Post
by jimmigoggles » Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:52 pm
Can i put my oar in?
Again mentioning the 'Guards' title for the British horse. As you say Barry, these regiments did not carry these titles at this time, and when they were awarded this they still were never considered as guards.
This honour was afforded to the Household units only. I think there were only three foot and two or three mounted units at this time. ( 1st Guards (Grenadiers after Waterloo only), 2nd Coldstream, 3rd Scots. Again, only known as 1st, 2nd, 3rd Footguards at this time. Lifeguards and Horseguards). The Irish and Welsh guards coming much later.
I may be wrong, but i think the Dragoon Guards regiments were the old 'horse' units as opposed to 'dragoon' units. The goverment has always messed about with unit titles etc, and are still doing it now with the continued horror of amalgamation!
I remember an odd chap who always insisted on his Napoleonic British Dragoon Guards as being guard status. So fielding upto eight heavy horsed guards. He even went so far as to say it was legitimate to have the Napoleonic British Horse Guards at Waterloo wearing cuirasses, as they wore them in Flanders in 1793 so could be allowed in Napoleonic rules!!!
What do you say to that?..............
On the subject of certain British units being of higher status, yet not super human, i agree. The British army in this period was still a fledgling force and not seriosly considered. It was at this time that many units, still without their later better known titles, cut their teeth and started to earn theses reputations.
The Foot Guards missed out on many a battle honour because of never being deployed 'east of suez'.
The 48th Foot earned a great reputation in the Peninsular War by steadying the line at Talavera..........after the Guards had got a bloody nose.
Sergeant Morris of the 73rd, in his excellent biography of the Napoleonic Wars, bemoans the fact that certain 'fashionable' regiments (the guards) received too much credit.
I have mentioned earlier on this site about the aborted British attack on Bergen op Zoom in 1813 (see Sgt Morris) , and how a number of British regiments got into trouble and had to surrender en masse. One of these being the famous 1st Foot, Royal Scots. However, this was the regiments 3rd or 4th Battalion, consisting of 'youths'. Not the same unit that had served with distinction in the Peninsular, New Orleans and Waterloo! This newer battalions colours are currently hanging in a Paris museum!
The unfortunate 69th Foot had a tendancy of losing it's colours and being ridden over!
The 95th Foot was the famous Rifles in the Napoleonic wars, but after this conflict was taken out of the 'line' and formed with the 60th Foot into the Rifle Brigade. A new 95th, Derbyshire Regiment?, was formed.
It is a well known fact that Napoleons Guard at Waterloo was beaten by the British Footguards. But what about the British light infantry unit that wheeled and took the grognards in flank? To say nothing of the allied units.
In the Peninsular War, the British Light Division had a fearsome reputation. The 1st Division was nicknamed the 'Gentlemens Sons' because of the guards units in it. Another Division, (4th?) was known throughout the army as THE Division, and was made up of 'line' units.
So, after that long winded dandle through the 'ordinary' regiments, i'd agree and say that because a unit is designated 'guard', it doesn't neccessarily mean it is that good.
Remember, those dastardly Maison du Roi got a good thumping off line cavalry at Blenheim!
Please don't let me give you the impression that i am anti guards. There ain't anybody in the world can put on a show like trooping the colour!
