The Fifth Infantry Regiment of New York Volunteers

[Hancock the Superb]

In my opinion, one of the greatest regiments of all time.

First engaged at Big Bethel. There, they flanked the enemy, captured their unoccupied works, and remained on the field although their support had withdrawn.

Battle of Gaines Mill. The Fifth counter-charged Orr's Rifles (the elite First SC Rifles), pushing them back. They held their ground against Gregg's South Carolina Brigade almost entirely unsupported, taking 1/3 casualties.

Second Battle of Manassas. The Fifth held the Union left flank along with the 10th NY against Longstreet's 30,000 men. Here, the Fifth stood up against Hood's Texas Brigade until it was almost completely surrounded, losing 1/4 of its men killed. The regiment mustered 50 men at the end of the battle.

The regiment was unengaged for the remainder of its service (until May 1863), avaliable, but not directly participating in the Battles of Antietam, Fredericksburg, and Chancellorsville. In its entire service, the Fifth lost 177 men killed or mortally wounded in action. It won praise for its gallantry and drill in every engagement, most notably from the US "Regulars", a hard-bitten group in themselves and known for their fighting ability.

Who thinks they have a regiment that can rival the Fifth in terms of fighting prowness? Include evidence and we can decide what the "best" regiment in the Civil War was by popular opinion.

[Ingles of the 57th]

Couldn't agree more.

Gouverneur K Warren's 3rd Brigade ........ the grey ham in the proverbial blue sandwich. Hood pushing down from the North and behind them Jones coming up from the south. The anniversary of course.

This was always one of my favourite TC2M scenarios, the only real object being to try to stay alive.

I would have to look very hard to find an equal. As a Brit I would of course have to put up the Light Brigade at Balaklava and the South Wales Borderer's at Rourke's Drift but both actions were largely brought about by stupidity and were single actions rather than a succession. C'est manifique, tous les deux, mais ce n'est pas la guerre !

I am still thinking about the ACW>

Geoff Laver Late of Her Britannic Majesty's 57th Regiment of Foot.

[Saddletank]

Hancock, why didn't the 5th see any more action after 2nd Manassass?

[NY Cavalry]

The unit was wrecked. During the civil war there was never a good system set up for refilling the ranks of veteran regiments. New full green regiments were sent from the states rather than sending replacements. This was true for the Union.

[Hancock the Superb]

Well yes and no. There was a replacement system in place, bolstering the regiment's strength by 70 or so before Second Manassas. The regiment continued to be reinforced, but was never again committed into action. McClellan held the entire V Corps in reserve at Antietam (the Fifth did not cross the creek with the regulars at the end of the day). The Fifth joined the regulars in holding Fredericksburg the day after the battle. On the first day at Chancellorsville, the Fifth held the Union left flank, but Hooker lost his nerve before the battle could commence (although some regulars fought that day, the fifth didn't) and the V Corps was moved towards the river. I find it uncanny how often the Fifth was on the flank of the entire army (Big Bethel, Second Manassas, and Chancellorsville).

But yes, the Fifth was destroyed at Manassas, no commander would want to commit such troops after that.

[Baldwin]

I would not say they are one of the greatest regiments of all time. They didn't endure throughout the entire war like many regiments did for one. They got slaughtered at 2nd Manassas for another. The toughest regiments would probably be from one of the famous brigades in the war. There were regiments that captured occupied works head on, that takes a heck of a lot more toughness/bravery than just flanking an opponent. I would say on the Union side it was the 2nd Wisconsin. There is way to many tough ones to name on the confederate side to pick the very best. But I'll take the "Bloody 5th" Texas and you take the 5th New York and we'll see who wins B)

[NY Cavalry]

Union officers often commented that when new recruits entered a veteran regiment they very quickly became good soldiers mimicking the veterans. In to many instances, new regiments were raised instead of just filling out the existing veteran formations.


By the way I was looking at the number of posts that each of us have. I have 400 which I agree is a lot. Digby has over 500 and he has been around half the time that I have. Hancock you have over 1300 posts and your posts are usually 4 or 5 paragraphs. You should be the sites official scribe.

[Hancock the Superb]

By the way I was looking at the number of posts that each of us have. I have 400 which I agree is a lot. Digby has over 500 and he has been around half the time that I have. Hancock you have over 1300 posts and your posts are usually 4 or 5 paragraphs. You should be the sites official scribe.

I believe that honor goes to Michael Slaunwhite...

But yes, most of the time, new regiments were formed. I pointed out the 70 new recruits before 2nd Manassas because official reports are absolutely scathing of about 35 of them who fled when the regiment was almost surrounded (I don't blame them, though).

I think a lot of people overrate the good regiments. The Second Wisconsin stood at Brawner's Farm, Antietam, and Gettysburg, of which only two come close to the staying power and casualties of the Fifth (and yes, I did leave out South Mountain because it was dark before they were in action). The Fifth Texas performed at Gaines Mill, Antietam, and Gettysburg (I don't count the Wilderness because that is more of good fortune than an incredible fight), and really didn't have the sort of stand-up at all costs brawl of the Fifth NY. Yes, they did charge through the cornfield (the 1st TX takes the cake there), but at Gaines Mill, they overran a line of troops who had fought for 2 hours straight and were out of ammunition. I will, however, admit that Gettysburg's fight where they charged up LRT three times is impressive. So, all these "great" regiments really only had one or two battles that made their name. In terms of all the times engaged (merely three), I believe the Fifth lives up to the highest expectations of any military unit. But that is my own humble opinion...and I enjoy the discussion.

[NY Cavalry]

I usually think in terms of brigades. Usually, the regiments in a brigade develop their own character that is reflected in the brigade as a whole. If a brigade has a good general this usually can be seen in all of the regiments and this quality will continue in the brigade long after the general has moved on or been killed.


The "iron" of the Iron Brigade was killed off at the Battle of Gettysburg.

Stonewall brigade was slowly bleed to death.

Mikesla does the play by play, you Hancock are the scribe.

[Hancock the Superb]

Unfortunately, brigades change over time. There was no more Iron Brigade after Gettysburg because it was consolidated into the Fifth Corps. Commanders change over time. Meredith was never quite as good as Gibbon was at commanding and instructing the troops. Regiments change over time. The 24th Michigan never performed as well as the rest of the brigade (it was the first one to break at Gettysburg while combating Pettigrew). Even the men change. By Gettysburg, the Iron Brigade had just as many new recruits who enlisted after Gibbon first lead them as there were veterans (you should probably check me on that, that is based off of memory).

The only thing that lives on in regiments or brigades is the indefinable "spirit" which characterizes the resolute stands of the Fifth New York, the charges of the First Texas, or the fighting prowness of the Second Wisconsin. That is what I am trying to evaluate.

The Fifth is an easy one to see. In its service, it recieved few recruits, had the same colonel (later Major General Warren), and participated in one of the smallest Union brigades: Warren's Third Brigade, Second Division, Fifth Corps. The First and Fourth Texas, the Second and Sixth Wisconsin, the First Minnesota and the Twenty-first Mississippi were lead by different commanders, had numerous recruits, and varying battlefield reputations. After accounting for these differences we can evaluate the "spirit" of the regiment that largely defined whether it stayed or ran, fought or charged.