Confederate Army of the South Regiment/Brigade/Division strengths, April 1865

Luke Freet

2nd Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Location
Palm Coast, Florida
I was wondering if there were similar statistics as the Appomattox surrender numbers to the surrender strength of the Army of the South later that month. I only know of a few units. For example, from Lundberg brigade history, the 1st Texas Consolidated surrendered 501 men on their rolls. I was wondering if similar statistics are available
 
Mark L. Bradley's The Battle of Bentonville: Last Stand in the Carolinas has a pretty concise list in it if I recall correctly. I can't find my copy right now, but it has great numbers as far as I know.
Good to know, may look it up later, though it is not in my possession
 
I should note I just contacted a friend of mine who owns Bradley's Bentonville book. He says there are NO tables or numbers available for what I ask for. He did mention he had a book on Wyse Fork by another author which contained numbers.
Apparently, H. R. Jackson's Brigade numbered just 76 men.
 
From the Wyse Fork Book, detailing Confederate troops in the engagement there:
1621611935357.png
1621612020641.png

1621612077627.png

1621612141067.png

1621612157738.png
 
I was wondering if there were similar statistics as the Appomattox surrender numbers to the surrender strength of the Army of the South later that month. I only know of a few units. For example, from Lundberg brigade history, the 1st Texas Consolidated surrendered 501 men on their rolls. I was wondering if similar statistics are available
A general return of Confederate Military Forces prior to April, 1865, showed less than 50% of officers and personnel were yet present in the ranks, so far as the data received went.
1622473400760.png


This is taken from Charles W. Wesley's interesting, and mercifully concise, "The Collapse of the Confederacy" (1937)
Wesley, Collapse of the Confederacy, Hathi Trust

Jesse Marshall,
Hernando, FL
 
A general return of Confederate Military Forces prior to April, 1865, showed less than 50% of officers and personnel were yet present in the ranks, so far as the data received went.
View attachment 402534

This is taken from Charles W. Wesley's interesting, and mercifully concise, "The Collapse of the Confederacy" (1937)
Wesley, Collapse of the Confederacy, Hathi Trust

Jesse Marshall,
Hernando, FL
Sobering numbers. I've never come across this before. Thanks for posting.
 
Sobering numbers. I've never come across this before. Thanks for posting.
It is also important to notice that the 127,000 or so "present for duty" includes "present--sick", as well as "effective--present." Shave off maybe 10% for sick (just for an example) and there are but 114,000 present-effective... etc. etc.

For example, In mid-December, 1864 a muster of Bate's Division with the Army of Tennessee showed 7,886 men on the rolls (aggregate present and absent). Present for duty of this number were 191 officers and 1,659 men: for 2,663 aggregate present (roughly 33% of total). Of these there were 1,562 EFFECTIVES (19% of total). [ORA, I,45,1, 679.]

That means this division was 80% understrength, yet was still employed as, and expected to perform as, a division of multiple brigades and battalions.

Next, consider the "Confederate" idea of "effective." The Confederate army could evidently be very liberal in its application of this denomination. Leander Stillwell noted Confederate Prisoners of Bate's Division captured in action near Murfreesboro just a few days prior to the above muster included many barefoot, with the flesh of their feet blackened and wrinkled and corrugated, like an alligator's hide, with nothing for food in their haversacks but acorns, etc. Their federal captors, themselves a bit worse for wear in garrison and camp, were stunned that the Confederates considered men in such miserable condition effective for combat. [Stillwell, Leander, the Story of a Common Soldier of Army Life in the Civil War, 1861-1865. 245-246.]
 
The impression is that instead of settling into the usual winter quarters, many Confederate soldiers went home during the winter of '64-'65 and did not return in the spring. Among various reasons given for allowing them to leave were their desire to check on or assist their families, it relieved the government of having to provide these soldiers with food or their horses with forage, it raised morale, it allowed them to recover from sickness, it gave them a chance to get crops in the ground before their expected return. But many did not return. This was not a problem in previous years as far as I know.
 
Back
Top