truthergw Posted 15 March , 2006 Share Posted 15 March , 2006 Any attempt to gain a statistically valid statement relating to a Regiment's 'worth' by using VC or other gallantry awards is likely to be difficult. ......................... Edwin Astill Quite, and then some. I am always on the lookout for some sort of measure that would yield meaningful results. They are all hedged about with so many ifs, buts and maybes as to make them of little objective use. Phil, you raise a valid and related point. I would love to think that bravery awards were made simply on the basis of brave conduct. The cynic in me raises an eyebrow. I don't know how the award of a VC is decided. I know that the deed has to be witnessed by an officer. I remember reading that the RWF did not recommend Hostilities Only officers for decorations. They were reserved for regulars where their possession would have beneficial effects on their careers. That implies that medal recommendations were not completely impartial. Would a bad soldier be recommended for a brave act? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_59 Posted 15 March , 2006 Share Posted 15 March , 2006 Wouldnt it be better to calculate the ratio of VC's to men that served in the regiment, rather than casualties? dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 15 March , 2006 Share Posted 15 March , 2006 It might, but this statistic is most difficult to find, even experts for a particular battalion end up with estimates only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGarnett Posted 15 March , 2006 Share Posted 15 March , 2006 Clearly the Guards are high up - and there may be a number of explanations as to why this is so, but it seems to point to high standards as well as 'luck' that bravery was also recognised Reading this thread has been fascinating. A professor once spent two hours criticising me for the use of the word 'political' in a second year undergraduate essay. Now, I wonder if he could have used those two hours slightly better but I am grateful to him for it. Evidence is crucial and if we do not respect it we tread a dangerous path. Yes the evidence does tell us the Guards were crack but not that they were the best, just like the VC ratio does not tell us that the East Kents were not of a high standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lionboxer Posted 15 March , 2006 Share Posted 15 March , 2006 According to my Penguin English Dictionary elite means :- select group of people; best part of anything; aristocratic or exclusive clique. In the case of the Guards I should have thought the later description would be true. Having said that, would not the other meanings too also apply to any specialist unit such as the Tunnelling Companies, Veterinary Corps etc? Since no one has answered my question about which Regiment (not Corps) won the most VC's in WWII I will tell you. It was the Royal Norfolks, a first class county regiment, which also provided the drill instructors to devise the new drill movements with the SLR rifle in the late Fifties. As an aside, were the Guards ever stationed in India or the Far East or were they just in Europe to provide security to the Royal family? Lionboxer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen D Posted 15 March , 2006 Share Posted 15 March , 2006 Another quote from Horace Calvert "As rare as Guards sh*t in India." No Guards unit went east of Suez until.........someone please give the correct date. Well after 1918. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackblue Posted 16 March , 2006 Share Posted 16 March , 2006 Wow, this topic looks like running. Back in Feb. I posted a note in the equipement/medals section pointing to the ratio between casualties sustained and VCs won - extract below The ‘top’ and ‘bottom’ Regiments were: HAC – 1 VC per 420 casualties Hertfordshire – 1 : 450 Leinster – 1 : 495 Coldstream G - 1 : 551 Irish G – 1 : 563 Scots G – 1 : 568 Grenadier G – 1 : 669 Essex – 1 : 8860 E Kent – 1 : 6000 Wiltshire – 1 : 5200 Somerset LI – 1 : 4760 Shropshire LI – 1 : 4710 Clearly the Guards are high up - and there may be a number of explanations as to why this is so, but it seems to point to high standards as well as 'luck' that bravery was also recognised (many other potential recipients were 'unlucky' in not having witnesses etc. Also I call to mind an extract in 'Goodbye to All That' (book not to hand). Graves is instructing some Canadians objecting to drill. Graves says something like "there are people here good at drill but with no guts, and people with guts who are no good at drill. But for some reason the best people are those with guts who are good at drill". Sounds like the Guards fit the bill - but that is not to say they were the only ones. Edwin Astill The Guards, as well as the other regiments here, are probably high in VCs per number of casualties up because they were all very small regiments. Although perhaps not officially there was probably a tendency to only allocate a certain amount of VCs to different regiments. Because they were small regiments the casualties are similarly small in number. The Essex Regiment had 30 odd battalions and the HAC had 2. Rgds Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 17 March , 2006 Share Posted 17 March , 2006 Any attempt at statistical analysis of VCs per regiment is bound to have little value: these are 'rare events' as seen by the statistician, and fall into the domain of the dreaded Poisson distribution, which is slightly on the barking mad side of General Relativity. I once [briefly] understood both, but not these days. No good will come of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David_Blanchard Posted 17 March , 2006 Share Posted 17 March , 2006 Has the SHLM project reached any degree of completion? This may provide us with some 'scientific' measure of the combat effectiveness of British/Dominion Divisions in the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldstreamer Posted 20 March , 2006 Share Posted 20 March , 2006 Another quote from Horace Calvert "As rare as Guards sh*t in India." No Guards unit went east of Suez until.........someone please give the correct date. Well after 1918. Hello I like the quote! But the Cg did go to the far east in the 1920's I believe. Also Malaya and the Gulf spring to mind (is Palestine east of Suez ??) Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen D Posted 21 March , 2006 Share Posted 21 March , 2006 I knew someone would have the answer.Thought it would be you Ian. As for Guards training 1 Wilts, I'm now on 6th Wilts War Diary and they had a visit too. 6th Wiltshire Friday 28th January 1916 France, Le Sart 28th - 29th Instruction of N.C.O's by Staff Sergt from Guards Division - Company training. Before that they had a new officer. 6th Wiltshire Thursday 25th November 1915 France, Le Sart, Nr Merville Platoon training. 2nd Lieut Pritchard late C.S.M of the Guards joined the Battalion and proceeded on leave to England for 10 days. The said ex-CSM was an ex-Grenadier. I've done a search on the War Diary on The Wardrobe website. Pritchard crops up alot giving NCOs training. Wonder if that's in Drill? http://www.thewardrobe.org.uk/wardiary.php...chard&logic=and 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