Regt/Btn

[Fat Frank]

I am a little (perhpas more than a little) confused with the infantry term "Regiment" and 'Battalion" in the Great War.

I keep seeing and reading them as interchangable, who and how is this decided and what is correct. I can supply references if required.

[dfaulder]

I am a little (perhpas more than a little) confused with the infantry term "Regiment" and 'Battalion" in the Great War.

I keep seeing and reading them as interchangable, who and how is this decided and what is correct. I can supply references if required.

I asked an allied question recently. It can be found on Regiments vs Battalions - I hope this provides some guidance.

David

[Fat Frank]

Not really what I am looking for. I am referring to units that are referred to as Regts in some instances and Btns in others. Is this an error from the authors rather than anything else?

[PGL]

Can you quote examples?

[daggers]

If we are talking about infantry, a regiment such as [at random] the Northamptonshire REGIMENT had two regular BATTALIONS at August 1914, and a 3rd (Reserve Battalion. In addition there were Territorial battalions, (4th, later 1/4, 2/4, 3/4) and in war time several Service and other battalions. All would be part of the Regiment and mostly wear the same badges.

You will find more about the structure of the army in the Long, Long Trail site by clicking its link near the top left of this page.

Some authors can be a little loose with their phrasing, making life harder for learners like us!

D

[Fat Frank]

..................Some authors can be a little loose with their phrasing, making life harder for learners like us!

I think this is more the problem. Specifically, the South African Brigade consisted of 4 what, (btns or rgets)? Every book I read has a different term and in some cases, the same book uses both on opposite pages.

So then the question is, what is correct and why?

[daggers]

Guessing, but probably battalions. If a Regiment had only one battalion, then both could be correct! I do not know about S. African army structure, but someone else probably will come along soon.

[Pte1643]

In "Apples and Pears" language... (Not meant to offend anyone's knowledge, just easy for newbies).

The Order of Battle goes like such.

Army... 1st Army, 2 Army, etc.

Which consists of a number of...

Corps... I Corps, II Corps, XXX Corps etc. (usually depicted by Roman Numerals).

Which consists of a number of...

Divisions... 1st Div, 7th Div, 12th (Eastern), 9th (Scottish), 47th (London) etc.

Which consists of a number of...

Brigades... 1st Brigade, 37th Brigade, 1 (Guards) Brigade, etc.

Which consists of a number of...

Regiments... Middlesex, Royal Berkshire, Royal Scots Fusiliers, etc.

Which consists of a number of...

Battalions... 1st Battalion, 1st/5th Battalion, 7th (Service) Battalion, etc

An Infantry Regiment generally consisted of 2 "Regular" Battalions, and any amount of Terrtorial (1st/5th, 2nd/5th, etc), and Service battalions. Service battalions were ones raised by Volunteer enlistment or conscription in times of War.

Battalions consist of Companies... "A" Company, "B" Coy, etc. And are generally refered to by letter.

I'm not sure, but I wouldn't think the SA Army would be constructed any differently.

[dfaulder]

In "Apples and Pears" language... (Not meant to offend anyone's knowledge, just easy for newbies).

>><<

Brigades... 1st Brigade, 37th Brigade, 1 (Guards) Brigade, etc.

Which consists of a number of...

Regiments... Middlesex, Royal Berkshire, Royal Scots Fusiliers, etc.

Which consists of a number of...

Battalions... 1st Battalion, 1st/5th Battalion, 7th (Service) Battalion, etc

An Infantry Regiment generally consisted of 2 "Regular" Battalions, and any amount of Terrtorial (1st/5th, 2nd/5th, etc), and Service battalions. Service battalions were ones raised by enlistment or conscription in times of War.

Battalions consist of Companies... "A" Company, "B" Coy, etc. And are generally >><<

Not sure that Regiments live in this hierarchy, I know various battalions of the Y&L (see The Long Long Trail | York and Lancaster Regiment in 1914-1918) were scattered across a variety of brigades. Until 1918 a UK infantry brigade consisted of four battalions, but after February/March1918 this was reduced in most cases to three battalions.

David

[Pte1643]

Not sure that Regiments live in this hierarchy

You may well be correct.

It was just an exercise in order to point out the "Break Down" in terms of (decreasing) size.

[amelialongcroft]

I hesitate to quote from Wikipedia but here goes:

"Naming conventions of units differ for traditional British historical reasons, creating a significant opportunity for confusion; an infantry battalion is equivalent to a cavalry regiment."

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_the_British_Army)

[Chris_Baker]

In the South African Infantry, battalions were referred to as Regiments. Just to confuse you. See their brigade structure here: http://www.1914-1918.net/9div.htm, for instance.

[PhilB]

Yes, I think the inclusion of regiments in there has confused the issue. A brigade is composed of (usually) 3 or 4 battalions which may be from different regiments or wholly or partly from one regiment. So, the umpteenth brigade may consist of the 7, 8 & 9 Bns of the Loamshires or of the 5 & 6 Loamshires plus the 8 & 9 Westshires or of 3 or 4 totally unrelated battalions.

[Fat Frank]

I have read before that there is a structure where 4 Btns make a Regt.

I find very little reference for this and have many refereneces where 4 companies make a Regt. There is also a lot of reference where 4 btys (comp) make a Regt and is commanded by a Lt Col, not a full Col. This would be roughly the same size the 4 sub-units in the question.

The 4 sub-units, (1st Btn/Regt, 2nd Btn/Regt) were made up of 4 (A,B,C and D) companies and each was commanded by a Lt Col which then went on to form a Brigade, commanded by a Brig Gen. Was this really so unusual?

[amelialongcroft]

I have read before that there is a structure where 4 Btns make a Regt.

I find very little reference for this and have many refereneces where 4 companies make a Regt. There is also a lot of reference where 4 btys (comp) make a Regt and is commanded by a Lt Col, not a full Col. This would be roughly the same size the 4 sub-units in the question.

I think this confusion has already been explained by Chris's post further up the thread i.e. in the SA infantry, battalions were referred to as regiments, whereas in other contexts the regiment may be an administrative unit and/or a tactical one. It's certainly not a clear cut term!

[Fat Frank]

Having taken this under consideration, it does seem that the SAI were referred to as Regiments. The best explanation I heard was “they were single Battalion Regiments”. It seems the confusion was much more about errors in writing than anything else.

Let us hope the authors take it to heart.

The plaque of the 1 SAI Brigade at the National Museum of Military History, Johannesburg, RSA shows all the unit badges. The one that gives it away is the 3rd, they actually use the word “regiment” in the badge.

[FROGSMILE]

Having taken this under consideration, it does seem that the SAI were referred to as Regiments. The best explanation I heard was “they were single Battalion Regiments”. It seems the confusion was much more about errors in writing than anything else.

Let us hope the authors take it to heart.

The plaque of the 1 SAI Brigade at the National Museum of Military History, Johannesburg, RSA shows all the unit badges. The one that gives it away is the 3rd, they actually use the word “regiment” in the badge.

Without wishing to confuse you 'sub-units' is a term used for the sub-division within a battalion (A, B, C, D etc) of a regiment, whilst as you have said in the case of the SA the 2 larger elements are synonymous. Finally, in WW1 an artillery 'brigade' was made up of 3 or 4 batteries.

[jeremym]

Having taken this under consideration, it does seem that the SAI were referred to as Regiments. The best explanation I heard was "they were single Battalion Regiments". It seems the confusion was much more about errors in writing than anything else.

Let us hope the authors take it to heart.

The plaque of the 1 SAI Brigade at the National Museum of Military History, Johannesburg, RSA shows all the unit badges. The one that gives it away is the 3rd, they actually use the word "regiment" in the badge.

Fat Frank

I don't know about the SAI, but the key principle to remember is that in the British army the Regiment was not normally an operational unit on the battlefield. The major operational unit was the Division, usually comprising three Brigades. Each Brigade consisted of four Battalions up to the winter of 1917 and three thereafter. Of course, any one Division might have two or more Battalions from the same Regiment, but this was not necessarily so. Different battalions from the same Regiment might be allocated to different Divisions. For example, I understand that four battalions of the Middlesex Regiment were all involved in four different Divisions at the time of the Battle of Loos, 25 September 1915. There were, though, a number of Division which were geographical in character - for example, the 62nd (West Riding) Division, which included Battalions drawn from the West Yorkshire Regiment, the West Riding Regiment, the KOYLI and the Yorks and Lancs Regiment.

jeremym

(Jeremy Mitchell)

[Fat Frank]

Without wishing to confuse you 'sub-units' is a term used for the sub-division within a battalion (A, B, C, D etc) of a regiment, whilst as you have said in the case of the SA the 2 larger elements are synonymous. Finally, in WW1 an artillery 'brigade' was made up of 3 or 4 batteries.

I do not agree that the elements are synonymous. This is what has led to the confusion in the first place. As noted, they were OFFICALLY Regiments and would request that they be refered to as such in the future. It takes the guessing out of the equation.