman ordered the murder/execution of hundreds/thousands of civilians, including women and children. If such war crimes had become well known in Europe, and it could be shown that the Lincoln administration ordered/approved of it, might Britain, France, and other European governments be so outraged that they recognize the CSA and begin providing real assistance (money, weapons, men), that could have prolonged the war for a much longer period?

even Sherman on his worst day would not do that.
 
What if, during his march to the sea, Sherman ordered the murder/execution of hundreds/thousands of civilians, including women and children. If such war crimes had become well known in Europe, and it could be shown that the Lincoln administration ordered/approved of it, might Britain, France, and other European governments be so outraged that they recognize the CSA and begin providing real assistance (money, weapons, men), that could have prolonged the war for a much longer period?

I don't think Sherman would do that. His goal was to destroy the South's industry and infrastructure, not mass murder.

A better POD would be if Sherman is killed by a sharpshooter in the Summer of 1864, before Atlanta falls.

What butterflies does that bring?

Delaying the fall of Atlanta might give the South a few more months at least. Still, Sherman's victory at Atlanta is also considered one of the critical events that ensured Lincoln's reelection.

Could any Southern victory after the election significantly delay the Union? What if Sherman's march to the sea was halted after Atlanta? Could Lee have somehow pulled another victory out of his hat against Grant, even with his diminishing resources?

I should note that I'm not trying to save the CSA. The CSA is going to lose after Lincoln's reelection, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. I'm just curious how long they could realistically linger on before actually surrendering.
 
The early death of men who particularly helped the Union cause or hurt the Confederate cause would help the Confederacy last longer. Union loss of Lincoln, Grant, Sherman, Curtis, Thomas or Meigs will definitely impair the war effort. Earlier Confederate loss of Polk or AS Johnston, or loss of Northrup, Floyd, Pillow, Van Dorn, and probably Davis will aid the war effort.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Could any Southern victory after the election significantly delay the Union? What if Sherman's march to the sea was halted after Atlanta? Could Lee have somehow pulled another victory out of his hat against Grant, even with his diminishing resources?

If Hood had succeeding in snuffing out Schofield's force at Spring Hill, he might have been able to retake Nashville and restore Confederate control of Central Tennessee. This might give the Confederacy another few months of life past April of 1865, but I still see the war ending in the next year.
 

Deleted member 67076

Has the Confederates adopting guerrilla warfare been discussed yet?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Has the Confederates adopting guerrilla warfare been discussed yet?

It wouldn't have worked very well. Davis wanted to "withdraw to the hills" to fight a guerrilla war, but the more rugged regions of the Confederacy were exactly those areas with the strongest Unionist support where the Confederate guerrillas could expect little support. No guerrilla struggle can survive without support from the civilian population.
 
Top