Military courtesies on the front line.

[kerry]

Quick quesiton - when a captain introduces himself to a major in the front line, would the Major reply with his rank and surname - or first name and surname, and would they then be on first name terms?

[Ken Lees]

Is he introducing himself because the two have never met? Likely to be very formal if it's a first meeting.

And are there any other soldiers present? Again, likely to be formal if there are subordinates present.

[kerry]

Yes, never met before, and it's in the firing line so there'll be other soldiers within earshot apart the sound of sporadic rifle fire from the trench.

[Ken Lees]

Then I'd say rank and surname. Less formal after that, in private, but formal again in the presence of others.

Of course, it really depends on the individuals.

[Michelle Young]

Would have thought that the fact he was a Major would be obvious owing to his rank badges. Would be surname only I’d say. 

[kerry]

Thanks all for your guidance. Duly noted. Will amend my chapter accordingly.

[ianjonesncl]

If they are in uniform rank is obvious ........Christian name and surname.

They may also introduce a known name.

 

[kerry]

Thank you.  I'll adjust accordingly.

[PhilB]

Never met before : - “Good morning, Sir - Captain Brown, 10th Loamshires”. Response - “Good morning, Captain -  Major Smith, 6th South Yorkshires”

[kerry]

Thank you, although that is at variance with what @ianjonesncl advised in his post above?

[ianjonesncl]

13 minutes ago, kerry said:

Thank you, although that is at variance with what @ianjonesncl advised in his post above?

My comments are based upon holding both ranks and having gone through many such greetings over a period of 15 years. Times change.... or maybe I was doing it wrong.

 

 

 

[kerry]

No, I was a Lt then Captain then Major, and it was always first name terms in the field once permission given especially to captains from majors 

[Michelle Young]

Things were a lot more formal in those days and most officers would have gone through the public school system, where surnames were the norm. Reading published diaries of the time, most officers refer to their fellow officers by surnames only.

[healdav]

53 minutes ago, Michelle Young said:

Things were a lot more formal in those days and most officers would have gone through the public school system, where surnames were the norm. Reading published diaries of the time, most officers refer to their fellow officers by surnames only.

In the late 1950s/ early 60s at a normal grammar school, it was surnames only both between the boys and the teachers.

 

[ianjonesncl]

1 hour ago, Michelle Young said:

Things were a lot more formal in those days and most officers would have gone through the public school system, where surnames were the norm. Reading published diaries of the time, most officers refer to their fellow officers by surnames only.

makes sense..... "Blackadder.. 10th Loamshires"............................ "Williams .. 5th Welsh"

 

 

[PhilB]

The OP specifies that these two officers have not met previously so a degree of formality is to be expected?

[FROGSMILE]

4 hours ago, Michelle Young said:

Things were a lot more formal in those days and most officers would have gone through the public school system, where surnames were the norm. Reading published diaries of the time, most officers refer to their fellow officers by surnames only.

I believe you’re correct, things were more formal in general back then, and all my reading has suggested greetings and responses along the lines that you’ve suggested.  In particular much greater use of surnames.  If I recall correctly subalterns in 2nd RWF, a typical regular battalion in terms of its cultural attitudes, were expected to respond to “Wart” according to Robert Graves and he was too bitter about it for it to be apocryphal I think.

A final point that I would strongly emphasise would be the pronounced difference that seems to have prevailed in the first two years at least between regular battalions and others.  Territorials were much less formal with each other, often having known each other through work or other local links, and had a more avuncular, collegiate and club-like relationship with each other.  Then war-raised (Kitchener) battalions were often different again, with a more middle-class and earnest approach, with little time for formality if just for the sake of it.  Over the course of the war these ingrained attitudes changed and the overall atmosphere was apparently very different by 1918. 

If you’re writing a story or novel you should consider what type of battalion it is, and when was it… You would do well reading some contemporary WW1 work’s written in the narrative style, like Graves and  R C Sherriff, to get an indication of how officers behaved.  Have you read Goobye to All That and Journey’s End?  They are not difficult reads and you will find them informative.  I hope that helps.

Edited 10 April by FROGSMILE

[Michelle Young]

Not just formal in the army. I’ve just recalled that when Vera Brittain went up to Somerville in 1914, her fellow students were Miss ……. If they wished to call a fellow student by their Christian name, they had to go through a proposal “ceremony” as she described it. 

[FROGSMILE]

Just now, Michelle Young said:

Not just formal in the army. I’ve just recalled that when Vera Brittain went up to Somerville in 1914, her fellow students were Miss ……. If they wished to call a fellow student by their Christian name, they had to go through a proposal “ceremony” as she described it. 

Yes, formal in general back then. 

[kerry]

With thanks once again for the comments, I'll amend the dialogue so that it's surnames throughout that chapter.

[FROGSMILE]

22 minutes ago, kerry said:

With thanks once again for the comments, I'll amend the dialogue so that it's surnames throughout that chapter.

Sorry Kerry, I’d meant to respond to you rather than Michelle.  Hopefully made sense 🤯

[kerry]

It does, thank you. All I need now is a volunteer beta reader for the trench chapters.

[kerry]

@FROGSMILE thank you for the book recommendations, I'll check them out.

[FROGSMILE]

1 hour ago, kerry said:

@FROGSMILE thank you for the book recommendations, I'll check them out.

There is an expurgated and unexpurgated version of ‘Goodbye to All That’, as when first published there was a fear of real characters being identified.  The value of the book is in the authenticity of the life described.  ‘Journey’s End’ in its original form will also give you a good steer.  Incidentally the latter was made into a film as well as a play, and has been regularly re produced for new generations.  It’s worth seeking out the original black and white production as it was made using actual veterans. 

[kerry]

Thanks again @FROGSMILE - I Googled Goodbye to All That but couldn;t readily identify an unexpurgated copy. Would any modern copy do the scene-setting job just as well?