Were Guards Regiments 'Elite' in the 18th Century?

~~Video Description~~

A commenter recently asked me, "Were the Guards regiment elite?" pertaining to the armies of the 18th Century. The answer to this question, as you can tell by the length of the video, is a bit of a complicated one and brings up a lot of really interesting topics relating to the role of Guards and Household Regiments in the early modern era, as well as what exactly we mean when we say something is "Elite."

~~Sources & Further Reading On This Topic~~

Visit The Native Oak's website to find recommended reading on 18th Century military history, as well as a whole slew of free primary sources like the Articles of War and the Manual Exercise!

~~Other Links & Contact Info~~

You can directly support my work by becoming a Patron of this channel:

You may also give a one-time tip here:

And of course you can follow me on Facebook and Instagram!

~~Timestamps~~
Intro 00:00
What Does it Mean to be "Elite"? 00:30
Sponsored Segment 01:54
The History and Concept of Guards Regiments 03:55
So, Were Guards Elite? 09:45
Social Elitism 15:56
Promotional Materials 20:44

[rhel]

I once heard that elite soldiers were the ones you could send marching through a forest, out of sight, without half of them deserting. Don't know how accurate that is, but it seems somewhat plausible. :D

[faeembrugh]

I once saw a Royal Marine officer being asked about his corp's 'elite' status. His response was 'Elite implies that a unit has reached a certain standard and that is dangerous. We, on the other hand, will always recruit and train in the assumption that there are always higher standards to achieve.'

[TheManFromWaco]

1:30 If you ask a US Marine, the Corps is the greatest fighting force known to man.

If you ask a US Navy Sailor, they’re the armed forces equivalent of a 14-year old who will yell that he’s a big, grown man who doesn’t need you any more “Dad”, but still expects you to feed him and drive him everywhere.

[Marinealver]

Before the term "elite" there was "prestige" which most military units used.
Don't forget the Zouaves

[r.coburn]

I'm the English teacher who loves the way you speak. Using your provided subtitles (additional points, by the way) I can see how your improvisations and asides are as eloquent as your script while also breaking down information that might be too dense for some and breaking up rhythms that might become monotonous. Marvelous.

[podemosurss]

For Spain, the military organisation was far more centralised than the British one. What you describe in 7:00 for Spain happened during the reigns of Isabella I, Joanna I and later Charles I, with the unification of the various retinues into the Royal Army (previously, the Royal Armies of Castilla and Aragón, which were the personal armies of the kings of both kingdoms), with a proper organisation. The nobles loyal to the crown were given officer ranks into this unified Royal Army, becoming the new colonels, generals, captains and the like. At first the organisation was made centered around companies of around 200 men and "coronelías" of 10 companies, with the coronelías being the basis for the later (and larger) Tercios. During that period, there were a bunch of elite units (in the sense that they had better training and equipment than the rest) tasked with protecting the Monarch, but weren't an unified "Royal Guard", but rather the "Guardia de Alabarderos" (Halberders Guard) established by King Ferdinand after the death of Queen Isabella, or the "Guardia de Archeros de Borgoña" (Burgundian Glaive Guard), a company brought by the King Consort Philip the Handsome. In 1704, during the Spanish War of Succession, the new Philip V (of the French Borbon dynasty) unified most of those units (except for the ones that went and sided with the Austrian claimant) into the "Real Guardia de Corps" (Royal Guard), a reinforced regiment made from 5 companies (reinforced): two Spanish cavalry companies of 200 men each, 1 Flemish company of fusileers, 1 Italian company of fusileers and 1 "American" company of fusileers (that is, from the Spanish colonial territories in America). During the Napoleonic Wars (what in Spain is called "Guerra de Independencia" or "War for Independance"), the Royal Guards Regiment fought in several key engagements, and they certainly lived to the "elite" monicker, as it was their stubborn resistance against numerically superior enemies what allowed either the survival of the army (in battles like Ocaña in 1809) or turning the tides of the battle completely (such as happened in La Albuera in 1811).

[russelmurphy]

Interesting little fact: the Austrian Empire did not have Guards units, as Kaiserin und Konigin Maria Thresa and her successors considered them an unnecessary expense and no better than the best line units. The closest you could say the Austrians and Austro-Hungarians came to having a guards unit was, in all likelihood, Infantrie Regiment (I.R.) No. 4 Hochs und Deutschmeister, which was raised ans stationed in Vienna.

[biyurica]

>have a sour day
>Brandon uploads
>day now good

Please keep making these

[mortdecai]

An interesting piece to keep in mind is, as elaborated on in your Social Elitism segment their is by all means in most Guard regiments in the United Kingdom & in my experiance in Denmark, a sense of elitism in said regiments. Most Guards believe themselves superior to the rest of the army typically today manifested in the fact that they have higher uniform maintance & drill standards. I recall a documentary from the sixties on the Welsh Guards were the first line was something along the lines of, as soon as you enter the Guards you are taught that you are a Guard & as such better than the rest of the army. I wouldn't be aware whether this applies to the 18th century, however, this traditional regimental culture that exists in Guard regiment (Altough all regiments have a regimental pride, Guard regiments are something else), I wouldn't imagine this culture is all to different from what used to be. Afterall, the Grenadier Guards always stick by 'once a Grenadier always a Grenadier' & equally in the Royal Danish Lifeguard you have the saying 'Once a Guard, always a Guard'.

[ghostie]

I really hope we get to see a video on the "Gentleman volunteers", from my own research they seemed to have been quite common in Sweden. I have found some as young as 16 years old serving as volunteer in the regular line regiments during the early 19th century

[Sammy]

On the social side its interesting to note the even today there is no such rank of sergeant in the Household Cavalry because the title of sergeant is derived from the Latin "serviens" which means servant. Instead the equivalent rank is corporal of horse, with staff sergeant and sergeant major equivalents being staff corporals and corporal majors

[DIREWOLFx]

I think the simple answer is, they're SUPPOSED TO BE elite, but is not by default.
And i think that also sums it up for "guards" units overall.

But there's some ways that they often differed from the average soldiery.
Higher wages was common. Which along with other things also ensured a generally better level of battle morale, which in most times means A LOT, as many many battles were lost because units of one side broke and routed. Guard units were less likely to do so in general.

Guard units meant to be household units and guards, often had extra training for those duties, and while not a huge advantage militarily most of the time, it did mean it was somewhat common for guards units to train more in total than regular units. If nothing else, this tended to mean that guard units had an average higher level of physical fitness. Rarely a big difference, but still noticeable.

Also, many guard units did have SOME sort of requirements above those of regular units. As you mention, sometimes that simply focused on being able to pay their own way, possibly outright being able to buy all their own equipment, but higher physical requirements were somewhat common.

Some guard units also specifically recruited experienced troops from the regular units, or sometimes this could be a "promotion"/reward for soldiers that had distinguished themselves in battle.

It was also much more common for guard units to have standardised uniforms, long before it became normal, as well as using more blatant colors or ornate designs. And while most people will scoff at it, it actually DOES have some level of psychological effect, unconsciously telling people that "oh dear, these people are so much stronger they can just prance around like that", it's basically the same thing in reverse as how people put on their uniform to "become their job". There is an inherent authority in uniforms, and the more distinct and "peacock-ish", the greater the effect. While it's not a huge thing, it still does make SOME difference. It also tends to be a minor morale booster for the troops themselves. Which is one of the reasons why the British ended up with their redcoat uniforms.

.

Also, there a very important quote worth remembering here.
"To create an elite unit, tell them they are an elite unit and then let them get on with living up to that".
It's an extremely simplistic way of looking at it, but it is also perfectly true to some extent.
Even with no other differences involved, if you have 2 identical units being created and one of them is told they're elite and that they darn well better live up to it, they generally WILL.
Give them 10% extra pay and give them special uniforms? At that point you're pretty much guaranteed that they will at minimum TRY to be BETTER.
Humans have a distinct tendency to live up, or down, to expectations.

[josephharrison]

Eh, the USMC is, in a sense, a military in its own right. It's got its own combat and amphibious vessels, a versatile ground combat force, and an air arm. Is it elite? In that it's versatile, and its troops are trained for amphibious warfare, giving them more tactical flexibility, sort of. But in a global context, it just makes them a fairly well trained military. They're not the same thing as the Royal Marines, who are a brigade of superbly trained amphibious light infantry commandos.

[TheIrishvolunteer]

Every time I think of a question regarding early modern warfare Brandon appears and answers my prayers! Thanks Brandon!

[MyelinProductions]

ALWAYS GREAT STUFF BF! Thank You - Useful Information and Helpful in many areas. ~ Be Safe out there ~ Peace & Health o Us All.

[SquidieTentacles]

Damn, nice video! you should make a video on the history of each guard regiment, each regiment has so much history and honours it'll be fun to both research and present them

[jonathanwashington]

I like the distinction of “a cut above”. It captures the vagueness of the issue nicely - and lays a finger of modern (self-perceptions) of elite within armed forces.

[stamfordly]

Probably worth mentioning that most regiments were raised by Royal Charter and that raising a regiment without a charter was considered a bit naughty.

[geroge]

In Württemberg during the reign of Frederick II & I (1797-1816) the guard brigade (eventually named Maison du Roi) were a complicated structure. You see, at some point they did have specific "guard regiments" on horse and on foot, however, they also had other standard regiments that had attained some sort of veterancy or reputation attached to the guard. For example, the guard grew exponentially in the course of around 15 years from 1800 to 1815, from 1 Batallion of Garde Grenadiers and one 4 squadrons of Horse guards (in reality each squadron had a different function, the first and the second were "Garde du Corp", the Third were the Leibjägers which were guides and the fourth were the Chevauxlegers which had an almost standard army function) to 2 regiments of Guard Infantry (one being the aforementioned Garde Grenadiers and the other being the first regiment of the standing army) 2 Horse regiments (one being a proper Horse Guard regiment which was made up from the previous Garde du Corp and the Leibjägers together with other raised men and the other also being a standard cavalry regiment from the standing army) 1 Light infantry regiment (Possibly the most famous unit in the army by that time and with reason) and 2 artillery batteries (one on foor and one on horse).

Of course the organization for the army was way more complicated than that and fluctuated alot in Frederick's reign as Duke, Elector then King, and i still have many questions yet to be answered.

One interesting thing was that once, the King's adjudant von Dillen, went to the garrison of one of the cavalry regiments and told the colonel he "wanted the strongest and most handsome of men to be selected for the Horse Garde regiment".

[thCompanyCaptain]

Hey! Looks like my grenadier company showed up as a picture of the guards at 13:52! Great picture!