#120 – CSA Estimate of USA Troop Strengths July 21, 1861

10 02 2009

O.R.– SERIES I–VOLUME 2 [S# 2] — CHAPTER IX, p 569

120p569 Click for clearer image

« »


Actions

Information

2 responses

11 02 2009
Will Keene (10:25:21) :

Some things that caught my eye.

– Some of the numbers seem quite accurate. Heintzelman’s Division (Howard, Wilcox, Franklin) for instance.

– The difference between the US report and the CSA report for Hunter’s division is really big. I am inclined to think that the number McDowell reported is wrong. If Andrew Porter claimed in his after battle report that his brigade numbered 3,700 the day of the battle, then how could Hunter’s division (Porter+Burnside) number less than 3,000?

– The CSA report has a large force of unattached infantry. Who are these?

Like

Reply
11 02 2009
Harry Smeltzer (22:14:23) :

Will,

One of the points R. M. Johnston raised in his book was that the tables in the ORs were sometimes ORs themselves, and sometimes the work of the compilers. The above chart appears over Rhett’s signature, so I’m going to guess it is a record in and of itself. However, what we don’t have are the documents that support the charts – at least, not in the published ORs. I imagine the support for the tables is tied up in ancient red tape somewhere in the bowels of NARA.

As for the unattached USA infantry, I don’t know. The CSA OOB has a few unattached units, most notably the 6th NC, Hampton’s Legion, and Holmes. Perhaps the Confederates were assuming a similar percentage for their opponents?

Like

Reply

Leave a comment