Any military types out there…

All this year we’ve seen plenty of pageantry on the TV, what with the jubilee, the royal wedding, the thingy, and the other one, and then the Olympics etc… we’re all used to seeing the guards parading up and down outside Buck house and Windsor castle dressed in magnificent displays of historical army uniforms. The commentary at such events take great pains to tell the onlookers that this regiment was founded on such and such a date and differs from another regiment because the tunic buttons are grouped in threes, or two’s… it’s all very interesting… but it never ceases to amaze me that they all parade with the latest issue modern assault rifle… surely, to be authentic an old Brown Bess or some other piece of historical weaponry would be more appropriate for authenticity. Why do they do that.?

I don't know the answer to this question but I have a horrible suspicion that it is to be found in a "health & safety gone mad" mentality - and that the men can now only carry firearms for which they have attended the relevant number of hours' assembly, maintenance and use course (with diploma E455.0 of course to verify this), and that since all pre EU-Reg Nr 800.1 (paragraph C) weapons did not conform to these standards they are now designated dangerously defunct hardware.

Though I assume the brass will say that it is of course due to soldiers on duty being at all times equipped for immediate action, regardless of the duty they are performing at the time. Yeah, right.

But surely it is because the red coats and bearskins etc are not historic costumes. They are the current full dress uniform (or whatever it is properly called) of the regiments and so are completely compatible with modern weaponry when used ceremonially. Trooping the Colour, the ceremony of the Keys at the Tower etc might be based on historic necessity blended with pageantry, but they are certainly not historical re-enactments.

That's right Meles. It's dress uniform rather that historic costume. 

The British Grenadiers began wearing black bearskin caps following the Battle of Waterloo in 1815. They also got the name of 'Grenadier Guards' at that time too. During and prior to the battle they were known as the 1st Regiment of Foot Guards. The appropriation of the name and the headgear was in imitation (and no doubt flattery) of the Grenadiers-à-Pied of Napoleon's Vieille Garde whom they had just vanquished. There were shades in this of the earlier English appropriation of the Cross of St George banner from the Genoese crossbowmen following the Battle of Crécy in 1346. Taking their lead from the Grenadiers, other British foot guard regiments also soon began sporting bearskins.



(Bearskin cap with storing case) 

The British Army sources its bearskins from Canadian black bears. Calls for the scrapping of the use of bearskins were heard as early as the 1880s. Opposition has mainly been with regard for animal welfare considerations. This has been countered with the argument that the bears are going to be killed anyway as part of the annual cull and that the number of skins used by the army is only a fraction even of that. A counter argument says that (as with other fur trades) there is no real guarantee of how a fur has been procured or from where. Consequently the UK ministry of defence has begun entertaining suggestions for reform with the obvious but rather naff proposal of using caps made from fake fur. Another option would be to revert to the pre-1815 shako:



(Leather shako cap dating from the War of 1812)

Actually, the Grenadier Guards are the senior regiment by a typical bit of legal fiction. The Coldstream Guards were actually founded before them, but they were a Parliamentary regiment. The King (2nd Charlie) wouldn't accept that they would be the Senior Regiment, so they were forced to lay down their arms, march around the parade ground and pick them up again. Hey presto - the Grenadiers were declared senior.