Mike You are mainly correct but only the 1st Division and the 4th Brigade were split. The 1st and 2nd Brigades formed the new 14th and 15th Brigades which together with the 8th Brigade became the 5th Division. The 3rd and 4th Brigades formed the 13th and 12th Brigades and together with the 4th Brigade formed the 4th Division. The 2nd Division was not split. This process would not have created duplicate numbers within units. Anthony -----Original Message----- From: Mike Boyd [mailto:mikejboyd@bigpond.com] Sent: Friday, 16 June 2006 8:31 PM To: AUS-MILITARY-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUS-MIL] Officers' Numbers David You have made a misrepresentation of what Bean says on page 42 of Volume III. The reorganisation of Feb 1916, was that the 1st and 2nd Divisions were split in half. The first half remaining as the initial Division and the second half becoming the 4th and 5th Divisions. So in the Case of the 1st Bn the second half became the 53 Bn. Then each unit was made up to strength with new recruites then being trained in Egypt. Certainly the First Bn did not disappear to be come the 53rd Bn. and so on. Mike Boyd Brisbane ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Dixon" <dixond2@bigpond.net.au> To: <AUS-MILITARY-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 6:21 PM Subject: Re: [AUS-MIL] Officers' Numbers > To strengthen my case, the official war history (Refer C.E.W.Bean, The > A.I.F. in France 1916 - Vol.III.) shows that a re-organisation of the > A.I.F. took place in 1916 and the 1st. & 2nd. Divisions became the 4th. & > 5th., hence if I have it right, the 1st Bde (1st.- 4th.Bns.) > became the 14th Bde.(53rd.-56th.). ie the 1st.Bn.> the 53rd, the 2nd.> > the 54th, > the 3rd.> the 55th etc.. It would have been chaotic to have numbers > attached to units at that point. > ==== AUS-MILITARY Mailing List ==== Please support RootsWeb who make this list possible http://www.rootsweb.com/rootsweb/how-to-subscribe.html