Talk:Brigadier

2005-2006

Was colonel commandant a rank in its own right? Or was it simply an appointment (or even just a descriptive label) of a colonel commanding a brigade? Franey 15:53, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

An appointment. As was Brigadier itself until after WWII. -- Necrothesp 17:33, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

AFAIK, in the Royal Marines, brigadier didn't become a substantive rank until 1999 (same time as commodore became substantive in the RN). — Franey 12:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Rank and temporary appointment are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Not sure what you mean, since in this case they are entirely different things. -- Necrothesp 23:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. Brigadier may not have become a substantive rank until after WWII; but was it a temporary rank before then?

Rank is rank, even when not held substantively: an acting major outranks a captain, though both have the same substantive rank; substantive majors do not outrank temporary majors (though they are senior to them).

Conversely, an RSM is senior by appointment to many other WO1s, but does not outrank them.

So:

• did pre-WWII brigadiers outrank ordinary colonels?
• Or were they merely senior by appointment to them?

We may be able to apply a saluting test, if King's/Queen's Regs on saluting were the same then as they are now.

IIRC, officers of the rank of major or higher must salute their superiors in rank. Would a pre-WWII colonel be expected to salute a brigadier?

• if not, then Brigadier was indeed only an appointment;
• but if the colonel was expected to salute, then Brigadier was a rank, albeit one that could only be held temporarily.

— Franey 12:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I would have said that Colonels did indeed salute Brigadiers, but I'm not sure the basis of your argument is correct. Surely a Lance-Sergeant outranked a Corporal and a Lance-Corporal outranked a Private even at the time when both were only appointments? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure they did, since L/Sgts were treated as Sergeants in every way and L/Cpls were treated as NCOs. The appointments they held were not the same as those held by WOs, where one WO1 never outranks another WO1 no matter what his appointment. Would this not have been the same for Brigadiers? -- Necrothesp 13:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Queen's Regs are explicit: a field officer must salute any officer superior in rank, not any officer merely senior to himself (except on the parade ground, where any officer must salute his senior, even if they're the same rank). Assuming King's Regs were the same in WWII (a reasonable though hardly unassailable assumption), then if a colonel was expected to salute a brigadier (away from the parade ground), the brigadier must have been superior in rank, and ipso facto Brigadier must have been a temporary rank rather than just an appointment.

What's your argument for saying that l/sgts outranked sgts, and old-style l/cpls outranked privates? They had greater authority and privileges, but neither necessarily implies an "outranking". (A battalion 2ic exercises command over its other majors, but does not outrank them, and may not even be the senior major; Eisenhower was for a while at once both Monty's commander and his junior in rank. As for privileged treatment: a modern Guards lance sergeant is a member of the Sergeant's Mess, but is otherwise just a corporal in fancy dress.) Moreover, l/sgts weren't treated as sergeants in every way: some jobs called explicitly for l/sgts rather than sergeants proper — e.g. section commanders in WWII glider regiments.

In any case, I don't think you can simultaneously argue that A outranks B, and that A is actually the same rank as B: it looks like a contradiction in terms.

Just to make it clear: I'm not saying that Brigadier was a temporary rank rather than an appointment; I'm just raising the possibility. I think we're going to need a military lawyer (preferably with a historical bent) to be certain. — Franey 15:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not a military lawyer and I'm not arguing one way or the other. I too am merely raising the possibility that there may be a difference. This is the British Armed Forces remember - traditions do not necessarily follow either hard and fast rules or logic, and even the forces themselves are often unaware of the finer points (I've seen plenty of errors on official websites and in official documents). I think there's confusion anyway, since I've seen Lance-Corporal (pre-1961) described as both an appointment and a temporary rank. Another interesting one is Colour Sergeant: appointment of Staff Sergeant or actually a different but equal rank? I've seen both versions. This is a very confusing subject, as we both know. Out of interest, pre-1999, did an RN captain salute a commodore? -- Necrothesp 10:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

UDA

Should there be a section on the UDA? There is no higher level section on any national army. The UDA is not a proper military force. Furthermore, the UDA does not use brigadier in any special way. I think the UDA does not deserve a mention, let alone an entire section.Mesoso 17:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

"Emperor's New Clothes" link

Rm the link; it was an extremely POV essay on how great the UK ranking system was, and how other countries' ranking systems as deviations from it were "wrong, stupid, pointless, and confusing". It adds nothing to the article. --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 20:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

A note:

Brigadier, is originally a Dutch word. Randalph P. Williams 10:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Not according to the dictionaries. Do you have a citation? --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 10:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

As a British sub-officer rank

"Brigadier" seems to have been used in its Continental sense in the old Troops of Horse Guards. An example Gazette from 1782 gives appointments to the following ranks:

• Cornet and Major
• Guidon and Major
• Exempt and Captain
• Brigadier and Lieutenant
• Sub-Brigadier and Cornet

The dual ranks were to reflect that regimental rank in the Guards carried with it higher rank in the Army, a situation that continued until the mid-nineteenth century. Opera hat (talk) 15:42, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

...and there are still brigadiers in this sense in the Royal Company of Archers. Opera hat (talk) 23:36, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I've added a section to Brigadier (United Kingdom) on this, though it could do with being better sourced. Opera hat (talk) 12:52, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Merge?

Shouldn't this entry be merged with Brigadier general? 151.24.0.196 (talk) 10:49, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

No. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:49, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

(i.e. Why do you think it should be? Pdfpdf (talk) 13:49, 13 September 2013 (UTC))

There's already a disambiguation page::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigadier_(disambiguation). If that page isn't working, then the two military ranks should be merged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.221.201 (talk) 20:45, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brigadier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141204195951/http://www.servicehistorique.sga.defense.gouv.fr/Les-grades-dans-l-armee-de-terre.html to http://www.servicehistorique.sga.defense.gouv.fr/Les-grades-dans-l-armee-de-terre.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:08, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Sri Lanka-army-OF-6.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:08, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Brig LDF.png
• Zambia-army 13.gif

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)