Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Regiments Brigaded Together

Expand Messages
  • Thomas Clemens
    In the AOP some of both. The old regiments only had ten companies, and because all ten were almost never in one place they operated as demi-regiments, or
    Message 1 of 7 , Mar 26, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      In the AOP some of both. The "old" regiments only had ten companies, and because all ten were almost never in one place they operated as demi-regiments, or battalions, the term applied for units with less than ten companies. Thus some of the old regiments fought combined, most notably at 1 BR. Even by Antietam several were small in #s and not having ten compaines were combined. OTOH, the new regiments, 11th thru 18th I think, had a two-battalion structure with eight companies in each. They could, and did, operate separately at times.


      Dr. Thomas G. Clemens
      Professor of History
      Hagerstown Community College




      >>> Dean Essig <dean_essig@...> 3/26/2008 12:42 PM >>>

      Thanks Jake... I should have remembered them, though
      aren't they actually organized that way permanently?
      As opposed to temporary matters?

      There are several regiments of regulars set up like
      that out west, too.

      Dean
      --- joseph_pierro <joseph_pierro@...> wrote:

      > Dean:
      >
      > The only other ones that occur to me are some of the
      > Regulars in
      > Lovell's Brigade (2d Div; Fifth Corps).
      >
      > Specifically, the 1st and 6th U.S (Capt. Levi C.
      > Bootes) and the 2d
      > and 10th U.S. (Capt. John S. Poland).
      >
      > --Jake

      __________________________________________________________
      Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
      http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • joseph_pierro
      Dean: As a practical matter (at least for part of the war), yes (which is to say, it isn t just an ad hoc arrangement for Sept. 17). Technically speaking,
      Message 2 of 7 , Mar 26, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Dean:

        As a practical matter (at least for part of the war), yes (which is
        to say, it isn't just an ad hoc arrangement for Sept. 17).
        Technically speaking, though, no -- it's never a "permanent" fusion.

        The 2d and the 10th U.S., for instance, are (at least on paper) two
        distinct regimental organizations for the duration.

        Hence, you'll see that on Poland's after-action report for Antietam,
        he signs himself as "Captain Second Infantry, Comdg. Second and Tenth
        Infantry."


        --jake

        --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Dean Essig <dean_essig@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > Thanks Jake... I should have remembered them, though
        > aren't they actually organized that way permanently?
        > As opposed to temporary matters?
        >
        > There are several regiments of regulars set up like
        > that out west, too.
        >
        > Dean
        > --- joseph_pierro <joseph_pierro@...> wrote:
        >
        > > Dean:
        > >
        > > The only other ones that occur to me are some of the
        > > Regulars in
        > > Lovell's Brigade (2d Div; Fifth Corps).
        > >
        > > Specifically, the 1st and 6th U.S (Capt. Levi C.
        > > Bootes) and the 2d
        > > and 10th U.S. (Capt. John S. Poland).
        > >
        > > --Jake
        >
        >
        >
        ______________________________________________________________________
        ______________
        > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
        > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.