View single post by CleburneFan
 Posted: Tue May 15th, 2012 02:20 am
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 

Joined: Mon Oct 30th, 2006
Location: Florida USA
Posts: 1021

  back to top

Dimitri Rotov has posted an enlightening examination at his blog about how Civil War writers all too often and perhaps even unconsciously emphasize the high speed of marches as if some special glory is attached to marches such as the notorious forced marches Thomas Jackson inflicted on his corps.

Rotov writes some examples that illustrate the exact kind of commentary one is commonly exposed to in histories of the war. He makes some excellent and cogent defenses of slower, more measured marches, citing definite advantages of a more humane pace.

Perhaps my recollections of the years of marathon training and the hardship of heat training, hill training and running through pain, thirst, and all the rest (but never carrying a rifle, bedroll, canteen, and assorted other items or suffering along barefooted or dodging sniper fire),has helped me sympathize with the extreme difficulties Civil War soldiers faced. I would have hated to have had to fight a several hour long battle after a ten or twelve-mile run.

Rotov's examination of march speed is not only the best examination I have ever read of this topic, it is the only examination I have ever read of it. It is a part of the Civil War soldier's life that seldom is looked at with critical eyes.

Thanks to Rotov, I'll never just gloss over statements about distances covered again. Take a look at Rotov's thoughts at:


 Close Window