Troop numbers during the Zulu/Sudan Wars?

[Mingans Marauders]

So I don't know if I'm googling the right keywords or its just harder to find. But does anyone know the break down number of British personnel when it came to rank? And how excatly was it layed out? I believe modern US Army its something like four men to a Sgt. four of those to a platoon(with a Lt. in charge) etc.

Thanks!

[zerostate]

A good breakdown of a full strength battalion can be found here:
http://www.victorianwars.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=1262.

It should be noted that eight of the corporals are likely to be lance sergeants (so there are 40 sergeants in total - one for  each section... Four sections making a company. There would be at least one lance corporal (an appointment, not a rank - they technically ranked as a private, but performed the duties of a corporal) for each section - and usually quite a few more.

A company's other ranks included a colour sergeant and the other NCOs mentioned, one or two pioneers and a proportion of the band. However, the pioneers and band generally did not do duty with that company, but in their trades.

The staff sergeants (those with named jobs) were not attached to companies.

Hope that helps.

[zerostate]

Sorry to DP - but I wanted to be sure this was seen in case my mistake in my earlier post is not noticed as corrected if I edited it!

The eight lance sergeants is erroneous (it comes from my 1890s home service notes). 32 sergeants, is of course already four per company.

An up to strength company would consist of: one captain as CO and one colour sergeant.
Two half companies - each with: one subaltern; one drummer/bugler; and two sections, each of:
One sergeant; one corporal; one or more lance corporals, plus 1/4 of the rank and file that are left.

Plus what I said in my previous post about pioneers and bandsmen.

Lance sergeants _were_ still possible. They would fill one of the sergeant's billets. A lance sergeant was an acting rank... It was a corporal acting as a sergeant.

Note: there was nothing called a platoon!

Sorry for the earlier error - it might have been confusing.

[Mingans Marauders]

Nope, not confusing at all. Very helpful and excatly what I wanted to know, I'll be sure to check that link in a moment. Thanks!

[Onebigriver]

The eight lance sergeants is erroneous (it comes from my 1890s home service notes). 

You're a bit old for a schoolboy. 

[Hobbit]

If  may add a little info from the Army in India...

Experience in Afghanistan showed that there were insufficient officers to effectively operate 8 independent companies so Companies often operated in pairs and battalions often split into two "wings". I don't know if this was also applied in Zululand or the Sudan.

Very slightly later drill books (off the top of my head I think they were the 1889 and 1897 versions that I looked at) suggested that if companies were under-strength that they should be combined to make fewer full strength companies rather than fielding all companies (ie if the battalion were at 5/8th strength overall it was better to field 5 full strength companies than 8 weak ones).

[zerostate]

You're a bit old for a schoolboy. 

Now that has made me laugh!