Only allowing *beep* 'Gentlemen' to be officers? Do you think this is overstated in the series or was it really this bad.
If so, no wonder they lost to the stupid Americans in 1776 and 1812.
Sig, you want a sig, here's a SIG-sauer!
From all I've read, yes. Only 5% of officers were elevated from the ranks at that time. The system of purchasing commissions helped to make sure that officers came from well-off backgrounds. Look up the Wikipedia article "British Army during the Napoleonic Wars" for a quick idea.
shareThe men like an officer to be different, set above them, special. This is explained in the episode.
A gentleman typically has money, which is why a commission is purchased, with the theory being that such an investment will prompt an officer will take a greater interest in the success of his unit than someone with no vested interest.
Going into the army was an option for younger sons of a gentleman. The eldest would inherit the estate and money to support it. Younger sons needed to enter into a career or marry a woman of fortune.
The only acceptable careers for “gentlemen” were Military service or entering the clergy. In order to maintain social standing, both of these careers required investment from the man’s father, another rich relative, or some other benefactor with an interest in assisting the young man.
It's just a different way of doing things. It's not so different from officers in the US Army today. In order to become an officer, until more recently anyway, a college degree was required. Most officers have a college education, although enlisted men can go through Officer Candidate School without one. But it still follows the idea of officers being better educated than the rank and file, and this often means the officer is more well-off than many enlistedmen. So in ways, the "class system" is still preserved, even though it's not an impassable gap like it used to be.
"Hey! If...if we had some rope, we could make a log bridge...if...if we had...some...logs."
Interesting insight. Thanks. I could be wrong, but I don't think the American "class" system has ever been as rigid as the British one. Which is what you indicated, but I'm just saying.
shareOh, no, no. Definitely not as rigid as the British system was or is. I only mean that there is somewhat of a class system separating officers and men, however veiled it may be. But it's certainly not an impassable barrier, and officers who come from the ranks are welcomed by other officer cadre as long as they are good leaders and do their jobs well.
"Hey! If...if we had some rope, we could make a log bridge...if...if we had...some...logs."
These days there is still a big element of separation, although Infantry officers (if not all of them) have to pass all the same basic training as the Men, do better than them as much as possible and only then go off to Officer School... Least that's what happened with our officers, to the point where we were Riflemen from the outset while they were only Privates.
About the only concession is that they didn't have to have their haircuts as short as ours.
Not quite. Infantry officers who aren’t prior enlisted go through a commissioning program, then Officer Basic Course, (basic training for officers), then airborne school if they haven’t been, and then finally Ranger School. They get trained more than the enlisted men- enlisted don’t have to do Ranger School. It now occurs to me that you probably weren’t talking about the AMERICAN Army. My bad.
share“But it still follows the idea of officers being better educated than the rank and file.”
Well, yes, but their education was in the humanities, studying the classics, literature, music, art, etc. in addition to having received training in deportment, dance, and social customs. They weren’t studying warfare or economics.
definitely, as english society was explicitly classist for over a century afterward.
one interesting aspect they slightly touch upon was that on the french side, there was a peasant revolution behind it, where french officers were selected from the peasant class in large numbers, since most of the aristocrats were disappeared/exterminated.
the question of obliterating formal class distinctions was the central existential threat napoleon represented to the rest of aristocratic europe.