Romanian Military History Forum - Part of Romanian Army in the Second World War Website



  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Romanian troops in 1916
Alexandru H.
Posted: September 15, 2003 09:49 pm
Quote Post


Sergent major
Group Icon

Group: Banned
Posts: 216
Member No.: 57
Joined: July 23, 2003



Basically, I need the OOB of the Romanian Army at the beginning of WW1....
PMUsers Website
Top
dragos
Posted: November 23, 2003 11:35 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 2397
Member No.: 2
Joined: February 11, 2003



Situation of 2nd Romanian Army at 15 August 1916.


2nd Army (gen. Alexandru Averescu)


2 Army Corps (gen. Dumitru Cotescu)

3rd Infantry Division (gen. Marin Nicolescu)
"Moroeni" Group (2 battalions, 1 battery, 2000 men)
"Bran" Group (9 battalions, 5 batteries, 9000 men)

4th Infantry Division (gen. Gheorghe Burghele)
"Predeal" Group (9 battalions, 9 batteries, 10500 men)



3 Army Corps (gen. Constantin Tanasescu)

5th Infantry Division (gen. Petre Frunza)
"Tabla Butii" Group (3 battalions, 3000 men)
"Bratocea" Group (6 battalions, 6 batteries, 7000 men)
"Predelus" Group (3 battalions, 1 battery, 3500 men)

6th Infantry Division (gen. Alexandru Costescu)
"Putna" Group (5 battalions, 2 batteries, 6500 men)
"Buzau" Group (7 battalions, 6 batteries, 8000 men)



Reserve of 2nd Army:

1st Cavalry Divsion (gen. Ioan Herescu)
PMUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
petru
Posted: November 27, 2003 05:31 pm
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 117
Member No.: 149
Joined: November 27, 2003



You might want to look in Kiritescu’s book “Romania during world war I”. I know it has the campaigns in it but I am not sure about the OOB.
PM
Top
Geto-Dacul
Posted: November 27, 2003 05:36 pm
Quote Post


Plutonier adjutant
*

Group: Members
Posts: 383
Member No.: 9
Joined: June 18, 2003



petru wrote :

QUOTE
You might want to look in Kiritescu’s book “Romania during world war I”. I know it has the campaigns in it but I am not sure about the OOB.


VERY NICE BOOK! It is available in 2 volumes... smile.gif

Getu'
PMUsers Website
Top
Carol I
Posted: February 28, 2004 11:03 pm
Quote Post


General de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2250
Member No.: 136
Joined: November 06, 2003



I have found this list of army commanders of the Romanian troops at the beginning of the 1916 campaign:

First Army: Gen. Culcer
Second Army: Gen. Averescu
Third Army: Gen. Aslan
Fourth Army: Gen. Prezan
PM
Top
petru
Posted: March 02, 2004 06:16 am
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 117
Member No.: 149
Joined: November 27, 2003



Here is some information about the OOB of Romanian Army. It is not complete however. The army was grouped in four army

Ist army (gen. Culcer, headquarter at Craiova)
1st Division (gen. Dragalina) on Cerna River
Reg. 57 Mehedinti
Reg. 1 vanatori
Reg. 17 Mehedinti

11th Division (gen. Muica, later gen. Cocorascu) on Jiu River
Reg. 18 Gorj
Reg. 58 Gorj
Reg 36

the Lotru-Olt grouping formed later Ist Army Corp (gen Popovici) with div. 13 (gen. Manolescu? later gen. Sanatescu) and div 23 (gen. Castris)

Rezerve: 2nd division
12th division
Some units belonging to the Olt grouping (probably not all of them):
Reg. 1 border (graniceri)
Reg. 2 Valcea
Reg. 5 vanatori
Reg. 42

Also I think there was a calarasi brigade detached to the army, and the 20th Division was guarding the Dnube River west of the River Olt.

IInd Army (gen. Averescu) was posted by Dragos. Here is what I have:

IInd army corp.: 3rd Div.
4th Div.

IIIrd army corp.: 5th Div
6th Div.

Reserve: 21st Div.
22nd Div.

At 15th September the 5th, 21st and 22nd Divisions are redeployed.

Some regimental units belonging to the divisions:
3rd Division: Reg. 30 Muscel
Reg. 22 Dambovita
22nd Division: Reg. 30
Reg. 29
Reg. 32

6th Div.: Reg. 11 Siret
Reg. 12 Cantemir
Reg. 32

IIIrd Army (gen M. Aslan) was deployed on the southern front from Calafat to the Balck Sea

16th Div.
18th Div
1st Cavalry (Dragos says this division was the reserve of the IInd Army)
17th Div. (gen Teoderescu) Reg 36 Vasile Lupu
Reg. 76 Ilfov
Reg 79. Ialomita
9th Div. (gen Basarabescu)
19th Div. (gen. Arghirescu) Reg. 9 vanatori
Reg 40 Inf (Calugareni)
Reg 39 Inf.

Also it was supposed to be joined by a Russian army corp (gen Zaioncikovski)
61st Russian
Serbian Division
3rd Cavalry Div.


IVth Army (gen. Prezan)

IVth Army Corp 7th Division
8th Division

14th Division
2nd Cavalry mentained the link with IInd Army

Total effectives:

A) On the Carpathians
Ist Army 134 000
IInd Army 127 000
IVth Army 108 000

Strategic Reserve: Vth army corp 2nd Div 51 000
12th Div
Total 420 000

cool.gif On the southern front
IIIrd Army
West grouping (Oltenia) 20 000
Center grouping (Olt-Arges) 50 000
East (Turtucaia-Dobrudja) 72 000
Total 142 000

Also they had 42 000 Russian troops.
PM
Top
Florin
Posted: March 03, 2004 06:26 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1879
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



Did the intelligence services of the Central Powers were aware of the negotiations between Bratianu and the Allies? Were Austro-Hungary and Germany caught by surprise at August 15th, 1916, or they expected it somehow?
PM
Top
Dénes
Posted: March 03, 2004 08:02 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4368
Member No.: 4
Joined: June 17, 2003



AFAIK, the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy was completely surprised by the Rumanian attack in August 1916. After all, let's not forget, these two countries were allies at that time. That's one of the explanations of the initial rapid pace of the Rumanian offensive into Transylvania, as apart of the boarder guard units, there were no significant A-H troops in the area (there was no need for their presence in the 'Hinterland'), the k.u.k. Armee being deployed to the actual front lines.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Florin
Posted: March 03, 2004 08:52 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1879
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



QUOTE
... the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy was completely surprised by the Rumanian attack in August 1916. After all, let's not forget, these two countries were allies at that time. ....


Interesting to consider... If Italy and Romania would respect their written agreements, could the Central Powers force a victory to the end?

Well, this is not clear... About the strength of the Romanian Army, we know from this site (and not only). I assume the Italian army was stronger, but between Italian and French border there are high peaks, and narrow passes and gorges, which allow the defense of that part of France with relatively small forces. And the Italian fleet could not go beyond Gibraltar, or beyond Suez. (I did not forget in all this that the US finally entered in the conflict, but the efficiency of the involvement just slowly increased in time, and anyway it was more psychological, than practical.)
PM
Top
petru
Posted: March 04, 2004 12:53 am
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 117
Member No.: 149
Joined: November 27, 2003



I think Romania was very important in WWI, probably more important than it was in WWII. At that moment the number of soldiers counted more, and WWI didn’t have the same economical dimension than WWII. Germany depended strongly on the Romanian supply of wheat, and one doesn’t need to be an expert to notice a link between the general trend of the war and the relations between Romania and Germany. After each German victory the shipment of goods from Romania were coming somewhat faster, and before there were always postponements and delays. At a certain moment I thought that Germany might have not lost the war if Romania had sided with them. With Italy and Romania on their side they wouldn’t have lost the war for sure.

However I don’t really think the Germans and Austro-Hungarians were caught entirely by surprise. Negotiations were carried out between Romanians and the Central Powers, but Count Tisza stubbornly refused any kind of major concession towards the Romanian population.
PM
Top
Dan Po
Posted: May 11, 2004 10:29 pm
Quote Post


Sergent major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 208
Member No.: 226
Joined: February 23, 2004



QUOTE
After all, let's not forget, these two countries were allies at that time.


The secret alliance signed in 30 october 1883 at Wien betwen Romanian Kingdom and Austro-Hungarian Empire and Germany was secret and unknown for the political class of Romania. In fact this threaty wasn t aproved by the romanian Parliament wich didn t know something about this.

This alliance was a defensive one (Russia was a serious threat) - and effective only if another power will atack unchallenged one of the allied states (Austro-Hungaria, Germany, Romania). In 1888 Italy will become the 4th part of this alliance with the same deffensive obligations.

The circumstaces of the outbreak of WW1 made this threaty inapplicable - the "casus foederis" (friendship only against an unchallenged atack) was the fundament of this alliance.
More than that, Austro-Hungary and Germany broke the provisions of the 7th article of this Threaty wich said that before any war action will take place meetings and prealable agreements between the allied states.

For this reasons Italy and Romania choose to be neutral at 3 august 1914.

By the other side we have to think beyond diplomatic aspects ... Italy and Romania wasn t prepared for a war and, more than that, both of this countries had teritorial claims against Austro-Hungary.

I wonder why A-H was so surprised by the romanian atack ...
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
Victor
Posted: May 12, 2004 05:25 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4350
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



True, but Romania broke another article of the treaty in 1916. This article forbidded to sign treaties with enemies of the other states.

It is strange that it was such a surprise.
Count Ottokar von Czernin, the Austro-Hungarian Minister in Bucharest was convince that sooner or later the Empire will most likely have to fight Romania. One of his reports in September 1914 signaled the fact that about 90% of the Romanian politicians are favorable to a war against the Central Powers. The Austro-Hungarian General Staff also made preparations in late 1914 to counter a Romanian offensive on the Olt Valley, bear Sibiu.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Dan Po
Posted: May 16, 2004 06:11 pm
Quote Post


Sergent major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 208
Member No.: 226
Joined: February 23, 2004



[quote]True, but Romania broke another article of the treaty in 1916. This article forbidded to sign treaties with enemies of the other states.[/quote]

Romania broke an article of treaty in 1916 but the main therm of treaty was already broken in 1914 by Austro-Hungaria and Germany. In this case I don t think that we can talk about an active treaty in 1916. It was already broken for a few times.

[quote]It is strange that it was such a surprise.[/quote]

Italy - wich was a part of Treaty from 1883/1888 declare war to Central Powers in 1915.

At the begginig of 1914 till 1916 Romania send a lot of diplomats and officers to France, UK, Italy in diplomatic and military (to buy weapons) missions. This cannot be unknown facts for Central Powers secret services ... so ...
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.0091 ]   [ 14 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]