British Military Question
 

It occurred to me that there are the Royal Marines, the Royal Navy, The Royal Air Force, even the Royal Mail.
Why isn't the Army Royal? Why is it just The Army? :munchin

I guess it's cause the British Parliament is the head and not the Queen.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Army
From wikipedia :rolleyes::D

In contrast to the Royal Navy, Royal Marines and Royal Air Force, the British Army does not include Royal in its title. This is because, historically, British Armies comprised individually raised regiments and corps. The position of the British Army as the Army of Parliament and not the Crown was confirmed by the Bill of Rights of 1689 requiring Parliamentary Authority to maintain a standing army in peacetime. Nevertheless, many of its constituent Regiments and Corps have been granted the "Royal" prefix and have members of the Royal Family occupying senior positions within some regiments.

I've always found some of the titles in the British Army interesting.

"The Coldstream Guards"

"The Royal Highland Fusiliers"

"The Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders"

The American ones sound so ordinary don't they?

"The All Americans"

"The Screaming Eagles"

"The Dark Horse"

That's because of the Home Regiment system they have. Regiments were named largely for the area they were recruited from rather than numerically, much like our volunteer regiments of the War Between the States. The Louisiana Tiger Zouaves comes to mind.


Most Americans think The Light Brigade was a regiment because of Kipling's poem when it was actually a brigade of 5 regiments.
Of Course, the 4th and 13th Light Dragoons, 17th Lancers, and the 8th and 11th Hussars doesn't rhyme well with, "Oh the wild charge they made" ;)

Well who would thunk weirdapedia might have the answer!~:eek:
Wonder why the RAF is royal, seeing as how they weren't formed until the 20th century.

I guess the closest thing we have to The Royal anything is The President's Hundred.:cool:

British System
 

This makes sense, though perhaps after WW1 while they kept the names they might have reconsidered the recruitment practices. I recall reading about " Pals Battalions" etc, where all the men from a village or town would sign up to serve together. If such a regiment was shredded in the meat grinder of the Somme, that village or town would have very few men returning.

The whole "Royal" thing makes little sense to me. As do many things British.
Perhaps that's why me grandmother ran away from Halifax at age 14 and went to America.;)

A sip of Crown Royal anyone?

I guess it's their form of checks and balances.

By law it keeps all on a short leash.

We have Guard, Reserves and Active Duty.

Active and Reserve are federally funded.

Guard are state funded (though more federal dollars have been pushed in since 9/11).

We do have some Royal members in the US Military.....mostly Royal Jackasses. See Spec 4 Mafia and such. :D