AotC, AotT and AofO

[wt_jimbos]

Why was the AotC nearly 5 times that of the AotO and more than twice the size of the AofT. As stated in General Schofield's memoirs, leave the AotC too big and cumbersome to move effectively in the rough dense terrain and leaving the AotO and AotT too small to often accomplish effect work. He also speaks of division being sent from the AotC to support the other Armies, but not put under that commanders direct command, and that many officers wouldn't take orders from those whose commission dates were not proir to their own. .
He sites Thomas over sized command to the fact that Thomas was very experienced in the recent conflict, also he questions whether Thomas was willing to have his command reduce, and whether any of his men would want to leave him.

My Question is simply why was Thomas's AotC so big compared to the AotT and O??

[johan_steele]

James, part of the answer would stand to what time period you are referring to. After Atlanta The AoC was given everything Sherman didn't need or want to take w/ him on the March to the Sea, the size is also misleading as many of the Regiments had been badly reduced by most of three years in the field. Add to that that the AoC was garrisoning a huge area while Shermans force was intended as a much more mobile strike force.

Almost all of Shermans Regiments on the march to the sea were seasoned veterans, including the former AoC troops... in fact it could be argued that the AoC troops that went w/ Sherman were among the best the AoC had available.

Just my two cent answer.

[gary]

Look to the origins of the army. Depending on the importance, mission and political influence, it received the # of troops it did.

[wt_jimbos]

Sorry I forgot to specify, the time of this imbalance was during the Dalton to Atlanta campaign