Regiments Split Into Different Theaters?

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

I just read that the 3rd Indiana Cavalry was split into two battalions - one in the Army of the Potomac and one in the Army of the Cumberland. Why was this done?

It wasn't simply a delayed transfer; the regiment was split in 1862 and never reunited.

I know the batteries within artillery regiments were frequently scattered. But what other infantry or cavalry regiments were split like the 3rd Indiana between different armies/theaters?

Note: I'm not looking for splits within a theater/army. Obviously, a regiment's companies might be scattered at different outposts for garrison duty or a few companies detached on escort duty.

 

[General JJ]

The 3rd Maryland.

The regiment went west in the fall of 1863 with the rest of the 12th Corps. That winter, those who chose to veteranize went home on furlough. After their furloughs, the 3rd Maryland veterans were assigned to the 9th Corps, and fought from the Wilderness all the way to Fort Stedman.

The remainder of the regiment fought through the Atlanta Campaign in the 20th Corps.

 

[Stryker65]

7th US Regulars -- Seven companies were organized in New York and fought through the war with Sykes' Regular Division, while the remaining three companies served until late 1863 in New Mexico.
10th US Regulars -- Seven companies were evacuated to Fort Leavenworth and DC and fought with Sykes' Regulars, while three companies served until late 1863 in New Mexico.
19th US Regulars -- Companies G and H were raised late and were rushed to DC in the wake of Lee invading Maryland in 1862, while the main regiment served in Kentucky, for nine months.
6th Ohio Cavalry -- 8 companies served with the Army of the Potomac; 4 companies served in Nebraska until mid-1863, when they were permanently detached as the nucleus of the new 11th Ohio Cavalry.
1st Massachusetts Cavalry -- 8 companies served with the Army of the Potomac; 4 companies served in South Carolina until mid-1863, when they were permanently detached as the nucleus of the new 4th Massachusetts Cavalry.
4th Massachusetts Cavalry -- As mentioned above. The 8 new companies of the regiment were diverted to Virginia and fought with the Army of the James, while their original battalion served at Charleston.
1st Indiana Cavalry -- ten companies served with the 16th Corps in Tennessee and Arkansas, while two companies served during the whole war as provosts at Army of the Potomac headquarters.
1st Ohio Cavalry -- ten companies served with the Army of the Cumberland in Tennessee, while two companies served until late 1863 as escorts to the Army of the Potomac's cavalry corps.
24th Missouri Infantry -- seven companies served in Missouri and in West Tennessee with 16th Army Corps, while two companies served in Arkansas with 7th Army Corps, and one company served in East Tennessee and Georgia with 15th Army Corps, all from late 1862 until late 1864.
3rd, 13th, 21st, and 23rd Veteran Reserve Corps: Spread out across the country.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

@Stryker65 I knew you'd have an answer for this.

 

[Stryker65]

I just read that the 3rd Indiana Cavalry was split into two battalions - one in the Army of the Potomac and one in the Army of the Cumberland. Why was this done?

According to the Adjutant General's report, the first six companies (the ones serving in the East) were sent east as reinforcements after Bull Run, before the remaining companies of the regiment could be organized. Similar to the story of the Nineteenth Regulars that I mentioned above -- companies were sent to the most needed place as soon as they could be raised, and it just so happened that in August 1861 that place was Washington DC, while thereafter it was Kentucky.

 

[gary]

It took a while for the 4th US Cavalry to be united and serve as a regiment. See Masters of the Field by John Heberich.

42nd PA/13th PA Reserves for a while was broken up with part in the Valley.

 

[JeffBrooks]

This is an unusual thing for American regiments during the Civil War, but it was completely normal for regiments of the British Army.

 

[13 IL Cav & 64 GA Inf]

I just read that the 3rd Indiana Cavalry was split into two battalions - one in the Army of the Potomac and one in the Army of the Cumberland. Why was this done?

It wasn't simply a delayed transfer; the regiment was split in 1862 and never reunited.

I know the batteries within artillery regiments were frequently scattered. But what other infantry or cavalry regiments were split like the 3rd Indiana between different armies/theaters?

Note: I'm not looking for splits within a theater/army. Obviously, a regiment's companies might be scattered at different outposts for garrison duty or a few companies detached on escort duty.

Strange. I certainly don't know!

 

[Dan Kohli]

This is an unusual thing for American regiments during the Civil War, but it was completely normal for regiments of the British Army.

Weren't they split into different administrative battalions normally?

 

[35th MA InfRegt]

Weren't they split into different administrative battalions normally?

I think so. Experts will correct me if I am wrong, but I think the norm or at least the ideal in a British regiment was to have two battalions, one on field service abroad, and the other at home serving as a depot. There may have been some British regiments which deviated from this practice, but don't ask me which ones! In wartime, a British regiment could raise multiple battalions, and these could certainly be deployed all over the world, but rarely serving together.

 

[Mississippian1861]

I think so. Experts will correct me if I am wrong, but I think the norm or at least the ideal in a British regiment was to have two battalions, one on field service abroad, and the other at home serving as a depot. There may have been some British regiments which deviated from this practice, but don't ask me which ones! In wartime, a British regiment could raise multiple battalions, and these could certainly be deployed all over the world, but rarely serving together.

By WW1, the average regular British infantry regiment had two regular battalions, one at home, the other overseas, a third Reserve depot battalion, and additional Territorial Force battalions. A few regiments had four regular battalions and two depot battalions.

 

[JeffBrooks]

I think so. Experts will correct me if I am wrong, but I think the norm or at least the ideal in a British regiment was to have two battalions, one on field service abroad, and the other at home serving as a depot. There may have been some British regiments which deviated from this practice, but don't ask me which ones! In wartime, a British regiment could raise multiple battalions, and these could certainly be deployed all over the world, but rarely serving together.

This is basically correct. Yet unit identity and espirit de corps was tied to the regiment, not the battalion. And, being British, they took it to absurd heights, with their various songs, traditions, mascots, etc., all tied specifically to the regiment. It has been said that the British army was not really an army at all, but several dozen armies fighting alongside one another. This is still true today, to a degree, but sadly almost all of the once-proud regiments are gone, disbanded or amalgamated.

 

[Stryker65]

Delete, question answered.

 

[Stryker65]

By WW1, the average regular British infantry regiment had two regular battalions, one at home, the other overseas, a third Reserve depot battalion, and additional Territorial Force battalions. A few regiments had four regular battalions and two depot battalions.

This existed in a similar form for the US 11th through 19th Regular Infantry during the Civil War. Each regiment was to have three eight-company battalions; what essentially was a "depot battalion" at the regimental headquarters; and -- later in the war -- an "invalid battalion." The 11th US Infantry, for instance, had two field battalions in the field, a third field battalion organizing at regimental headquarters (essentially the depot battalion), and an invalid battalion at HQ as well.

 

[35th MA InfRegt]

This existed in a similar form for the US 11th through 19th Regular Infantry during the Civil War. Each regiment was to have three eight-company battalions; what essentially was a "depot battalion" at the regimental headquarters; and -- later in the war -- an "invalid battalion." The 11th US Infantry, for instance, had two field battalions in the field, a third field battalion organizing at regimental headquarters (essentially the depot battalion), and an invalid battalion at HQ as well.

Do you happen to know when the US Army first adopted a permanent multi-battalion format for their regiments in the postwar period?

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

Do you happen to know when the US Army first adopted a permanent multi-battalion format for their regiments in the postwar period?

I don't think it was until posr-1900. The Spanish-American War didn't seem to involve any multi-battalion regiments.

 

[Mississippian1861]

Do you happen to know when the US Army first adopted a permanent multi-battalion format for their regiments in the postwar period?

Officially 1898, but it took a few years to fully implement.

 

[Stryker65]

Do you happen to know when the US Army first adopted a permanent multi-battalion format for their regiments in the postwar period?

Considering that less than 5 years after the war, they scrapped the multi-battalion format for the 11th-19th Regulars, I think it would be a while after.

 

[Kyle Kalasnik]

The 3rd Maryland.

The regiment went west in the fall of 1863 with the rest of the 12th Corps. That winter, those who chose to veteranize went home on furlough. After their furloughs, the 3rd Maryland veterans were assigned to the 9th Corps, and fought from the Wilderness all the way to Fort Stedman.

The remainder of the regiment fought through the Atlanta Campaign in the 20th Corps.

So we're there technically (2) 3rd Maryland Regiments in 1864 and 1865 but just serving in different Corps which would be in different Armies ?

 

[Dan Kohli]

My impression is that the the U.S. Government realized from the Span-Am War, that if the Army was going to serve over seas, it would need to be overhauled. The militia and volunteer system would be reformed into the National Gard, too, if I remember correctly.