Civil War Army Organization and Order of Rank

Here is an explanation of the basic way both the Union and Confederate armies were organized. The units are listed from the largest to the smallest. The descriptions below can be considered the ideal or desired make up of the units. As the Civil War progressed, the size of the various units would change due to loss of men by disease, death, or injury. The force of men an army could bring would be added to, and subtracted from, with the ebb and flow of war.

Army – An army is the largest field force unit of military organization. The Union armies were commanded by a major general and were usually named after rivers (for example, the Army of the Potomac). The Confederate armies were commanded by a general and were usually named after the area from which they were based (for example, the Army of Northern Virginia). The way of naming the armies was not always followed by either the North or the South and exceptions can be found, sometimes or often leading to confusion.

A confusing example of the way armies were named is this example: the Union had the Army of the Tennessee, while the Confederates had the Army of Tennessee. An army was further divided into Corps.

Corps – A corps was commanded by a brigadier general or a major general for the Union, and with the Confederate States of America a corps was commanded by a lieutenant general. Major General George B. McClellan and President Abraham Lincoln organized the first corps in the Union Army in March, 1862. In 1862, the Confederates began organizing their armies using corps in September in the east, and in November in the west.

Prior to arranging corps, the Confederates had sometimes (and informally) used what were called “wings” or “grand divisions” to further group their armies. A corps would be made up of two or more divisions and each corps used a Roman numeral for its designation. The corps were also often referred to using their commander’s name.

Division – A division was the second largest unit making up an army. For the Union, a division was commanded by a brigadier general or a major general. For the Confederacy, a division was commanded by a brigadier general, and sometimes, but it was rare, by a major general. A division would be divided into usually 2 to 6 brigades. The Confederate divisions tended to be larger in manpower than the Union divisions and would be made up of more brigades. Some divisions in Confederate armies were of equal size to one corps from a Union army.

Brigade – A brigade was commanded by a brigadier general or maybe a senior colonel. A brigade was divided into regiments, usually two to six regiments to a brigade. The Confederate brigades were more apt to be made up regiments from the same state, than brigades in the Union armies.

Regiment – A regiment was commanded by a colonel. The regiment was probably the army organization unit that a soldier felt like he most belonged to. A regiment was made up of men from the same area of a state, mainly because they were raised by the various state governments. At least during the early part of the Civil War, a regiment would have men who were friends or neighbors back home, or were relatives. These regiments chose their own officers by electing them. Typically, a regiment was made up of 10 companies, with each company having 100 men. So, if mustering men for service went well, there were 1000 men in each regiment. A battalion was the name used for a regiment that had not mustered a full 10 companies with 100 men in each company.

Company – A company was commanded by a captain. With perfect army organization and strength, a company had 100 men. But because of disease and other causes (such as soldiers being killed in battle!), by 1862 a company might only have 30 to 50 soldiers. Companies were officially designated by letters or numbers, but often a company had an unofficial designation, often a nickname.

Does reading about Civil War history from long and dry academic-like books bog you down and cause you to lose interest? Would you like to read interesting stories based on facts of the Civil War, stories that inform you and move along with the war’s history? Does having to read from cover to cover tire you and cause you to drag through a history book? Would you prefer the freedom to skip around in a book and learn story-by-story about the Civil War? If you answered “yes” to any of these questions, then the factual stories in 125 Civil War Stories and Facts will help you learn Civil War history. The stories are informative and entertaining and it’s a fun way to learn about the Civil War. Do books like Civil War Trivia and Fact Book by Webb Garrison or The Civil War: Strange & Fascinating Facts by Burke Davis interest you? Then you will find 125 Civil War Stories and Facts follows in their tradition of providing the reader with rich and interesting information about the Civil War. Available as a Kindle device e-book or as a paperback. Get 125 Civil War Stories and Facts now!

 

Civil War Army Organization

Shown below is a chart to help clarify Civil War army organization somewhat. The soldiers shown in the background are members of the Petersburg, Virginia Detachment of the 3d Indiana Cavalry.

Civil War Army Organization

Order of Rank

Listed from top to bottom are the highest ranks of officers and gentlemen, all the way down to the lowly, but backbone of the army, private.

  • General
  • Lieutenant General
  • Major General
  • Brigadier General
  • Colonel
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • Major
  • Captain
  • First Lieutenant
  • Second Lieutenant
  • Sergeant
  • Corporal
  • Private

Civil War Army Organization

By Civil War Trust Historian Garry Adelman


My book 501 Civil War Quotes and Notes features quotes made before, during, and after the Civil War. Each quote has an informative note to explain the circumstances and background of the quote. Learn Civil War history from the spoken words and writings of the military commanders, political leaders, the Billy Yanks and Johnny Rebs who fought in the battles, the abolitionists who strove for the freedom of the slaves, the descriptions of battles, and the citizens who suffered at home. Their voices tell us the who, what, where, when, and why of the Civil War. Available as a Kindle device e-book or as a paperback. Get 501 Civil War Quotes and Notes now!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
(Visited 5,295 times, 1 visits today)

19 thoughts on “Civil War Army Organization and Order of Rank

  1. I am writing a fictional book about the American Civil war. To no avail, I’ve been trying to find out how many men a corporal would be in charge of.

    I would be very grateful if you could supply me with this information.

    • Good question. Here is an excerpt from the link I provide below:

      "The formation of a regiment is in two ranks; and each company will be formed into two ranks in the following order: the corporals will be posted in the front rank, and on the right and left of platoons, according to height; the tallest corporal and the tallest man will form the first file, the next tallest man will form the second file. and so on to the the last file which will be composed of the shortest corporal and the shortest man. "

      A regiment in ideal circumstances could have 100-800 men, with 1000 at full strength. A company would have around 300 men, in ideal circumstances. These numbers may help you with how many men a corporal would be in charge of. However, remember what I said in my post: "The descriptions below can be considered the ideal or desired make up of the units. As the Civil War progressed, the size of the various units would change due to loss of men by disease, death, or injury. The force of men an army could bring would be added to, and subtracted from, with the ebb and flow of war." So, to pin down an exact/always/certain number for the number of men a corporal was in charge of might be impossible, the number of men changed in the various units that made up an army as events progressed.

      HTH & FWIW

      …Jonathan R. Allen

      More info:
      http://civilwartalk.com/threads/corporal-rank.23357/

        • "The descriptions below can be considered the ideal or desired make up of the units. As the Civil War progressed, the size of the various units would change due to loss of men by disease, death, or injury. The force of men an army could bring would be added to, and subtracted from, with the ebb and flow of war."

  2. Pingback: Civil War Revisited educates, immerses - The Feather Online

  3. I am just finishing W.T. Sherman’s Memoirs and would like to make, or receive a copy of this information, that would be so helpful in understanding the disposition of troops during respective battles. Also, your comment to James Leigh above is very informative.
    Can you provide a copy for me to print, or can I have permission to copy the above?
    This information is not for publication, it will merely supplement my library on the Civil War.

    Thanks

    • Hello Pepper Irwin,

      At the bottom left of the post, just above the "Please Share This" options, you will find "Print" and "PDF" options to either print the contents of the post to your printer or as a PDF file.

      HTH.

      …Jonathan R. Allen

  4. I’m doing some research for a masters and I’m wondering if you can help me out with something I’ve come across.
    The ranks all seem to be further subdivided. I.e, I’m looking at A company of the 69th New York State Militia, they have corporals ranging from just corporal to sixth corporals, and same for sergeants.
    I know 1st and 2 Lieutenants are standard, even now, but this division into at least six seems strange. I was wondering if you could offer any insight into this?

    Great Article,
    Cheers,

    • Hello Kevin,

      I suspect the reason there were sixth corporals and sergeants in that company is because it was a state militia, the militia is not the same animal as the army. Ranks to the sixth degree/permutation/computation/complication seem extreme. Imagine in the heat of battle wondering whose orders/directions you should follow? "Well, Jones wants us to charge that barn, but Smith says no, we shouldn’t and should hold our ground. Is Jones a first sergeant this week or is Smith? I can’t keep track anymore." It may also be that it was political, that being a militia everyone knew just about everyone else in the militia and everyone had to feel important some how, so you end up with sixth corporals!

      That’s my insight or speculation, I think a study of militia before and during the early part of the Civil War would be needed to explain the ranks of the 69th New York State Militia.

      …Jonathan R. Allen

    • If administrative paperwork; if a unit has 1 First Lieutenant and 2 Second Lieutenant, the junior Second Lieutenant may be referred as Third Lieutenant; if a unit has 2 First Lieutenant and 2 Second Lieutenant, the junior First Lieutenant is listed as Second Lieutenant, the senior Second Lieutenant as Third Lieutenant, and the junior Second Lieutenant as Fourth Lieutenant. Units with 4 Lieutenants are Batteries with 3 Artillery Platoons. Units with 3 Lieutenants are mostly Confederate units, and Union Company with 3 Platoons is rare.

      First Sergeant is the Right Guide of the Company.
      Second Sergeant is the Left Guide of the First Section (Left Flank), First (Left) Platoon, and Company.
      Third Sergeant is the Left Guide of the Third Section (Right Center), and Second (Right) Platoon.
      Fourth Sergeant is the Left Guide of the Second Section (Left Center).
      Fifth Sergeant is the Left Guide of the Fourth Section (Right Flank).
      Second to Fifth is by seniority, not ranks for the Sergeants.

      First Corporal is the Front Left Flank Squad Leader; front left of the first platoon.
      Second Corporal is the Front Right Center Squad Leader; front left of the second platoon.
      Third Corporal is the Front Left Center Squad Leader; front right of the first platoon.
      Fourth Corporal is the Front Right Flank Squad Leader; front right of the second platoon, immediately to the left of the Captain during march.
      Fifth Corporal is the Rear Left Flank Squad Leader, 2 paces in front of the Second Sergeant, but the Second Sergeant may double-hat with this role.
      Sixth Corporal is the Rear Right Center Squad Leader, 2 paces in front of the Third Sergeant, but the Third Sergeant may double-hat with this role.
      Seventh Corporal is the Rear Left Center Squad Leader, 2 paces in front of the Third Sergeant and 1 file to the left, but the Fourth Sergeant may double-hat with this role.
      Eighth Corporal is the Rear Right Flank Squad Leader, immediately to the left of the First Sergeant during march and 2 paces in front during combat, but the Fifth Sergeant may double-hat with this role.
      First to Eighth are seniority, not ranks for the Corporals.

  5. In a company there would be multiple sergeants. There would be only one First Sergeant, which is a rank. He is the highest enlisted man in a company, and is largely responsible for keeping up with the organization of the company. Other sergeants might be called 2nd, 3rd, and so on, but they are all the same. The number designation would only apply to where they were in formation, not their duties.

  6. Mr. Allen:
    This is a remarkable site! Thank you for this excellent information/education you’re giving everyone about the Civil War!
    I have a question that I’ve been trying to resolve for quite a while: did the standard order of companies within a regiment in the Army of the Potomac change around the time of the Battle of Antietam?
    All of the tactics books (Casey’s and Hardee’s) seem consistent from the beginning of the war to the end, in all their editions. The language, " … ten companies, which will habitually be posted from right to left, in the following order: first, sixth, fourth, … etc. … according to the rank of the captains" (i.e.: their date/time of commission), is consistent through the 1861, 1863 and 1863 versions, along with ancillary govt. publications like "The 1863 Laws of War."
    In my research I have read an early 20th century typescript of James Wright, who was First (Orderly) Sgt. of Company F, 1st Minnesota Volunteer Infantry. His personal memoir runs about 1,000 pages, and an edited version was published by the Minnesota Historical Society Press. On page 198 of that book ("No More Gallant a Deed"), Wright states, "It was about this time (just before the Battle of Antietam) that the new method was adopted to recognize seniority among officers by transfer instead of changing the position of the company in line." I have not been able to find any mention of this from any other source. I don’t find it in the order books from the regiment archived in the Minnesota Historical Society; nothing in the "Official Records of the War of the Rebellion." Do you have any information on this issue? Wright seems to be an extremely reliable source on most everything else. Since he was his company’s Orderly Sgt., he would have been directly involved in this piece of information, but I’m puzzled that I’ve never read/heard/seen any other reference to this.
    Thanks for whatever information/ideas you (or any of your readers) can provide!
    Brian Leehan

    • Hello Brian Leehan,

      Thank you for your comment. It certainly got me to do some wondering and researching in my library of Civil War books and a certain copy of a magazine which I have, I don’t have an answer regarding whether or not the standard order of companies within a regiment in the Army of the Potomac changed before or at the Battle of Antietam. I can provide some information and offer some thoughts.

      In the September 2006 magazine Civil War Times there is an article by Ted Alexander titled; “Two Great American Armies: The Opposing Forces At Antietam.” This article gives a good explanation of what the makeup and organization of the Army of the Potomac and the Army of Northern Virginia were like at the Battle of Antietam. No where in the article did I read anything that indicated that the standard order of companies with the AoP was changed. However, there were changes made in organization, and I have this quote from the article:

      “McClellan’s army was put together in an amazingly short time in early September 1862 at Rockville, MD. But this new Army of the Potomac was an amalgam of a number of different commands. It was certainly not the same force that had nearly captured Richmond in the Peninsula campaign, nor was it the Army of the Potomac that would gain victory and fame at Gettysburg and other places. At Antietam McClellan had the II, V and VI corps of his original Army of the Potomac. Three Corps from Pope’s ill fated Army of Virginia were also in the fold. They became the I, XI and XII corps.”

      This quote seems to indicate to me that there was a lot of organizational change occurring in the AoP before the Battle of Antietam, and it happened fast that 1862 September. In this light, I believe it may very well be possible that James Wright is correct in his writings about the 1st Minnesota Volunteer Infantry and that, "It was about this time (just before the Battle of Antietam) that the new method was adopted to recognize seniority among officers by transfer instead of changing the position of the company in line." I have no proof that this is true or false. Your research has been extensive and it seems that James Wright is credible. What is lacking is another source to confirm James Wright’s information. That source would be valuable with its confirmation. I did spend some time at: http://antietam.aotw.org/oob.php hoping to find something that would help, but I did not find anything.

      There are a few more books that I have that may help with more information. I will give them a skim-though when I find time (my nightly late night Civil War reading and study time accompanied by a glass or two of red wine) and if I discover anything that will shed more light, then I will return with a follow-up comment.

      Hope this helps some, but I know I did not provide the revelation you were looking for. I suspect the answer might either be hidden in plain sight, or perhaps buried away in a book on some dusty shelf of some library or archive in a place where the sunlight seldom penetrates. 😉

      Best Regards,

      Jonathan R. Allen

      • I could – and likely will – give myself a swift kick in the pants for not replying to you before now! Thank you so much for doing the digging you have done. Much appreciated. Maybe I’ll do a contest – with crowd-source funding – and offer a reward to anyone who solves the conundrum! 😉 I’ll keep nosing around and will definitely post whatever I find here.
        Best,
        Brian Leehan

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *