40 Years of Wandering and the Exodus Population
errancy@infidels.org errancy@infidels.org
Tue, 18 May 1999 22:16:00 EDT (00927098160, d533542a.247378e0@aol.com)
> Farrell Till:
> Let's suppose that these 3 million traveled, say, 200 abreast, taking with
> them their tents, herds, and other possessions as they marched along. How
> long would this line of humanity have been? If they traveled this way,
there
> would have been 15,000 columns, and if they had only 3 feet between the
> columns, they would have been strung out over a distance of almost 9 miles.
> ===============
> Joe Alward:
> On another matter of less importance: I think that Till must mean that
there
> were 15,000 "rows", not columns.
BAKKE
Since I am a US Army soldier in real-life, I can confirm that Till is
correct. In military parlance, the 200 people standing abreast in a
marching formation would constitute a "column". Each of the 200 people
would be leading a "file" that would be 15,000 people in length.
Therefore, the formation would consists of 200 "files" and 15,000
"columns".
==================
Joe Alward:
I believe the 200 men you refer to above are said to be in a "rank", or
perhaps a "line", but not in a "column".
The 15,000 men are in a "file", as you said, but they are also in a "column";
the two words are synonymous.
Consider also the definition of "column":
4. (Naut.) A number of ships so arranged as to follow one another in
SINGLE . . .FILE. . ."
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?db=web1913&term=Column&config=define
Thus, a column of troops is a collection of soldiers marching single file.
One final comment about the 200 men, which I assert represents a "rank", or
"line", not a "column". Being in the U.S. Army, perhaps you'll remember
seeing films of grunts in Vietnam "going on line" (walking dozens abreast)
across a paddy into a village, firing weapons as they went. The expression
was "on line", not "on column", right? GI's walked "in columns" down jungle
trails, didn't they?