This is an off-shoot from some of the discussion regarding the burning of the White House.
These are some thoughts on Battle Honours for the War of 1812. I know there are others out there with more expertise, so perhaps they can add some discussion or correct me where I'm wrong.
Historically Canada has followed the lead of the United Kingdom in determining which honours would be issued and the criteria to be met for their award. However, since the creation of the Order of Canada in 1972, Canada has determined to create its own set of distinctive Honours and Awards. Currently, this has not expanded beyond personal (including gallantry) awards and the grant of arms, but it is only a matter of time that awards such as military Battle Honours for the Canadian Forces will become distinctly Canadian.
The British issued five Battle Honours for the War of 1812: â Å“Detroitâ ?, â Å“Queenstownâ ? (note the spelling of Queenston), â Å“Miamiâ ?, â Å“Niagaraâ ?, and â Å“Bladensburgâ ?. Units of the Canadian militia were present at each of the engagements with the exception of Bladensburg, sometimes in greater numerical strength than British regulars. However, with the exception of the grant of â Å“Niagaraâ ? to the five regiments of Incorporated Militia, no award was made to the militia. The rationale of this decision has been lost in the passage of time, but in all probability, it was due to the British â Å“perspectiveâ ? of the war. Certainly it was not based solely on the â Å“regularâ ? aspect of the Incorporated Militia, for there were other Canadian units present in this theatre that were â Å“regularsâ ? which did not receive the honour.
The British issued a Military General Service Medal during the period 1793-1814. Conflicts world-wide during this period were recognized by the issuance of clasps or bars, the significance of which was highlighted by the Duke of Wellington who wrote that the issue of a bar was as important as the award of a Battle Honour. In fact, of the 29 bars issued to the medal, only three bars have not had a corresponding Battle Honour awarded. The three bars commemorating North American War of 1812 battles are: â Å“Fort Detroitâ ?, â Å“Chateauguayâ ?, and â Å“Chrystler's Farmâ ? (note the spelling). Chateauguay and Chrysler's Farm were two of the three for which no Battle Honour was issued.
With the current thrust to â Å“Canadianizeâ ? our honours system, I believe that, without recourse to British authorities, nor limitation by the original British criteria, Canada could issue Battle Honours for the War of 1812. If we did so, it would not be necessary to copy the honours awarded by the British, but those six battles are logical choices to begin the process of examination. There is precedence for issuing Canadian Battle Honours with the same name as those of the British, and it is readily found in the case of the First World War where Canada used the British list of honours, but set its own criteria for the awards.
If Canadian awards are deemed appropriate, there would have to be some thought as to the criteria to be used to determine their issue. Usually, there is some reference to numerical strength, but in this respect that rationale is really not appropriate. Militia units were not standard organizations, basically because they were drawn from very different population bases. What might seem to be an insignificant numerical strength at a battle might be a very large portion of the male population of the geographical area and reflect a more substantial effort than numbers alone might reflect.
There is British precedence in the issuing of Battle Honours long after the event. The first British honour was awarded in 1695, and years later an honour commemorating a battle in 1513 was awarded to the Corps of Gentleman at Arms. Thus, the late award of Battle Honours for the War of 1812 would not be unique in the history of such honours.
Additionally, the War Honour, â Å“The War of 1812â ? (similar to the honour â Å“The Great Warâ ? in World War I) should be included in any approved honours. This award would recognize units that by their very existence and presence contributed to the defence of the country.
Grants to Units
Perhaps the greatest difficulty in awarding Battle Honours for the War of 1812 is the continuing policy of not recognizing lineage of units of the Canadian Forces prior to the Militia Act of 1855. To set that policy aside for the purpose of awarding Battle Honours invites a host of other problems (i.e. Order of Precedence) which in turn creates controversy. There is a possible solution, however, in the process that was adopted in the awarding of Battle Honours earned by units of the Canadian Expeditionary Force in World War 1 to units of the militia after the war. In that case, militia units that met certain criteria were deemed to be perpetuating the CEF battalions and entitled to the honours earned by the CEF battalion. That concept was expanded beyond CEF battalions which served in France to recognize the contribution of follow-on battalions which were broken up in the United Kingdom to provide reinforcements to the Canadian Corps in the field. Perpetuation, however, is not to be confused with descent.
Something of this nature could be developed for the award of 1812 Battle Honours. Central to that solution, however, would be the necessity of developing a comprehensive and accurate Order of Battle for the Canadian militia in Upper Canada, Lower Canada and the Maritimes for the period 1812-1814; time consuming but not impossible.
If that concept were adopted, current-day regiments (both regular and reserve) could be identified as perpetuating units. I would suggest, though, that a part of the process of awarding World War II honours be followed - the list of those honours was circulated, and units were invited to identify those to which they believed they were entitled. This would create a positive sense of participation and involvement by the Army. Of course, the final decision and approval would be at the national level where, it can be argued, there would be no bias in the decision.
I'm just a Pte recruit so I don't know what is legal or not but they sure take pride in it, or as you would say, are "True Believers"...
