Talk:Sherman's March to the Sea/Archive 1

Casualties?

what were the casualties

According to whom? With what counting method? Ronabop 09:35, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Sherman led a very important march through Georgia. does anyone here know of any casualties??? =S

There weren't significant casualties to speak of. The South didn't put up much resistance and Sherman didn't actually kill civilians, (just destroyed things). 198.112.236.6 14:39, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Did sherman destroy everything?

If sherman destroyed everything and didn't kill civilians then where did the civilians live? Did sherman take them with them? Did he not care? Can u please tell specfics!!! Thank U!!! Sherman destroyed everything in thought

Well, if somebody came and burned down your home... what would you do?

You'd probably go shack up (stay with) with a friend or relative, right? Anywhere they could find a roof over their head. No different from if a hurricane hit your home or if it somehow burned down today.

That's exactly what the civilians did. Some went to Tennessee to stay with family or relatives until they "got back on their feet", economically.

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/atlanta/stories/0730sherman.html

Note: the URL above is from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution newspaper from the city that he ordered be burned. Article talks a bit about why the civilians resented Gen. Sherman.

Dsf 03:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Your link is broken! :( Shalorian20 15:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Did some digging and came across a rarity. A southern account of Sherman's March. Here's the external link for it [1].

Consequences of the March

Sherman's march frightened and appalled Southerners. It hurt morale, for civilians had believed the Confederacy could protect the home front.

Sherman's March to the Sea Sherman had terrorized the countryside; his men had destroyed all sources of food and forage and had left behind a hungry and demoralized people. Although he did not level any towns, he did destroy buildings in places where there was resistance. His men had shown little sympathy for Millen, the site of Camp Lawton, where Union prisoners of war were held. Physical attacks on white civilians were few, although it is not known how slave women fared at the hands of the invaders. Often male slaves posted guards outside the cabins of their women.

Confederate president Jefferson Davis had urged Georgians to undertake a scorched-earth policy of poisoning wells and burning fields, but civilians in the army's path had not done so. Sherman, however, burned or captured all the food stores that Georgians had saved for the winter months. As a result of the hardships on women and children, desertions increased in Robert E. Lee's army in Virginia. Sherman believed his campaign against civilians would shorten the war by breaking the Confederate will to fight, and he eventually received permission to carry this psychological warfare into South Carolina in early 1865. By marching through Georgia and South Carolina he became an archvillain in the South and a hero in the North.

Does anyone know, or have, a conversion for the amount of damage he did in the south then to what it would cost now? The razing of Atlanta alone would put it in the hundreds of billions and i'm wondering what kind of price tag the damage he did to Georgia would cost in modern times.Shalorian20 15:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

According to the article Sherman estimated the damage at $100 million. According to an incflation calculator I found online, that would work out to over $1.3 billion today.--194.98.58.121 (talk) 08:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

March orders?

I'm curious why the phrase "March orders" is used instead of the more widely-used phrase "Marching orders." In my brief military experience, I heard "marching orders" used often and never the term "march orders." Both Google and a Wikipedia search seem to confirm this. Has this term changed over time or am I wrong? I'd appreciate some feedback instead of merely reverting my well-intended edits! --ElKevbo 16:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Because in this case, "March" is a popular name for the operation, the Savannah Campaign, not the traditional use of 'marching orders', which denotes the routine matters about marching, such as the order of units in the column, the times for rests, etc. It probably should be Background and orders for the March, but then the capitalization police will be after us. I guess I don't feel really strongly about this, but I generally find that in Wikipedia if I revert something two times, most people will leave things my way, particularly on rather trivial things like this. :-) Hal Jespersen 16:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I think the current section title is a bit confusing and your suggested title is much better. I was bold and made the change. If the "capitalization police" come after they will be wrong for suggesting we not capitalize March as it is used as a proper noun in this instance.

And it takes more than just reverting my changes (unless they're trivial word choice changes, and I try to not make those) twice to make me go away. :) --ElKevbo 18:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, you're an exceptional Wikipedian then. I find that ~95% of my reversions are successful. I've got a quick trigger finger. :-) Hal Jespersen 20:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Macon is not east of Atlanta

Article currently reads:

"Slocum's wing, accompanied by Sherman, moved to the east, 70 miles along the railroad toward Macon."

Macon is south-southeast of Atlanta, in the path of Howard's wing, and is mentioned in the description of that wing's advance.

I'm guessing what was meant here was "...toward Augusta", but I leave it to those actively working on this article to decide. --Davecampbell 20:49, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

That was confusing. Fixed. Thanks for finding the problem. Hal Jespersen 01:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

How about including a mention of Doctorow's 2005 novel "The March"

Seems strange not to make a note of this as it is by a pre-eminent American author, and is, as far as I'm aware, the only novel to deal exclusively with Sherman's march. Theo71 14:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

There is an Edit button on the article and you are invited, as always, to edit responsibly. Hal Jespersen 15:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Controversies

The artcicle mentions contoversies, but does not elaborate. Surely the total war of destruction of Americans BY Americans is worthy of elaboration and an opposing point of view. There are no citations for the aftermath section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.2.181.72 (talk) 17:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

"Confusing" tag in Background and orders for March

I put it here, to clarify: it is may appear that scorched earth tactics were not used, and that they were only to destroy property if attacked. More questions? See my talk page. PwnerELITE (talk) 04:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protection

Because of the current rash of IP vandalism, I've requested temporary semi-protection for this article. Ed Fitzgerald ^{t / c} 01:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Turned down -- keep that undo button handy! Ed Fitzgerald ^{t / c} 08:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)