duckman Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 Hi all, Many armies in WWI had a regional base for recruiting - British & Empire obviously, but also German, Austro-Hungarian, and (sort of) Russian. I'm curious if anyone here can confirm or refute whether there was any regional basis to recruitment for the AEF or the French army (aside from their colonial units which obviously were regionally recruited). Were the "Lone Star", "Santa Fe" or "New York" divisions actually raised in Texas, New Mexico and NY? Was a particular regiment associated with a state/area in the way that the British Army did the West Yorks or North Lancs? thanks Duckman PS: I realise this is not so much off-topic as on the wong board (since it ain't about the B.E.F - but if someone could point me to a book or a website where these questions might be answered, I would be eternally grateful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tintin1689 Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 US Regular Army units have no regional recruitment, the National Guard, however, is organised in peacetime on a state basis.In time of emergency the National Guard may be federalised, this occured during the Great War.The NG Regiments then assume a federal number - 15th New York "The men of bronze" were a black Regt from Harlem and got a three figure federal number. An expert on the US army could tell you which Regiments were which and which Divisions were wholly NG (36th Div was Texas NG and 29th Div was Virginia and Maryland). The new US formations created in the war were not based on the NG and randomly composed of draftees (except black and white men were separated), they were known as the "National Army". There were problems as some NG bns had less companies and Regts less bns than standard federal establishments and sub-units had to be robbed from other Regts to bring them up to strength (men had to go to 69th New York from 7th New York - the 2 Regts detested each other) Separate black battalions had to combine with others from different states to make a Regt. The French Army (les Metros) I know very little of. The Regular line infantry regiments do become very heavily identified with their permanent garrison (43 RI with Lille and I believe 46 RI were from somewhere in Brittainy), but whether they recruited locally I do not know. I do know that non-regional recruitment severely compromised French mobilisation in 1870 as reservists trekked from one end of France to the other to get to their depots, so this may have been changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyOfficer Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 Use the below link for lineage and background: http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/default.htm As stated; RA units have no regional affiliations for recruitment. However, STRONG regional affiliations come through long basing/stationing (e.g. 1st ID and Central Kansas). Strictly speaking; there are no "national guard" divisions once mobilized; they are all "Army" Divisions. In fact; there are effectively no ARNG Divisions now...its all ONE Army. While not a WWI issue, strictly speaking, the history of formation/lineage of US Divisions is an interesting topic....and one that is now really being examined in depth as we look to redesigning forces/formations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul guthrie Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 I agree with prior posts on WW1 US Army. Also the drafted men from states were concentrated in certain of the National Army Divisions. I do not know how strictly this was adhered to. Every 4th division was broken up for replacements in France tho Pershing had said this would not be neccessary with our large " square " divisions over twice size of British ones. This happened to Kentucky NG and NA men so no division is really associated with this state as is 30th with Tennessee, North Carolina NG. Also 42 Rainbow were NG from all over the country, MacArthur COS. 82 All American were draftees from all over, Alvin York in this one and if you do not know who York was, for shame! Ducky I have not checked the link but if you need to know what state was what division can look it up for you at home, in American Armies & Battlefields In Europe ( 1938). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Burns Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 Hi, Just to clarify the 29th also contained New Jersey National Guardsmen. With the exception of the regular Army and Rainbow Division just about every US Division had some regional connection. These were never 100% as drafts were brought in before the divisions shipped overseas. I am at work now but if you are interested I can post a rough list of regional affiliations for AEF divisions when I get home. in WW I there was a definite treatment of each of the 3 divisions the 'Regulars', National Guard and National Army (Draft) divisions are clearly labeled as such although they were parts of one army in the field. Even the National Army Divisions had a tendency to be drawn from the same regions. But again this isn't 100% accurate. Which Division are you interested in? Take care, Neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tintin1689 Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 Use the below link for lineage and background: http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/default.htm In fact; there are effectively no ARNG Divisions now...its all ONE Army. Has any one told the State Adjutant Generals this? Seriously I would be very interested to hear more on this, are all US divisions a mixture now? What is the role of the Army Reserve units? are they used to find drafts like our old "Special Reserve" units? US army is not a major interest of mine, but I have just bought a book "The Rise of the National Guard" which is fascinating, I can heartily recommend it. I had read quite a bit on this force before, but the breadth and depth of this study is astounding PS Was the 3rd Infantry Division the only US Army unit in the invasion of Iraq? looked like it from our newspapers.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Burns Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 Once mobilised all divisions are 'one army' but before mobilisation the National Guard Divisions are still composed of Guardsmen, the 'Reserve' Divisions roughly correspond to the the 'National Army' or draftee Divisions of World War I and are composed of Army Reservists and the Regulars are well, the Regulars! Although the Army is a mixture the units still do hold onto some of their regional nature. Take care, Neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottsGreys Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 I can't remember where I heard this, but in the World Wars, I think the U.S. Army divisions numbered 26 (Massachusetts)-45 (New Mexico?)were National Guard based units. I'm sure either Paul, Neil, or Tintin could confirm and/or elaborate. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyOfficer Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 Has any one told the State Adjutant Generals this? Seriously I would be very interested to hear more on this, are all US divisions a mixture now? What is the role of the Army Reserve units? are they used to find drafts like our old "Special Reserve" units? PS Was the 3rd Infantry Division the only US Army unit in the invasion of Iraq? looked like it from our newspapers.... Excuse my editorial. We still have "National Guard Divisions". That being said, they are committed and considered just as any other Division....One Army. There are, however, Regular Army Battalion Commanders within these Guard Divisions and ARNG Commanders for some Regular Battalions as well. The 3 ID was most DEFINATELY not the only US Army Division committed. By the end of April the V Corps (THE Army Corps) controlled the 82d Abn, 101st AASLT, 3 ID, 4 ID and the lead of the 1st Armored Division as well as two Cavalry Regiments (2d and 3d). The press coverage plan was such that the majority of the media were embedded w/3 ID...due to a variety of reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Burns Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 hi Chris, The 26th are (and were) the Yankee Division National Guard from New England. The 45th were NG from OK,CO,NM & AZ didn't go overseas in WWI. The 26th I knew, 45th I had to look up! Take care, Neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottsGreys Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 Hey Neil: Thanks for the info. I realize now that I could have worded it better--what I meant to stress is that in the U.S. Army divisional numbering system, the divisions numbered 26 through 45 were National Guard based units, I believe? I didn't mean to single out the 26th & 45th Divisions in particular, they just happened to be at the opposite ends of the spectrum, and I thought I knew their state affiliations. Regards, Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Burns Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 hi Chris, You are correct, I should have seen the '-' my mistake not yours. take care, Neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Burns Posted 21 January , 2004 Share Posted 21 January , 2004 (edited) From 'The War With Germany' Leonard P. Ayres GPO Washington 1919 Divisions 1-20 regulars no state affililiation. National Guard Divisions 26th New England 27th New York 28th Pennsylvania 29th Jersey, Maryland Virginia 30th Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina 1/3 or so Draftees 31st Alabama,Florida, Georgia 1/3 or so Draftees 32nd Wisconsin and Michigan 33rd Illinois 1/3 or so Draftees 34th Iowa Minnesota Nebraska South Dakota 1/4 or so draftees 35th Kansas Missouri 36th Texas Oklahoma 1/4 or so draftees 37th Ohio 38th Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia 1/4 or so draftees 39th Louisiana Missippi Arkansas 1/2 or so draftees 40th California, Colorado Utah Arizona New Mexico 1/2 Draftees 41st Oregon, Washington, North Dakota Idaho South Dakota Wyoming Montana 1/3 Draftees 42nd Rainbow NG from all over US National Army Divisions (Draftees) 76th New York New England 77th New York City 78th Jersey Virginia Maryland District of Columbia 79th NE Pennsylvanian Maryland D.C. 80th Virginia West Virginia Western Pennsylvania 81st North Carolina South Carolina Florida Puerto Rico 82nd Georgia Alabama Tennessee 83rd Ohio Western Pennsylvania 84th Kentucky Indiana Southern Illinois 85th Michigan Eastern Wisconsin 86th Chicago Northern Illinois 87th Arkansas Louisiana Mississippi Southern Alabama 88th North Dakota Minnesota Iowa Western Illinois 89th Kansas Missouri South Dakota Nebraska 90th Texas Oklahoma 91st Alaska washington Oregon California Idaho Nebrask Montana Wyoming Utah 92nd Black Division various states 93rd Black Division various states Keep in mind that replacements would change the regional nature of the units and these are rough guides. In my own researh I've come across a few Jersey men in the 87th which is supposedly a Deep South Outfit but it apparently picked up quite a few Jersey draftees before it went over to France. Take care, Neil Edited 22 January , 2004 by Neil Burns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duckman Posted 22 January , 2004 Author Share Posted 22 January , 2004 Thanks everyone for the input here. Neil, I would be most interested to see your rough guide if it's not too massive to post. No specific divisional interest, just trying to improve my feel for the composition of all armies during the war. Undertaking similar scrutiny of most other armies as well. What really set me wondering was whether the "Rainbow" and "All American" tags signified that they were recruited nation-wide. If that guess was right, then the fact that that was distinctive to them, in itself suggested that other divisions were not drawn from a nationwide pool. And thanks for the offer Paul, I'll post specific questions as and when. I'm still cutting my teeth on the AEF. Previously been concentrating on BEF (+ AIF+CEF). Recently read "The Myth of the Great War", and it elevated my interest in the AEF to a higher level than previously - so whatever the merits of that work as a whole, it has generated a little extra interest for me. No bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Burns Posted 22 January , 2004 Share Posted 22 January , 2004 Hi Duckman, My rough guide is above. Hope it helps. Take care, Neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul guthrie Posted 22 January , 2004 Share Posted 22 January , 2004 Duckman disregard everything you read in the Mosier book , it's garbage and replete with error. Get The War to End All Wars by Edward Coffman, paperback in print and Paul Braim The Test of Battle about Muese Argonne battle, easy to find , White Mane Books I think. Burn the Mosier book so no one else is contaminated, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now