Valerie corby Posted 7 November , 2008 Share Posted 7 November , 2008 Not sure if this is the correct 'thread' however in order to make sense of what I am reading at the moment, on this site, books etc and information about my relative who died on the somme can anyone out there spare the time to explain to me what these words mean. Is a division bigger than a battalion etc. Why are corps not regiments? I.e. the physical training corp, machine gun corp if you see what I mean. I do know what a regiment is though which is a start!! Thank you. Valerie - slightly embarrassed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickrose Posted 7 November , 2008 Share Posted 7 November , 2008 Valerie, 'Click' on the 'Long long Trail' at the top left of this page, then down on the right hand side of that page click on 'Army terms and definitions'. (I think) You'll learn alot from that site. Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Dunlop Posted 7 November , 2008 Share Posted 7 November , 2008 Valerie, just to make it a little more confusing, some terms, such as regiment, vary somewhat between national armies. Considering the BEF, however, in order of size, starting at the smallest of the list in your heading, the formations are:- company < battalion < brigade < division < corps < army. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerie corby Posted 7 November , 2008 Author Share Posted 7 November , 2008 thank you Mick and Robert, I will look at the site Mick as suggested. Valerie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBrockway Posted 7 November , 2008 Share Posted 7 November , 2008 ... and even when you have it straight in your head, there are a few anomalies waiting to trip you up: the King's Royal Rifle Corps is not a Corps (as in a number of divisions) but a Regiment and The Rifle Brigade is not a Brigade (as in three or four battalions), but also a Regiment! These regimental names have been carried forward from the origins of the regiments just to confuse us! They also prove there's always an exception to any rule This entry on Wikipedia may also help, though it describes the modern-day structure of the Army: Structure of the British Army Cheers, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Dunlop Posted 7 November , 2008 Share Posted 7 November , 2008 And then there is the Honourable Artillery Company My head hurts. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhclark Posted 8 November , 2008 Share Posted 8 November , 2008 Valerie, I, too, nearly went mad trying to sort all this out. After about a year, I concluded that it was best to ignore the exceptions, and focus on the general structure of the British Army as a whole. I also find it extremely irritating to flick backwards and forwards between a series of web pages, so I compiled the following notes for reference, and typed them up. Perhaps they will help you? "It is impossible to give all the detail of the complex organization of the British Army in just a few paragraphs, and the following presents a summary only. The Battalion was the basic unit of infantry. At full establishment it had 1,007 men of all ranks (including 30 officers) and 56 horses, and comprised a Battalion Headquarters and four Companies. Headquarters consisted of the battalion’s commanding officer (usually a Lieutenant-Colonel) assisted by various other officers and non-commissioned officers filling specialist roles, men from the Royal Army Medical Corps, signallers, men on construction, repair and general engineering duties, drivers for the horse-drawn transport, stretcher-bearers, batmen, etc. Each company (usually designated A-D, or in the case of the Guards Regiments, 1-4) at full establishment had 227 men of all ranks. Each was commanded by a Major or Captain with a small number of supporting officers and men in company headquarters. The body of a company was divided into four platoons, and each platoon into four sections of 12 men under the command of a non-commissioned officer. In 1914 a battalion also had an 18-man machine gun section. The infantry Brigade consisted of a Brigade Headquarters and four infantry battalions, and at full establishment had 4,055 men of all ranks and 247 horses. Brigade Headquarters consisted of the commanding officer, a Brigadier-General, and his support establishment, including two Staff officers, a Field Post Office, military police, a cook, batmen and drivers. In 1918, the number of infantry battalions in a brigade was reduced from four to three. The Division was the largest tactical unit of the Army, and consisted of a Division Headquarters, three infantry brigades, and various Divisional Troops – artillery, engineers, transport, signals, medical, machine gun, veterinary, labour and mounted troops etc. – and at full establishment it had over 18,000 men of all ranks and over 5,000 horses. Division Headquarters consisted of the commanding officer, usually a Major-General, 14 officers and 67 other ranks. A division on the move was an imposing sight and occupied 15 miles of road. The Army Corps, usually abbreviated to Corps, was usually commanded by a Lieutenant-General, and consisted of a Corps Headquarters and a variable number of Divisions as required but normally two. Corps Headquarters consisted of 18 officers and 71 other ranks in 1914, but as the Army grew in size so did the establishment of a Corps, such that by the late stages of the war Corps Headquarters had 50 officers and 141 other ranks. In addition to its Divisions, a Corps also included some 2000 Corps Troops – a cavalry regiment, a heavy trench mortar battery, a cyclist battalion, signal troops, a motor transport column, mobile workshops, and others. Corps Headquarters normally stayed in a fixed location, well away from the front line, unlike the Divisions, Brigades and Battalions, which were on the move with the ebb and flow of battle. The level above the Army Corps in the hierarchy was, somewhat confusingly, known as the Army. At the outbreak of war, no formation later to be known as an Army existed, and the First Army and Second Army were not formed on the Western Front until December 1914, and an official establishment was not defined until March 1915. Once defined, an Army consisted of an Army Headquarters of 31 officers and 106 other ranks, at least two Corps, and various Army Troops including artillery, engineers, transport, signals, medical, machine gun, veterinary, labour and mounted troops. An Army was usually commanded by a General. The overseas Armies formed during the First World War were as follows. First Army :Formed in France in December 1914. Remained on the Western Front. Second Army:Formed in France in December 1914. Moved to Italy for the period November 1917 to March 1918 and then returned to France. Always associated with the Ypres Salient. Third Army:Formed in France in July 1915. Fourth Army:Formed in France in February 1916. Renamed as the Second Army when the original Second Army moved to Italy, and reverted to the Fourth Army in March 1918. Fifth Army:Formed in October 1916 by renaming the Reserve Army. Destroyed in the German offensive in March 1918, it was reformed in May 1918. Dardanelles Army:Formed in October 1915 when the second Mediterranean front opened at Salonika. Consisted of the three Corps at Gallipoli. Ceased to exist in January 1916. Salonika Army:Formed in October 1915. The top level in the hierarchy was the General Headquarters (GHQ). A GHQ was formed for each theatre of war, generally when the build-up of forces became too large or complex for operations to be adequately coordinated by the various Army Headquarters. A GHQ was known as a Headquarters (HQ) if its commanding officer held the same rank (General) as the Army commanding officer(s) reporting to him. The overseas General Headquarters/Headquarters formed during the First World War were as follows. British Expeditionary Force (BEF) :Formed in 1914 during the pre-war planning, this GHQ commanded the British Armies in France and Flanders on the Western Front. East Africa :Formed in December 1914 by merging Indian Expeditionary Forces “B” and “C” with British forces in Africa. Mesopotamia:From November 1914 under Indian Expeditionary Force “D.” Taken over by the British in February 1916. Mediterranean Expeditionary Force (MEF):1915-1916. Formed in March 1915 to control the Dardanelles Campaign. Egyptian Expeditionary Force (EEF):Formed in March 1916 to command the increasing British forces in Egypt and the growing importance of the Sinai front. British Salonika Army:Formed in January 1917 from the former Army Headquarters in Salonika." I'm happy to take factual corrections from all the experts out there, but please remember I set out these notes for general guidance only, not to be strictly accurate under all possible circumstances. Noel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc2 Posted 8 November , 2008 Share Posted 8 November , 2008 And not all Corps are the same. While generally in military organisations a Corps is made up of several Divisions, certain functional groupings are also called Corps, when they may be distinctly smaller than a Division. Examples are the Army Air Corps (US), The Royal Army Medical Corps (UK), etc. These are usually named "corps" in the old sense of the word "a group or body of people with specific skills", rather than reflecting the organisational structure or size of the body. It is indeed confusing. Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBrockway Posted 9 November , 2008 Share Posted 9 November , 2008 Valerie, I, too, nearly went mad trying to sort all this out. After about a year, I concluded that it was best to ignore the exceptions, and focus on the general structure of the British Army as a whole. I also find it extremely irritating to flick backwards and forwards between a series of web pages, so I compiled the following notes for reference, and typed them up. Perhaps they will help you? .. .. I'm happy to take factual corrections from all the experts out there, but please remember I set out these notes for general guidance only, not to be strictly accurate under all possible circumstances. Noel Noel - excellent piece of work! Well done Cheers, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerie corby Posted 9 November , 2008 Author Share Posted 9 November , 2008 My goodness I have started something. Thanks everyone, esp. Noel. I will be printing this off and having a good read, I think I am getting the gist. A bit like trying to explain the rules of cricket to me! Very good of all of you to take the trouble to explain things... Valerie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Dunlop Posted 10 November , 2008 Share Posted 10 November , 2008 Ah, the rules of cricket. Now, let's see [strangle... choke....] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 10 November , 2008 Share Posted 10 November , 2008 Careful Robert...they'll be accusing you of laying down the LAWS (of cricket). "rules"...mutter, mutter...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now