146th NY @ Battle Of The Wilderness

Hopefully someone who can answer more intelligently will come along. I only know this because the tactic and maneuvers guys here at CWT have been so generous in coaching me. :D

In typical line of battle, companies in a regiment were generally aligned as follows, left to right: B G K E H C I D F A -- However this might vary/change based on the seniority of Captains.
 
I had no idea about this, Laura, but it's really interesting--thank you! :smile:
Right!?!?!? @Tom Elmore or @Package4 can explain the variations better - one of them told me the basic alignment a while back but I can't remember the reasons why another alignment might be used. Something about seniority.
 
Laura, you are correct. That is, some regiments decided to retain the original order of companies: B-G-K-E-H-C-I-D-F-A, perhaps for the sake of simplicity. Others, however, shifted companies around to reflect changing seniority of company commanders who came and went. From the examples I have seen at Gettysburg, nearly half retained the original order while a little over half did not. Unfortunately, I don't know the order of the 146th New York at Gettysburg, which would be a good indicator of their previous and subsequent formations. But in the same brigade, the 140th New York at Gettysburg did not adhere to the original order, being aligned G-A-E-H-F-B-D-C-I-K (from left to right).
 
Laura, you are correct. That is, some regiments decided to retain the original order of companies: B-G-K-E-H-C-I-D-F-A, perhaps for the sake of simplicity. Others, however, shifted companies around to reflect changing seniority of company commanders who came and went. From the examples I have seen at Gettysburg, nearly half retained the original order while a little over half did not. Unfortunately, I don't know the order of the 146th New York at Gettysburg, which would be a good indicator of their previous and subsequent formations. But in the same brigade, the 140th New York at Gettysburg did not adhere to the original order, being aligned G-A-E-H-F-B-D-C-I-K (from left to right).
Thanks Tom. Can you please explain to Linda about the double lines or whatever they are called and maybe just a primer on line of battle vs columns of companies? See her question in the OP. Thanks so very much!

EDIT TO ADD:
I'm trying to determine the rhyme or reason for that order and am going crazier than usual!:bounce:
I have no idea. I just use this to remember the order: Big Generals Kick Each Human Can In Defiance oF Authority :D There's probably a "real" one somewhere but it makes it easier for me to remember.
 
Last edited:
Hello everyone,
Does anyone know the lineup of the soldiers within their regiments? In particular, the 146th NY, on May 5 and May 6, 1864, at the Battle Of The Wilderness. Possibly one company behind another?? Thanks for any suggestions.
Linda

We have a lot of folks here who can do a better job explaining infantry formations, but here goes ...

I can't speak directly to the Wilderness, but typically regiments (comprising the usual ten companies) fought in a double line with half their fighting men in the front rank and the other half close behind them in a rear rank. My rule of thumb is 22 inches of width to each enlisted man, so that a regiment with a strength of 300 enlisted men (officers don't count in this calculation) would occupy a front of 275 feet as an approximation. This formation delivers optimal firepower. The ten companies would not stacked one behind the other because then the nine companies directly behind the front company could not fire their weapons without endangering their comrades. Sometimes regiments are stacked up one behind the other (creating a "column of regiments") for ease of movement, but for the same reason it is a very ineffective formation for battle. During an actual battle, regiments do sometimes find themselves blocked by other friendly regiments positioned in front of them, and the results are never good.

At the outset of the war, the senior captain in the regiment commanded Company A, and the next senior captain commanded Company B, so that placing Company A on the far right and Company B on the far left ensured your most senior captains would be on the vulnerable flanks, and those two companies were often selected as skirmish companies, meaning they were deployed at a distance in front to cover the entire front of the regiment.
 
Hopefully someone who can answer more intelligently will come along. I only know this because the tactic and maneuvers guys here at CWT have been so generous in coaching me. :D

In typical line of battle, companies in a regiment were generally aligned as follows, left to right: B G K E H C I D F A -- However this might vary/change based on the seniority of Captains.
 
Thank you very much for this information. I’ve been studying the 146th NY casualties and wounded during the Battle of the Wilderness. I’m compiling the names of all the soldiers and their fate. It made me wonder if where a company was placed made it more or less vulnerable. That’s what prompted my question.
 
Thank you very much for this information. I’ve been studying the 146th NY casualties and wounded during the Battle of the Wilderness. I’m compiling the names of all the soldiers and their fate. It made me wonder if where a company was placed made it more or less vulnerable. That’s what prompted my question.
 
We have a lot of folks here who can do a better job explaining infantry formations, but here goes ...

I can't speak directly to the Wilderness, but typically regiments (comprising the usual ten companies) fought in a double line with half their fighting men in the front rank and the other half close behind them in a rear rank. My rule of thumb is 22 inches of width to each enlisted man, so that a regiment with a strength of 300 enlisted men (officers don't count in this calculation) would occupy a front of 275 feet as an approximation. This formation delivers optimal firepower. The ten companies would not stacked one behind the other because then the nine companies directly behind the front company could not fire their weapons without endangering their comrades. Sometimes regiments are stacked up one behind the other (creating a "column of regiments") for ease of movement, but for the same reason it is a very ineffective formation for battle. During an actual battle, regiments do sometimes find themselves blocked by other friendly regiments positioned in front of them, and the results are never good.

At the outset of the war, the senior captain in the regiment commanded Company A, and the next senior captain commanded Company B, so that placing Company A on the far right and Company B on the far left ensured your most senior captains would be on the vulnerable flanks, and those two companies were often selected as skirmish companies, meaning they were deployed at a distance in front to cover the entire front of the regiment.
 
Dear Tom, thank you for your thorough explanation of Infantry formation. I’m going to do a little sketch to visualize it. Since Companies A and B are on the flanks and in skirmishes, does being the senior, experienced companies cancel out their vulnerable positions? Thank you again. Linda
 
Thanks Tom. Can you please explain to Linda about the double lines or whatever they are called and maybe just a primer on line of battle vs columns of companies? See her question in the OP. Thanks so very much!

EDIT TO ADD: I have no idea. I just use this to remember the order: Big Generals Kick Each Human Can In Defiance oF Authority :D There's probably a "real" one somewhere but it makes it easier for me to remember.
 
Laura, you are correct. That is, some regiments decided to retain the original order of companies: B-G-K-E-H-C-I-D-F-A, perhaps for the sake of simplicity. Others, however, shifted companies around to reflect changing seniority of company commanders who came and went. From the examples I have seen at Gettysburg, nearly half retained the original order while a little over half did not. Unfortunately, I don't know the order of the 146th New York at Gettysburg, which would be a good indicator of their previous and subsequent formations. But in the same brigade, the 140th New York at Gettysburg did not adhere to the original order, being aligned G-A-E-H-F-B-D-C-I-K (from left to right).
 
Hi Tom, where did you find the info on the 140th NY formation at Gettysburg? Sorry for all the questions. Seems like as soon as someone replies, I want to learn more and more!
 
Thank you very much for this information. I’ve been studying the 146th NY casualties and wounded during the Battle of the Wilderness. I’m compiling the names of all the soldiers and their fate. It made me wonder if where a company was placed made it more or less vulnerable. That’s what prompted my question.

You are exactly right. Depending on the terrain and other features like stone walls, different companies of the same regiment may have significant variation in their losses.

A recent thread provides just such an example: https://civilwartalk.com/threads/en...s-from-onondaga-county-on-culp’s-hill.159260/ In this case, while going forward into the breastworks the four right companies of the 122nd New York were largely protected by a ledge of rocks. In fact, knowing Companies I, D, F and A had very light casualties leads to the conclusion that the regiment retained its original alignment (from left to right): B-G-K-E-H-C-I-D-F-A.

Of course, as noted, many regiments moved their companies around, which changed the far left and far right flank companies, as well as the color company, which is just to the right of center. How often a change was made presumably varied widely. I am only aware of one detailed example, that of the 140th Pennsylvania. On May 13, 1863, it changed to E-F-D-G-H-A-I-K-B-C, but only about a month later, on June 10 or 20, it changed again to A-E-H-B-I-K-D-G-F-C, although it kept that alignment ever after. The benefit of not changing is that a soldier always knew just where to find his company and his precise place in line. That's important if for any reason he became separated from his regiment, for instance when returning from the skirmish line. Later in the war, any company might be detached temporarily to the forward skirmish line (when all were veterans it made no difference), and typically the resulting gap was not filled, so that when the company returned, it could readily resume its place in the regimental line.
 
Later in the war, any company might be detached temporarily to the forward skirmish line (when all were veterans it made no difference), and typically the resulting gap was not filled, so that when the company returned, it could readily resume its place in the regimental line.
Ah Ha! I've always wondered how the skirmishers rejoined the line. I just figured they tagged onto one or both ends. I guess that would be accurate early in the war - when A & B were the senior companies and usually selected for skirmish duty. But later in the war, say if G & K were selected. Then the gap in the line of battle would be left open for them to return to? Speaking of which, if two companies of skirmishers were selected, would those that were normally side by side in line have been selected or would they have been selected one from each side of the line?
EDIT TO ADD: Sorry for butting into your thread Linda. Inquiring minds want to know. :D
EDIT AGAIN: Maybe we should change the title of this thread to Tom Elmore, with the Patience of Jobe, Schools the Ladies on Infantry Formations. :D:bounce::D
 
Last edited:
Back
Top