Preferred Way To Write Regimental Numbers?

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

I feel like more books these days seem to be writing out regiment numbers (ex: One Hundred Twenty-first Pennsylvania instead of 121st Pennsylvania). Is this purely author or publisher preference or has there been some kind of larger style manual change?

Which do you prefer?

I strongly prefer numerals. I think a big reason is it allows me to recognize a regiment more quickly. I think my brain also processes numbers faster and easier when they're numerals than as words.

 

[Nathan Stuart]

I strongly prefer numerals. I think a big reason is it allows me to recognize a regiment more quickly. I think my brain also processes numbers faster and easier when they're numerals than as words.

Agree. Thought that's a compelling reason to favor numerals over written-out forms, from a reader's viewpoint - it facilitates efficient processing of massed textual content and allows for quicker identification of regimental units.

 

[Oceanweather]

At one point the AP style manual recommended that numbers 10 or greater should be numeric and less than 10 should be written out. Not sure if that is still true.

For military history I prefer numeric unit identifications with one side being in italics. This avoids confusion, for example, on which side a Maryland or Tennessee regiment was on.

 

[huskerblitz]

At one point the AP style manual recommended that numbers 10 or greater should be numeric and less than 10 should be written out. Not sure if that is still true.

For military history I prefer numeric unit identifications with one side being in italics. This avoids confusion, for example, on which side a Maryland or Tennessee regiment was on.

It was when I was working for a newspaper, unless that number began a sentence.

I prefer numeric. It's really difficult at times to search for information for a specific regiments given the variety of ways they were written in print.

Twenty-Second Kentucky
22nd Kentucky
22d Kentucky
22 KVI
22nd Infantry of Kentucky
22nd Kentucky Infantry Regiment
etc.

 

[gary]

Chicago Manual of Style.

Keep things consistent.

What I generally do for numbers it to use arabic if one hundred and over but if it's things like regimental #s, I'd prefer using arabic. For Corps, Roman numerals.

Publishers are concerned about space/pages/costs.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

Publishers are concerned about space/pages/costs.

Yes, which makes me surprised at the use of the longer form.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

Twenty-Second Kentucky
22nd Kentucky
22d Kentucky
22 KVI
22nd Infantry of Kentucky
22nd Kentucky Infantry Regiment

I definitely prefer Kentucky Infantry Regiment.

"Volunteer" can be assumed by the fact that it's a state unit.

Putting the type (Infantry) does not narrow things down as much as the state. Most readers would care more about the state too. And, statistically speaking, any given statement about the Nth State is usually about an infantry regiment; when it's not that's usually obvious from context before one even reads the words Cavalry Battalion or Artillery Battery.

 

[R. Porter]

How were they referred to during the war? On hats they used numbers. How were they mentioned in orders? How are they written in official military histories through the years?

 

[huskerblitz]

I definitely prefer Kentucky Infantry Regiment.

"Volunteer" can be assumed by the fact that it's a state unit.

Putting the type (Infantry) does not narrow things down as much as the state. Most readers would care more about the state too. And, statistically speaking, any given statement about the Nth State is usually about an infantry regiment; when it's not that's usually obvious from context before one even reads the words Cavalry Battalion or Artillery Battery.

Yes, I should have specified this was how they appear in period newspapers. I have seen all of those and more used, along with the use of volunteer, in newspapers.

I think most modern writings have been mostly consistent with 22nd Kentucky.

 

[The Ninth Ohio]

Here is a related question. An annoying quirk of folks around here is to put the state first. So forever I am fielding questions about the "Ohio Ninth" and "Ohio Twenty-Eighth". Anyone else familiar with that practice and/or where it comes from? It was certainly not a wartime practice.

 

[The Ninth Ohio]

Chicago Manual of Style.

Keep things consistent.

What I generally do for numbers it to use arabic if one hundred and over but if it's things like regimental #s, I'd prefer using arabic. For Corps, Roman numerals.

Publishers are concerned about space/pages/costs.

This is my experience as well. Although if I had my own way, I would spell it out in titles (book, chapter, etc) and use the numeric elsewhere.