The reason that the 'path of destruction' was 60 miles wide is primarily because of military logistics. A large army on the move will often split into multiple columns. This keeps the army closer together than being in one column on one road. If you have three columns 10 miles long, all marching parallel courses 5 miles apart they army will be able to close together to form a battle line faster than if the second and third columns were behind the first. The army is also less likely to walk into an ambush or be encircled on the march. One of the reasons that Lee lost at Gettysburg was his army was spread out and took too long to marshal.
Being spread out laterally also made it easier to find supplies and have enough water. The land can only support so many people at a time. Too many soldiers using a water hole and too many latrines in an area led to diseases such as dysentery.
Sherman was marching in multiple columns, and each column would spread out looking for supplies and 'contraband' while destroying 'significant military targets'.
2007-12-01 06:50:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by gentleroger 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
He didn't have to have his men cover every square inch of that ground.
Setting fire to some, nearly ripened crops could take care of a very wide swath of land. Raiding a few store houses of food would devastate an entire community for miles around. Setting a few homes of prominant people would suffice to terrorize dozens, if not hundreds of their neighbors.
A small party of men, sinking a few river barges in key locations could disrupt commers along miles of waterways.
In other words, Sherman's men didn't have to "destroy" every single square inch of grass, dirt and domicile. Small parties of raiders, operating, separately, along a sixty mile front, against a, virtually, unarmed civilian population could do a LOT of damage.
2007-12-01 13:31:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Vince M 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
When the Mamuluk's invaded the middle east, they cut down every tree, and knocked down every building. The entire region has never recovered. That is destruction.
Sherman on the other hand, destroyed "military stores". That would be; crops, railroads, factories etc. along with the homes and buildings of proven confederate supporters. That was not hard to do in the rural areas of the antebellum south.
2007-12-01 13:18:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by nathan f 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
With what was actually three columns of troops including cavalry,Sherman did his research first. He knew hee needed alot of food to feed thousands of men and horses to keep them moving and cut the Southern forces off. He checked the county tax records of all the states he passed thru to see what counties produced the largest amounts of food and also had the largest amount of horses. Not bad for a former banker.
2007-12-01 20:41:57
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sheer determination and will. Now if we only cut a 600 mile wide path from Turkey to Saudi Arabia.....
2007-12-01 13:12:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by why not 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
i know. Sherman and his men must have been some bad mofos!
2007-12-01 13:09:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by negaduck 6
·
0⤊
0⤋