- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
edadian said:
Frankie said:
He's only joking...
Besides, it'll be a cold day in hell before an American admits defeat about the War of 1812 (I'm not being anti-American, by the way - they are just certain that they won. That's all I mean).
Just out of curiosity though, do the Queen's Own Rifles have an honour for the Battle of Ridgeway?
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 430
Zartan said:
No:
http://regimentalrogue.com/battlehonours/bathnrinf/06-qor.htm
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
edadian said:
Never said that.....never meant that
edadian said:
see above..
edadian said:
I guess my sources have misinformed me about the power of Fox News...........
Next time I try to inject a little humour on a subject, I will make a note of opening the thread with a line like ..I don't know...maybe.. " A little humour on the subject....." and end it with :
Humour break over....and now back to your regularly scheduled topic
:brickwall:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
My argument for awarding some form of honour (battle honour, GG's Commendation, etc) acknowledges the fact that Canada was not even an autonomous Dominion in 1812. Understood. I say that is not an obstacle to the idea of commemorating what is an important part of our heritage, both military and national. The War of 1812 exerted a huge, long-lasting influence on the political development of this country (one might argue that it still affects our view of the US...). It was also the first time that there was "national" resistance: i.e. in both Upper and Lower Canada. (The resistance to the US foray under Benedict Arnold during their revolution was confined to Lower Canada.) The battles occurred, and Canadian soldiers fought in them. The Militia Infantry and Artillery units currently based in the affected counties are, IMHO, ideally suited to carry these honours, in whatever form they may take. I think that perhaps we are letting an age-encrusted process get in the way of doing something useful. Just because "we've never done that before" doesn't mean we shouldn't at least consider it.
The idea that we might offend the US by assigning such honours is really already neutralized by the fact that we would only be matching honours assigned to US regiments years ago, and still honoured IIRC. (Yes-the US Army has a Regimental System and has had one for years...). If they can honour their side of the fight, we can do no less. We might also be inflating the degree of attention that US media actually pays to such things in Canada. And, as has been pointed out, apart from the shelling of Baltimore and the Battle of New Orleans, IMHO most Americans have little desire to think about the War of 1812, especially not the operations on the Northern Frontier, some of which were less than stellar for their forces.
Finally, I would like to know more about this 1812 unit from Western Canada: where was it raised and how did it get to the theatre of operations? Are you sure you don't mean "Canada West" (which was not the same as what we call "Western Canada" today)?
Cheers
The idea that we might offend the US by assigning such honours is really already neutralized by the fact that we would only be matching honours assigned to US regiments years ago, and still honoured IIRC. (Yes-the US Army has a Regimental System and has had one for years...). If they can honour their side of the fight, we can do no less. We might also be inflating the degree of attention that US media actually pays to such things in Canada. And, as has been pointed out, apart from the shelling of Baltimore and the Battle of New Orleans, IMHO most Americans have little desire to think about the War of 1812, especially not the operations on the Northern Frontier, some of which were less than stellar for their forces.
Finally, I would like to know more about this 1812 unit from Western Canada: where was it raised and how did it get to the theatre of operations? Are you sure you don't mean "Canada West" (which was not the same as what we call "Western Canada" today)?
Cheers
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Sorry Frankie didn't realize it was out of humour. In reality would Fox news notice?
We should pass out pre-confederation honours with the war on terror ones to dilute any US complaints.
The response to complaints being; 'What we shouldn't honour units fighting the war on terror?'
We should pass out pre-confederation honours with the war on terror ones to dilute any US complaints.
The response to complaints being; 'What we shouldn't honour units fighting the war on terror?'
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
I really think we should award battle honors to Canadian regiments who fought for this country before the confederation, even if Canada was only a colony at that time. They fought against Americans, so what? If these soldiers wouldn't have given their lives, we would all be Yankees and Canada would not exist. We should start from the 1775 invasion of Canada by the USA. It was the first time that French-Canadians and British (including a small number of Anglo-Canadians) troops fought together against an enemy.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
pbi said:
I haven't heard of any companies raised in Western Canada, though the British engaged in a few Naval operations off the Pacific North-west. I figure he meant the Michigan Fencibles, a battalion composed of traders and explorers that fought around the Mississippi River and Lake Michigan.
Ha!! ;DDanjanou said:
Seriously though, whichever battalion perpetuates the 60th Missiquoi battalion could get an honour for Eccles Hill, 1870 (I think that was the year) - another Fenian attack repulsed without loss (to Canada, Fenians lost quite a few). Just a large scale skirmish, though.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
edadian said:
No worries Ed.
edadian said:
Without a doubt. Fox and MSNBC would love to get a hold of a story like this. I would not be surprised to see a reference to this thread on the "O'Reilly Factor".
There have been some strangely offensive but entertaining comments coming from some of the talking heads as seen here.
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/36660.0.html
anyhow.. back on topic
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
pbi
Tend to agree with you - if a sizeable enough unit can be identified as having participated AND can be traced to an existing formation, then they should be presented with those battle honours....
Look at it this way, there are many US Regiments that trace their ancestry to the Colonial wars & the Civil War. They carry honours for fighting the Brits/Canadians AND for fighting their own brothers (Confederates)... so what are they going to do? get upset at us?.... what for?
Tend to agree with you - if a sizeable enough unit can be identified as having participated AND can be traced to an existing formation, then they should be presented with those battle honours....
Look at it this way, there are many US Regiments that trace their ancestry to the Colonial wars & the Civil War. They carry honours for fighting the Brits/Canadians AND for fighting their own brothers (Confederates)... so what are they going to do? get upset at us?.... what for?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Accoring to Captain J.R. Grodzinski, CD in his article 'THE SYSTEM OF BATTLE HONOURS IN THE CANADIAN ARMY'
...the oldest Canadian battle honour commemorates the Second Fenian Raid of 1870. The Regimental Colour for the 50th Battalion Huntingdon Borderers, presented by His Royal Highness Prince Arthur in 1920, bore the words "Trout River" commemorating an action that occurred on 24 May 1870. The Victoria Rifles of Canada received the battle honour "Eccles Hill" on 5 December 1879, commemorating an action from 25 May 1870. Both of these regiments have since been disbanded.
The first major award of battle honours to the Canadian Militia was for the North-West Campaign of 1885. These award were made over a period 42 years and sparked much debate between the Militia Department and the War Office in England over the criteria and precedence by which awards were made. The final list of honours included: "North-West Canada 1885", "Batoche", "Saskatchewan", and "Fish Creek". The first honour from this campaign, "Batoche", was granted to the 10th Battalion, Royal Grenadiers on 2 May 1888. On 1 May 1899, The Royal Canadian Regiment received the honour "Saskatchewan"; in 1911, the 90th Winnipeg Rifles received the honours "Batoche" and "Fish Creek". Additional awards came in 1919, and in 1929 a large award of several of these distinctions went to 13 regiments including The Halifax Rifles ("North-West Canada 1885) and The Princess Louise Fusiliers ("North-West Canada 1885). The last honours for the campaign were granted to The Royal Grenadiers in 1930.
Source:members.tripod.com/RegimentalRogue/ battlehonours/grod_btlhnrs.htm
Chimo, I nominate the following:
Milice de la Sainte-Vierge created at Montreal, 27 January 1663
Côte Saint-Michel Militia Company, 1755
...the oldest Canadian battle honour commemorates the Second Fenian Raid of 1870. The Regimental Colour for the 50th Battalion Huntingdon Borderers, presented by His Royal Highness Prince Arthur in 1920, bore the words "Trout River" commemorating an action that occurred on 24 May 1870. The Victoria Rifles of Canada received the battle honour "Eccles Hill" on 5 December 1879, commemorating an action from 25 May 1870. Both of these regiments have since been disbanded.
The first major award of battle honours to the Canadian Militia was for the North-West Campaign of 1885. These award were made over a period 42 years and sparked much debate between the Militia Department and the War Office in England over the criteria and precedence by which awards were made. The final list of honours included: "North-West Canada 1885", "Batoche", "Saskatchewan", and "Fish Creek". The first honour from this campaign, "Batoche", was granted to the 10th Battalion, Royal Grenadiers on 2 May 1888. On 1 May 1899, The Royal Canadian Regiment received the honour "Saskatchewan"; in 1911, the 90th Winnipeg Rifles received the honours "Batoche" and "Fish Creek". Additional awards came in 1919, and in 1929 a large award of several of these distinctions went to 13 regiments including The Halifax Rifles ("North-West Canada 1885) and The Princess Louise Fusiliers ("North-West Canada 1885). The last honours for the campaign were granted to The Royal Grenadiers in 1930.
Source:members.tripod.com/RegimentalRogue/ battlehonours/grod_btlhnrs.htm
Chimo, I nominate the following:
Milice de la Sainte-Vierge created at Montreal, 27 January 1663
Côte Saint-Michel Militia Company, 1755
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
3rd Herd said:
See, you don't have to stay long on the battlefield to win an honour, Danjanou! The Halifax Rifles didn't even fire a shot. It is interesting, that at the time, they held the all time record for the longest overland distance crossed by a military formation, and when they finally made it to the NWT, all they did was play baseball.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Zartan said:
I wonder how many casualties that baseball game caused? After crossing most of the continent I may be a tad peed off. ;D
Good to see this topic has been reborn. As we initialy noted if this was to happen their has to be a lot of work done at the ground level.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
If we accept Jacques Cartier's naming of Canada on his second voyage then the original order for the formation of milita in Canada is defined by the following:
On April 3, 1669,Louis XIV ordered Courcelles, who was governor at the time, to "divide" his subjects in Canada into companies "with regard for their proximity, and, after having divided them in this way, to select captains, lieutenants and ensigns to command them ... to issue orders that they assemble once a month to practise handling arms." Care should be taken, he added, that these men "always be well armed and always have the powder, lead and fuses necessary to use their arms when needed."
Archives nationales de France, Colonies,CI IA, Vol. 125, f. 32. Paris, April 3, 1669. Louis XIV to Courcelles.
On April 3, 1669,Louis XIV ordered Courcelles, who was governor at the time, to "divide" his subjects in Canada into companies "with regard for their proximity, and, after having divided them in this way, to select captains, lieutenants and ensigns to command them ... to issue orders that they assemble once a month to practise handling arms." Care should be taken, he added, that these men "always be well armed and always have the powder, lead and fuses necessary to use their arms when needed."
Archives nationales de France, Colonies,CI IA, Vol. 125, f. 32. Paris, April 3, 1669. Louis XIV to Courcelles.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 10
No, they where the Western Rangers (Indians & Settlers), they took to Battle at Fort Meigs Seige 1813, Chippawa (Street's Creek) Upper Canada, 5 Jul 1814. The Michigan Fencibles fought in the Defence of Mackinac, Fort Michilimackinac and at Prairie au Chien 1814.
Our government would have to raise this Battle Honour question as an item to be discussed in the Commons. FAT CHANCE
The Incorporated Militia Battalion of Upper Canada comprised 10 companies of volunteers from Sedentary Militia units in Upper Canada and was formed for full-time service for war's duration starting 1813. This Battalion fought at York (Arty Det), Fort George 1813 (May), Fort Niagara New York 1813 ( 19 Dec), Buffalo & Black Rock New York 1813 (29-30 Dec), Madrid New York 1814 ( 6 Feb), Lundy's Lane 1814 (25 Jul), Fort Erie Siege 1814, Niagara 1814, BATTLE HONOURS AWARDED - NIAGARA
Also the British Regt 104th Regt of Foot (New Brunswick Regt) was recruited soley in New Brunswick and disbanded in Montreal 1817. Fought at Sacketts Harbour, Lundy's Lane, Fort Erie, Niagara, BATTLE HONOURS AWARDED - NIAGARA
British Awarded Battle Honours North America 1812-1815 - Detroit, Queenstown (aka: Queenston), Miami, Niagara and Bladensburg.
73 notible actions took place in which Canadians where involved in as British Subjects
As for the Campaign Medal there was 6 Clasps awarded as - Detroit [Michigan] awarded 1816 clasp: "Fort Detroit", Queenstown(aka: Queenston) awarded 1816 (clasp is unofficial), Fort George [Upper Canada] (clasp is unofficial), Stoney Creek [Upper Canada] (clasp is unofficial), Chateaugay [Lower Canada] (clasp unoffical) , Crystler's Farm [Upper Canada] clasp: "Chrystler's Farm"
Our government would have to raise this Battle Honour question as an item to be discussed in the Commons. FAT CHANCE
The Incorporated Militia Battalion of Upper Canada comprised 10 companies of volunteers from Sedentary Militia units in Upper Canada and was formed for full-time service for war's duration starting 1813. This Battalion fought at York (Arty Det), Fort George 1813 (May), Fort Niagara New York 1813 ( 19 Dec), Buffalo & Black Rock New York 1813 (29-30 Dec), Madrid New York 1814 ( 6 Feb), Lundy's Lane 1814 (25 Jul), Fort Erie Siege 1814, Niagara 1814, BATTLE HONOURS AWARDED - NIAGARA
Also the British Regt 104th Regt of Foot (New Brunswick Regt) was recruited soley in New Brunswick and disbanded in Montreal 1817. Fought at Sacketts Harbour, Lundy's Lane, Fort Erie, Niagara, BATTLE HONOURS AWARDED - NIAGARA
British Awarded Battle Honours North America 1812-1815 - Detroit, Queenstown (aka: Queenston), Miami, Niagara and Bladensburg.
73 notible actions took place in which Canadians where involved in as British Subjects
As for the Campaign Medal there was 6 Clasps awarded as - Detroit [Michigan] awarded 1816 clasp: "Fort Detroit", Queenstown(aka: Queenston) awarded 1816 (clasp is unofficial), Fort George [Upper Canada] (clasp is unofficial), Stoney Creek [Upper Canada] (clasp is unofficial), Chateaugay [Lower Canada] (clasp unoffical) , Crystler's Farm [Upper Canada] clasp: "Chrystler's Farm"
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
3rd Herd said:
Simply for the sake of trivia, the unofficial uniforms for the Militia of New France were the toques and sashes worn by the soldiers. If the colour of the items was blue, you were from Montreal; White, from Trois Rivieres; Red for Quebec City.
Back on topic, the Western Rangers? I've never once heard of them (as may have been evident). Do you know of any good resources on them? I'm intrigued.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Danjanou,
could the Western Rangers you are looking for be "Cadwell's Western Rangers" also some more scaps from our wondeful archival system.
"Sheaffe was able to endorse the formation of new corps as another obvious means for bolstering the province’s defences. He welcomed the suggestion initiated by Procter and promoted by Colonel William Caldwell* to form a corps of rangers similar to Butler’s Rangers in the American Revolutionary War. In February, Sheaffe supported Caldwell’s proposals before Prevost. The Western Rangers, also known as Caldwell’s Rangers, was formed in March and part of the credit may belong to Sheaffe."
http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=38304
http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=36905&query=Colonel%20AND%20William%20AND%20Caldwell
I am suggesting this as 1812 was the start year for Lord Selkirks Red River Coloney, the rest of the west was still Rupperts Land having said that.
Corps of Canadian Voyageurs
For obvious reasons it was advantageous to the British and the North West Company to secure Fort Mackinac. In July 1812 a force consisting of 180 Voyageurs, 300 Indians, and 45 regulars of the 10th Royal Veteran Battalion stationed at St. Josephs Island departed for Fort Mackinac. On July 18th, the American fort was captured.
In October 1812 William McGillivray was given the rank of Lt. Colonel and instructed to arm a company of voyageurs made up of North West Company engagees. Officers of this newly armed corps came from the Scottish gentlemen partners and clerks of the NW Company.
During the War of 1812 McGillivray obtained the rank of lieutenant-colonel in the Corps of Canadian Voyageurs, which was formed in October 1812 and disbanded in March of the following year.
http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=37136&query=William%20AND%20McGillivray
could the Western Rangers you are looking for be "Cadwell's Western Rangers" also some more scaps from our wondeful archival system.
"Sheaffe was able to endorse the formation of new corps as another obvious means for bolstering the province’s defences. He welcomed the suggestion initiated by Procter and promoted by Colonel William Caldwell* to form a corps of rangers similar to Butler’s Rangers in the American Revolutionary War. In February, Sheaffe supported Caldwell’s proposals before Prevost. The Western Rangers, also known as Caldwell’s Rangers, was formed in March and part of the credit may belong to Sheaffe."
http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=38304
http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=36905&query=Colonel%20AND%20William%20AND%20Caldwell
I am suggesting this as 1812 was the start year for Lord Selkirks Red River Coloney, the rest of the west was still Rupperts Land having said that.
Corps of Canadian Voyageurs
For obvious reasons it was advantageous to the British and the North West Company to secure Fort Mackinac. In July 1812 a force consisting of 180 Voyageurs, 300 Indians, and 45 regulars of the 10th Royal Veteran Battalion stationed at St. Josephs Island departed for Fort Mackinac. On July 18th, the American fort was captured.
In October 1812 William McGillivray was given the rank of Lt. Colonel and instructed to arm a company of voyageurs made up of North West Company engagees. Officers of this newly armed corps came from the Scottish gentlemen partners and clerks of the NW Company.
During the War of 1812 McGillivray obtained the rank of lieutenant-colonel in the Corps of Canadian Voyageurs, which was formed in October 1812 and disbanded in March of the following year.
http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=37136&query=William%20AND%20McGillivray
Similar threads
