Army Snobbery

[Hugh Pattenden]

Thanks everyone

Hugh.

[Ciaran Byrne]

There was a story that went round to the effect that the Oxfordshire Hussars had just come up to the front and an officer from the 9th Lancers was in conversation with an officer of the 18th Hussars. They saw the Oxfords and the conversation went like this:

9th Lancer officer "Good God! Who the are they?"

18th Hussars officer "The Oxfordshire Hussars"

9th Lancer officer "Who's on your left?"

18th Hussars officer "The 4th Dragoon Guards"

9th Lancer officer "Thank God for that!"

[Guest]

I think there was definitely an element of snobishness from the Regular Battalions whose members looked down on the New Army Battalions. This comes across in the writings of Graves and Dunn.

Dunn in particular is scathing of some New Army Battalion Officers.

Tim

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Even, I think, after 1914, when many of the "regular" battalions were made up of new army replacements.

[Steven Broomfield]

Is the question about regulars 'looking down' on TF units right? I wonder if 'looking askance' might be better? I remember my TA days in the late 70's, early 80's: the regulars just didn't understand; the same for my brother - a regular attached to the QOY - he just didn't undrestand why the local toffs wanted to dress up and boss people around, and the local toughs were happy to work all week, then play soldiers at weekends and in the holidays.

Think of the stories about the LRB collecting theit half-yearly subs in the trenches at Ploegsteert - the (regular) SLI with them thought it quite bizarre.

I do think TF units were under-represented in the VC front (and probably other awards, too), but their social connections (as outlined above) would have made it unlikely they would have been looked-down on too much in what was, after all, still a very hierarchical army.

As for the new Army lot, well, that I couldn't say.

[bob lembke]

Guys;

Quite interesting, reading through this thread.

If you have noticed my posts you may have notived that I am a Yank, my personal experience is with the US Army, but my current avocation is centered on the Imperial German Army of the Great War era.

Reading Graves, I think that he mentioned that his regiment had something like 13 battalions, and that the more recent ones had never had any contact with the more established battalions. (This is from about 3 years ago, I hope that memory serves.) This sounds more like a fraternity, and less like the US and German regiments I am familiar with; say an infantry regiment of three infantry battalions plus perhaps a couple of MG companies.

So I guess that the British regiment was more of a traditional association than a fixed tactical unit. Would a regiment of 13 battalions go into action together? (I assume not.) Would a few battalions serve together? Was this situation only a situation from the Great War, when many more "boots on the ground" were needed? Would a regiment of 13 battalions be commanded by a colonel, when many of the battalions may have been commanded by a lt.-colonel? Or by a major general?

"So many questions, so little time." I don't actually expect that all these questions be answered, but would someone kindly say a few words on this topic? There might be a few other neophytes wandering about in our cyberspace.

Bob Lembke

[Steven Broomfield]

Bob - look on the British regiment as an administrative entity. The 13 battalions would have 2 regular, which almost never served together; 2 to 4 territorial battalions, which may well have been in the same brigade; and a number of wartime battalions, which may or may not have been in brigades together.

There was a regimental colonel; largely an honorary position for a senior serving officer with regimental connections, his job was to stand up for the regiment in official circles; there would have been a depot, commanded by a colonel, and the battalions would have been commanded by lieutenant colonels.

The regiment was not a fighting organisation - for the British (and Empire) Armies, the brigade was, I guess, the closest equivalent to the three- or four-battalion regiment.

[ChrisC]

There was a story that went round to the effect that the Oxfordshire Hussars had just come up to the front and an officer from the 9th Lancers was in conversation with an officer of the 18th Hussars. They saw the Oxfords and the conversation went like this:

9th Lancer officer  "Good God! Who the are they?"

18th Hussars officer "The Oxfordshire Hussars"

9th Lancer officer  "Who's on your left?"

18th Hussars officer "The 4th Dragoon Guards"

9th Lancer officer "Thank God for that!"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It was actually in "The Oxfordshire Hussars in the Great War" by Adrian Keith-Falconer. N&M Press. Wonderful book!

It's a story told by Lieutenant Villiers of D Sqn in trenches near the Wulverghem - Messines road and started

"What regiment is that..." from 9th Lancers. Villiers replies as per 18th Hussars as quoted, but he also adds that the Lancer said, "GOOD GOD! (In a tone of deepest disgust )" before the question of who's on the left.

For "agricultural cavalry" they didn't do badly, being the first Territorial unit to come under fire in the War.

My great uncle was RSM and won the MC with them - though a regular whose unit was the 18th Hussars!

[Max]

I wonder what the officers in the mess of the 13th/18th Hussars would have thought if they had known that between 1988 and 1991 they were commanded by the son of a coal miner and a canteen lady. My **** of a cousin Alan Mallinson.

Andy

[bob lembke]

Guys;

Again, I beg an indulgance. "13th/18th Hussars" would be the "13th Battalion of the 18th Hussars"?

Not that you asked, but in the German unit notation "III./18. IR" or "III./18. Infanterie=Regiment" would be the "3rd Battalion of the 18th Infantry Regiment". For clarity, the Germans usually alternated "Arabic numerals" (actually of Indian origin) and Roman numerals describing different levels of units. For example, they used 3. Kompagnie, III. Bataillon, 3. Infanterie Regiment, III. Infanterie Brigade, 3. Infanterie Division, III. Armeekorps, and 3. Armee. This would allow one to sharply abbreviate the unit description and still remain understandable.

Again, I have butted into an interesting discussion with my ignorant question (but something that I have wondered about for a while), and hope that my contribution, although not asked for, is of interest.

Bob Lembke

[Max]

Again, I beg an indulgance. "13th/18th Hussars" would be the "13th  Battalion of the 18th Hussars"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hello Bob

Not quite. The 13th/18th Hussars are the product of an amalgamation of the 13th Hussars and the 18th Hussars in 1922. In 1992 the 13th/18th Hussars formed with the 15th/19th Kings Royal Hussars to form The Light Dragoons.

Andy

[AB64]

In the book "Morale" about the Scottish Rifles - I dont have it to hand unfortunately, I seem to recall it talks about the relative cost of buying a commision in various Regiments and hiw their was almost a league table of desirability.

Alistair

[Steven Broomfield]

Hello Bob

Not quite. The 13th/18th Hussars are the product of an amalgamation of the 13th Hussars and the 18th Hussars in 1922. In 1992 the 13th/18th Hussars formed with the 15th/19th Kings Royal Hussars to form The Light Dragoons. 

Andy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And just to expand, cavalry regiments didn't have battalions - unlike the infantry, cavalry units tended to be 'stand alone' (although they were grouped for training purposes); if required, extra regiments were created rather than extra battalions of existing regiments. I think the same applied elsewhere?

[Guest British Sapper]

The 13th/18th Hussars went through Hohne Garrison , Germany, in 1973/4/5. Met some good lads too.They seemed to be mostly 'yorkies'.

They were bottom end of the camp nearest to Bergen.