im guessing a hero, as he took savannha and its supplies cutting off the souths supplies and strong hold with out a great loss of life on either side. Now was it brutal of course, wars not a game played on a screen to be turned off when your tired of it. The Brutality of the march seem mute when compared to other battles, and emence compared to other actions. Could it have been done a different way? Who knows we can only look at what we know and speculate at best.
Of course it easy to play arm chair quarter back and say “it should have been this way and not that way” but it is what it is. One man's fight is another man's play time, so when looking at it, I feel you have to keep it in perspective of the time and situation. 1864 is not 1994 or 2004 and are the terrorists of today less brutal or more?
I'm sure some will see it as good and/or bad, good for the north bad for the south,if it didn't happen and another battle had to be fought somewhere, and 15,000 guys are killed on both sides, would this make it good? Hypothesising is great isn't it? you can add anything in to have your point proven.
I believe he was a soldier who did what he was trained to do, win at all costs, and help end the war restoring the union.