Brevet

[1st east yorks]

Hello,

Ive just been looking at an issue of Stand To and reading about a Brevet Major and a Brevet Lieutenant.

What do these terms mean and how do they compare to a Major and a Lieutenant?

Thanks Anthony.

[Pete1052]

Brevet ranks are honorific and the men holding brevet ranks don't receive the pay that goes with the rank.

[1st east yorks]

Hello Pete 1052,

Thanks for your reply.Why would someone be honoured with a Brevet rank if the army didn't need you to be that rank(hence they dont pay the rate).?

Anthony.

[Pete1052]

It was a way of recognizing the value of a man's service.

[1st east yorks]

Thanks Pete.

Anthony.

[Pete1052]

In the morning someone who knows more about the British Army than I do will probably give you a more detailed answer than I did. When Custer died at the Little Bighorn he was serving as a lieutenant colonel but his brevet rank was general, brigadier general if I recall correctly.

[George Armstrong Custer]

Brevet Major General actually, Pete!

ciao,

General Custer

[Doc2]

In the morning someone who knows more about the British Army than I do will probably give you a more detailed answer than I did. When Custer died at the Little Bighorn he was serving as a lieutenant colonel but his brevet rank was general, brigadier general if I recall correctly.

I don't think that is quite accurate. Custer had been a general during the civil war, and was always referred to (especially by himself) as "General" in recognition of that, but he held no current brevet at the time of his death. He had "reverted" to his old rank. This was quite common, but "brevet" ranks were not used much during the Indian Wars period. A person who was brevetted was temporarily allowed to wear the rank and exercise the powers of his new higher rank, but did not receive the pay. At the time of his death, I do not believe that Custer was authorised to wear the stars of a General Officer. Doc

[Gibbo]

Pete's answer is correct for the US army but the British system is a bit different. In the British Army Brevet rank is given for merit where a man deserves a promotion but there is no vacancy for him to be promoted within his own regiment. However, By WWI it only applied to Major, Lieutenant Colonel & Colonel so if the article memtions a Brevet Lieutenant then perhaps it refers to the US Army?

There has been a previous thread on the subject. There was some disagreement on the answer but I'd take Charles Messenger's version as correct since he's written a well researched 600 page book on the British Army of WWI.

[Muerrisch]

Brevet, Honorary, Local or Temporary, rank: a collection of information from reputable British sources.

For convenience, Brevet henceforth abbreviated Bt. Local as L, Temporary as T. and Honorary as Hon. My editorial comments in [brackets] thus.

Queen’s Regulations 1873. Bt. field officers [major, lt. col., col.]doing duty with their regiments as captains to wear uniform according to their rank in the army; to do duty as field officers in garrison etc. [in context, army rank seems to that awarded by the Bt.]

Rank, Badges etc by Otley Lane Perry 1888. Bt. rank is permanent army rank as regards precedence but with pay of rank next below that indicated by the Bt. ….. [if I read this right, a captain with two brevet promotions would be paid as a major but ….]

Hon. Rank gives same advantages as enjoyed by Corresponding rank [ie equivalent Naval ranks] and Perry lists 17 appointments carrying Hon. Rank of Major, for example Chaplains 3rd class, Staff Paymaster

Queen’s regulations 1885. Agrees QR1873 and adds that captains holding Bt. rank as field officers are to perform regimental duties according to their regimental rank [in context, as captains]

Manual Military Law 1899. ……officers …… all alike are officers of HM land forces and have army rank as such, which may or may not be the same as their regimental rank ………….. [a corollary of this is that a Major, Bt. Lt Col doing duty on a Court Martial will outrank all Majors and below and therefore preside]

Royal Pay Warrant 1914. Substantive rank shall include all rank except army, brevet, honorary and local or temporary rank. [three points here 1. any comfortable thought that Bt. and army rank were the same is dispelled, 2. a following paragraph seems to suggest that regimental rank is the same as substantive rank, and 3. a reasonable working definition of substantive rank is ‘one that cannot be lost except by sentence of Court Martial’].

QM commissions were exactly that, and not combatant. QMs were not entitled to command mixed bodies of troops in action. They were eligible for Hon. Ranks as Lieutenant, with subsequent Hon. rises even to Lt Col. depending on length of service and merit. One well known example is QM & Hon Major Harry Yates, MC, 2RWF.

Bt. promotion may be given to captains[ after at least 6 years service], majors and lt cols for distinguished service [in the field or otherwise] [note that these are the only British brevet awards, unlike some other nations]

Kings Regulations 1914. adds to previous QR by noting that specially meritorious service may be recognised by accelerated promotion “usually by Bt.” Regular officers to take precedence over SR, who in turn take precedence over TF, of same nominal rank.

Bt. rank will not exempt an officer from taking the usual examinations for promotion [these exams differed according to arm of service]

Military Origins by Gordon 1971 is probably too “out of period” to be much use, he says little to disagree with the above on Bt. Rank and adds that Acting rank became Temporary rank after three months.

To summarise: Local and Temporary do appear to be synonymous, Brevet and Honorary are most definitely not synonymous, army rank and Bt. rank seem almost synonymous. I know that an officer doing a company commander’s job in an acting capacity was automatically given temporary promotion [and the rate for the job] after 30 days, and I know that the Army List used the same symbol both for temporary promotions and temporary commissions, so the only rank where we know what the asterisk means is 2Lt, in that this must mean Temporary commission.

One last thought, from studying RWF Army Lists 1895 to 1914. Promotion was by seniority but conditional on the ability to pass the exams, with small seniority adjustments made from time to time for less-than-obvious reasons and published in the London Gazette. I can find no instance where possession of a Bt. allowed an officer to queue-jump, although such an analysis is made difficult by the tendency for a fair few senior captains to have acquired a Bt. by the time they were near the top of the list. There are, however, examples of officers “parachuted in” to the regiment at Major rank, holding Bt. Lt col, and rising to lt col in the regiment before departing, with a Bt. colonelcy, to the staff. There seems to have been a mutual “deconfliction” by senior captains and senior majors, who could read a seniority list with an eye to possible further promotion. If one had little chance [there were only two lt col posts for regular officers in the whole regiment, with possibly a third for the SR battalion] then one could take the money and go on to half pay or pension.

After the war started, all bets were off, and many things changed ….. perhaps we could start to list them?

Please, if any errors detected, or Pals can add to this, I would be grateful.

[George Armstrong Custer]

I don't think that is quite accurate. Custer had been a general during the civil war, and was always referred to (especially by himself) as "General" in recognition of that, but he held no current brevet at the time of his death. He had "reverted" to his old rank. This was quite common, but "brevet" ranks were not used much during the Indian Wars period. A person who was brevetted was temporarily allowed to wear the rank and exercise the powers of his new higher rank, but did not receive the pay. At the time of his death, I do not believe that Custer was authorised to wear the stars of a General Officer. Doc

I can assure you that Custer was indeed a brevet major general in the post bellum army, Doc, and there is a reason why he didn't sport the stars of that rank at the time of his death. It's slightly off topic, but a clarification will help explain the US brevet system and its importance to those so recognised.

In June 1863, the 23-year-old Captain Custer was appointed Brigadier General of Volunteers, commanding the Second (Cavalry) Brigade of the Third Division. This was a temporary wartime appointment, not a regular army brevet, and his regular army rank of course remained that of captain. In October 1864 Custer was appointed Brevet Major General of Volunteers, allowing him to wear two stars (see image below). As this rank was 'of Volunteers' it could not be retained by Custer as a brevet in the regular army once the war was over. At the end of the Civil War in 1865, the army was greatly reduced in size, leading to fierce competition for preferrment amongs those officers who had chosen to remain in the service. Custer ought to have returned to his regular army rank of captain, but was fortunate to be appointed lieutenant colonel of the newly created 7th cavalry. Thus, far from being demoted at war's end as is often stated, Custer was in fact promoted two grades as far as his regular army rank was concerned. There remained his wartime brevet of Major General of Volunteers, of course, which he was not entitled to retain as a regular army brevet.

The rivalry for rank in the post war army centered on brevets, for in theory they proclaimed battlefield gallantry. The liberality with which the War Department boards showered brevets on staff and line alike diluted this distinction. Brevets also had practical benefiots because officers could be assigned to duty by the President in their brevet grade, and brevet rank automatically took precedent in certain circumstances. Furthermore, ofiucers could wear the uniform and be addressed according to brevet rank. This wrought monumental confusion because most post-war regimental commanders were generals by brevet and most company commanders were majors or colonels by brevet (several of Custer's subordinates at Little Big Horn were brevet colonels, including Major Reno, Captain Benteen and Captain Keogh). At length Congress decreed that officers wear only the uniform and insignia of their regular rank. In May 1866 Custer, after forceful pleading on his behalf by his mentor Phil Sheridan, received a brevet of major general in the regular army. This explains why, at the time of his death, Lieutenant Colonel Custer was correctly addressed in the army by his regular army brevet rank of General Custer, this being an established courtesy. That he did not wear the insignia of that rank is due to the decision by Congress to abolish that practice.

ciao,

GAC

[truthergw]

Please tell me that Col. Sanders is a substantive Colonel and not just a Brevet.

[George Armstrong Custer]

Tom, he was as much a 'Colonel' of any sort as 'Colonel' Tom Parker!

[1st east yorks]

Hello,

Only just got in from work and found all these replies.Gibbo my original post had an error which i only realised after i had sent it,the officer involved was a Brevet Lieutenant Colonel in the Royal Engineers not a Brevet Lieutenant.Grumpy got your PM and thanks for your reply.An interesting argument about Custer;The American Civil War is another interest of mine,although i cant say whos right.Thanks to everyone who replied.

Anthony.

[1st east yorks]

Grumpy,

Thanks for your in depth reply,ive had to read it a few times to get my head around it,thanks for taking the time with such a long post.

Anthony.

[Doc2]

George, thanks. I stand corrected. Got confused by the Congressional action, which I thought abolished the brevet system. Doc

[George Armstrong Custer]

No worries, doc - only picked up on it myself due to enquiring into Custer's special circumstances of Phil Sheridan getting him a regular army brevet after the war but his not ever wearing the insignia. Custer's luck was proverbial. Well, until it ran out, of course!

His case does show, though, that the US brevet system was quite different from the British one described by Grumpy.

regards,

George

[John Gilinsky]

Brevet as the word clearly sounds comes from the French. The British army adopted this practice in the 18th. century (and possibly earlier) in order to a) as has already been pointed out recognize quality officers of relatively junior rank usually subalterns who wished and could perform the duties of field officer rank but for whom there were currently NO openings either regimentally or extra-regimentally and as a reward for battlefield gallantry or sheer patronage award in the field initially and later as mere patronage (especially from the mid-18th century onwards).

John

Toronto

P.S. I wish I could be made by Chris (aka Haig on this forum) a brevet Brigadier-General!