PFD or ETP: Which Should I Use?

[Luke Freet]

Due to my interest in the Atlanta Campaign, I always see the tabulations for the army strengths for the Confederates based on the "Effective Total Present" numbers given for each division in the returns for various points in the Atlanta Campaign. I never thought much of this until I started reading Ecelberger's "The Day Dixie Died" on the Battle of Bald Hill. There, he says that Cleburne's division numbered 4300 men at the time of the battle, which threw me off, because the ETP for his division in the July 10th returns shows 3743 men (see O.R. Volume 38, Part 3, Page 679). However, I've also started looking into Darrell L. Collins' Army of Tennessee book (giving organization, strengths, and casualty tables), and he pust Cleburne's strength at 4328 men (Page 176). This was bizarre to me, until I looked back at the O.R.s and realized he's placing his numbers on the PFD strengths, combining both the officers and enlisted men. I should have been ticked off on this earlier because he also lists the officer and enlisted numbers and has the section include "PFD strength" in the title.

So, I'm wondering: Which number set should I be using? ETP makes more sense, given how most other sources I've come across seems to point to them. But I get the feeling I may have been mislead by older sources. Then again, my reading thus far with Ecelberger has not given me a high opinion on his analysis and such, and he may have screwed up looking at the wrong numbers.

 

[Saphroneth]

It's my opinion that any strength measure is probably okay so long as you're using it in a consistent way whenever comparisons are being made - whether between opposing sides, or between the same army on different dates, or between different components of the same army on the same date, or whatever.


Roughly, the definitions in the East are:

Effectives - only the men who actually fight. This may include or exclude officers.

PFD - men with their permanent duty station with the regiment. Excludes sick, arrested, and often also logistics troops. (There's "special duty", "extra duty" and "daily duty", and whether they are counted in PFD or not varies by definition and time.)

AP, Aggregate Present - men who are with the army. You can sort of think of this as ration strength, though for any force with non-soldier auxiliaries (e.g. slaves) it won't actually be the ration strength.

AP&A - Aggregate Present and Absent. Includes everyone not struck off the rolls.


"Effective" had also in the past meant non-sick, and is sometimes used in this respect (I believe mostly in the West).


The reason to use PFD would I think be to facilitate comparison with the Union strengths, which tended to report in PFD not Effectives. (Though definitions changed over time, and by IIRC Hooker in the East Union PFD is closer in meaning to Effectives.)

 

[Luke Freet]

It's my opinion that any strength measure is probably okay so long as you're using it in a consistent way whenever comparisons are being made - whether between opposing sides, or between the same army on different dates, or between different components of the same army on the same date, or whatever.


Roughly, the definitions in the East are:

Effectives - only the men who actually fight. This may include or exclude officers.

PFD - men with their permanent duty station with the regiment. Excludes sick, arrested, and often also logistics troops. (There's "special duty", "extra duty" and "daily duty", and whether they are counted in PFD or not varies by definition and time.)

AP, Aggregate Present - men who are with the army. You can sort of think of this as ration strength, though for any force with non-soldier auxiliaries (e.g. slaves) it won't actually be the ration strength.

AP&A - Aggregate Present and Absent. Includes everyone not struck off the rolls.


"Effective" had also in the past meant non-sick, and is sometimes used in this respect (I believe mostly in the West).


The reason to use PFD would I think be to facilitate comparison with the Union strengths, which tended to report in PFD not Effectives. (Though definitions changed over time, and by IIRC Hooker in the East Union PFD is closer in meaning to Effectives.)

Ok. That makes more sense to me now.