Drawing a Regiment on a map

[Barnesville Blues]

Hi Guys, first of all, I have absolutely no idea in which forum I should post this question so Mods, feel free to move if I guessed wrong and I apologize.

I am trying to draw up a rough map of a Battle that hasn't been mapped much based on my own research. how big should a Regiment realistically appear on a map? I am using google maps for my maps because they have a feature that lets you measure distance....any distance on the map and also has topography. Unfortunatly, because I live in Ireland, google maps always reverts to maps.google.ie by default whenever I go to it... This is bad fore me because it only uses the metric system in it's distance measuring tool. So so am dealing with Meters for the most part. But anyway, I am worried that i am either making the regiment rectangles too big or too small. Just curious realisticly, how long and how wide whould the rectangles be.

 

[James N.]

Hi Guys, first of all, I have absolutely no idea in which forum I should post this question so Mods, feel free to move if I guessed wrong and I apologize.

I am trying to draw up a rough map of a Battle that hasn't been mapped much based on my own research. how big should a Regiment realistically appear on a map? I am using google maps for my maps because they have a feature that lets you measure distance....any distance on the map and also has topography. Unfortunatly, because I live in Ireland, google maps always reverts to maps.google.ie by default whenever I go to it... This is bad fore me because it only uses the metric system in it's distance measuring tool. So so am dealing with Meters for the most part. But anyway, I am worried that i am either making the regiment rectangles too big or too small. Just curious realisticly, how long and how wide whould the rectangles be.

I'm not going into anything like specifics, largely because I don't think I have the knowledge to, but here are a few general observations: It would to a great deal depend on the scale of both the map as well as the action itself. For example, something like Brice's Crossroads could of course fit on a much smaller map than Gettysburg! On small-scale actions like, say Chamberlain's defense of Little Round Top, the 20th Maine did NOT occupy a straight line, nor were all it's components in one convenient location - one company remained detached at some distance protecting the far left flank - the left of the left, so to speak. Also related - how many men were remaining in the unit at the time you wish to portray? I've just finished reading three highly-detailed accounts of each of the three days of Gettysburg, in which each author carefully computes the frontage of individual units, based on their strengths at the times considered - some regiments had shrunk to only a hundred men or so, whereas the relatively new 26th North Carolina boasted over 800. (Most of whom became casualties in the three days at Gettysburg.) Also, in what manner were they deployed - close-order, skirmishers, a combination, or something else altogether?

 

[Barnesville Blues]

I'm not going into anything like specifics, largely because I don't think I have the knowledge to, but here are a few general observations: It would to a great deal depend on the scale of both the map as well as the action itself. For example, something like Brices' Crossroads could of course fit on a much smaller map than Gettysburg! On small-scale actions like, say Chamberlain's defense of Little Round Top, the 20th Maine did NOT occupy a straight line, nor were all it's components in one convenient location - one company remained detached at some distance protecting the far left flank - the left of the left, so to speak. Also related - how many men were remaining in the unit at the time you wish to portray? I've just finished reading three highly-detailed accounts of each of the three days of Gettysburg, in which each author carefully computes the frontage of individual units, based on their strengths at the times considered - some regiments had shrunk to only a hundred men or so, whereas the relatively new 26th North Carolina boasted over 800. (Most of whom became casualties in the three days at Gettysburg.) Also, in what manner were they deployed - close-order, skirmishers, a combination, or something else altogether?

Points well taken...looking at the Battlefield as close as I plan to draw the map, it looks like the map width covers and area of 1.46 Kilometers wide and 873 Meters tall..so certianly not as big as Gettysburg. One of the Regiments in Questions was just formed, this was it's first action so it is at full strength. One of the unts is tiny as well, only being composed of thre companies, and they are deployed in a skirmishline. At the time they are composed of around 100 men. The other main Confederate Unit was not at full strength but not sure of its numbers.

1.46 Kilometers is almost 1 mile...0.907 miles 873 meters is 2864.17 feet.

 

[johan_steele]

Years ago I read that NPS map makers used a frontage of 100 yards for a regiment in line of battle with a depth of 200 yards.

I don't know if that is legitimate or not. There is a big difference in frontage between a Regiment fielding 800 men and one fielding 200.

 

[infomanpa]

Not too long ago, I believe it was @Tom Elmore who gave us an exact width per man in computing the battle front of a regiment. Hopefully, he can give us that, again

 

[Tom Elmore]

The simple rule of thumb for infantry regiments that I found works out rather well on the many battle maps that I have drawn over time is to assume a front of 22 inches for each enlisted man present (divided by two for the usual two ranks). So a regiment having 300 enlisted men present translates to a front of 275 feet. Static units will generally retain that length of front even with significant attrition, as the men spread out into a single line. But when such a unit moves and reforms into two ranks again, a new front would have to be calculated based upon the remaining number of enlisted personnel.

A regiment will typically leave a gap open for deployed skirmish companies so that they can readily resume their place in the line if recalled, but soldiers from companies on either side of the gap may spread out to temporarily fill the hole.

 

[Barnesville Blues]

Thank you Tom...it is just what I was afraid of, I was drawing the units too small. This is a rough map for now so I am not concerned about it being a science, just wanted to be in the ball park. I do not have the numbers for all the regiments involved...I just kind of wanted a safe kind of medium to draw the units for now. Especually with Confederate Units, it can be difficult to determine who many effectives each regiment had during each paricular battle. I'll say 275 feet for my Regiments which equals 82.82 metres wide. What kind of depth would that be? It looks like I was drawing them at about half the size I should have been.

 

[JAGwinn]

Civil War map legend National Geographic

 

[Tom Elmore]

Units varied widely in strength depending on how long they had actively campaigned, and of course diminished over the course of the war. The average Confederate infantry regiment at Gettysburg contained 338 enlisted men, and while I have not calculated the same strength of a Union infantry regiment in that battle, I imagine it would be somewhat less, my guess would be around 275 enlisted men. As for depth, the "book" gives 19 inches per man (times two), plus 13 inches between the ranks, or 4 feet, 3 inches. The disparity between length and width is why width is exaggerated on hand-drawn maps, which is helpful because one can then use a thinner line to denote a single rank.

 

[Barnesville Blues]

Thanks Tom, that's very helpful.

 

[gary]

You may want to contact Hal Jasperson who does a lot of maps. He is a member of the Peninsula Civil War Round Table (San Francisco Bay Area).

 

[DixieRifles]

I use Paint on my Puter to sketch out a map or fill in units on a geo-map or other source. I generally don't use a line to represent the scale of the unit. There are times it is important to show the complete battle line. My opinion is that there is a lot of confusion on the battlefield and it takes an expert to know where a unit was exactly and how it interfaced with other units and geography. Brigades were broken up by a stone wall; Regiments were sent off to provide support to other brigades.

In most cases, I use the basic Army symbols to designate the placement and command of regiments and various units. These symbols are rectangles with designation for infantry, cavalry, etc. I use arrows to indicate movement and attack and leave the exact details up to the reader. If I want to show the action of a specific company on a map showing regiments, I just label it as a company.

WW2 symbols use the dots and bars on top of the rectangle to designate the size of the unit that is depicted--- See below. The positions on this map created by Army's Center for Military History(but translated into Italian) depicts the general area a unit is defending with a Circle marked with a double vertical bar representing unit's area of control. I wouldn't use this on a Civil War map but I do generally follow this method of symbols and arrows.

But as I said, I'm a novice and use Paint to draw my maps.

 

[Barnesville Blues]

You may want to contact Hal Jasperson who does a lot of maps. He is a member of the Peninsula Civil War Round Table (San Francisco Bay Area).

I'm actually working with Hal or I should say I will be. I have already contacted him about making the final maps for me. I am trying to do some rough maps that will both service as a guide for Hal and also to use in discussions with various peoples. Some of the maps I am making have been mapped before but I am concentrating on a particular brigade my map will still be a bit unique.

 

[Barnesville Blues]

I use Paint on my Puter to sketch out a map or fill in units on a geo-map or other source. I generally don't use a line to represent the scale of the unit. There are times it is important to show the complete battle line. My opinion is that there is a lot of confusion on the battlefield and it takes an expert to know where a unit was exactly and how it interfaced with other units and geography. Brigades were broken up by a stone wall; Regiments were sent off to provide support to other brigades.

In most cases, I use the basic Army symbols to designate the placement and command of regiments and various units. These symbols are rectangles with designation for infantry, cavalry, etc. I use arrows to indicate movement and attack and leave the exact details up to the reader. If I want to show the action of a specific company on a map showing regiments, I just label it as a company.

WW2 symbols use the dots and bars on top of the rectangle to designate the size of the unit that is depicted--- See below. The positions on this map created by Army's Center for Military History(but translated into Italian) depicts the general area a unit is defending with a Circle marked with a double vertical bar representing unit's area of control. I wouldn't use this on a Civil War map but I do generally follow this method of symbols and arrows.

But as I said, I'm a novice and use Paint to draw my maps.

View attachment 166856

Yeah, I'm using paint as well. I am going into google maps, centering on the area I want, bring up the toptography or terrain as google maps calls it then past the image into paint. I am not an artist and am not great with Paint so I am trying to keep it simple...I am just using a rectangle shape to represent regiments, red for Confederate, Blue for Union. For my small unit which was deployed in a skirmish line, I am using a broken line.

 

[gary]

Tell Hal Gary Yee says hello. The Peninsula CWRT was one of the three CWRT I used to belong to.

 

[Harris]

If I may ask...which battle are you preparing a map for?

 

[Barnesville Blues]

As I said I am working on several but the main one is Hoovers Gap.

 

[civilken]

only the guys on this forum would know 22 inches per man or approximately 30 cm centimeters.

 

[E_just_E]

Thank you Tom...it is just what I was afraid of, I was drawing the units too small.

95% of the maps out there, are drawing the units way too small. I think that when we are used visually to brigades 35-50% of actual size, actual size seems just huge.

Example:

A. Usual view of the size of Pickett's division during Pickett's charge (more, but just focus on the 3 Pickett's brigades) :

B. Actual size approximation based on that 22 inches per man:

Way off...
(a good comparison point is the size of Spangler's Woods vs. Armistead's Brigade in both maps...)

 

[infomanpa]

95% of the maps out there, are drawing the units way too small. I think that when we are used visually to brigades 35-50% of actual size, actual size seems just huge.

Example:

A. Usual view of the size of Pickett's division during Pickett's charge (more, but just focus on the 3 Pickett's brigades) :

View attachment 166998


B. Actual size approximation based on that 22 inches per man:

View attachment 166999

Way off...
(a good comparison point is the size of Spangler's Woods vs. Armistead's Brigade in both maps...)

Very interesting, indeed. Although, I have to say that I've never seen a map like B, that shows Kemper's brigade extending all the way out to the Wheatfield Rd. Since you are using the @Tom Elmore measurement system, I would be curious as to what his map would show.