The Queen's Royal (West Surrey) Regiment - Question

[The_Enigma]

Howdy, ive been doing quite a bit of reading of late about the 7th Armour Division and there 131st Infantry Brigade which was made up of the 1/5, 1/6 and 1/7 Queens.

This is what is confusing me. I understand that the first number infront of a title for example 1st Rifle Brigade doesnt mean its an entire brigade but its the first battalion of said unit but there numbering confuses me!

There website: Link

states that the above were TA units and the regiments regular units the 1st and 2nd Queens were based over in Asia, which to be honest doesnt really help me.

I thought it may have been something simlar to the way the Aussie units were numbered but the TA units from the Queens are as followed:
1/5th, 1/6th and 1/7th and 2/5th, 2/6th and 2/7th.

Am utterly confused, can anyone explain to me what the numbers infront mean?
Am i right to still think the latter numbers mean 5th, 6th and 7th Battalions?

[JonS]

5th, 6th, and 7th Bns got split to create more bns early in the war (or in 1938/39) as part of the general expansion of the Army.

Thus, 5th Bn begat 1/5th and 2/5th. Etc.

Nothing to do with the Aussie system. The "2/" prefix for all AIF units was simply so they could remember which war they were going to. The Militia were smart enough to know, so they didn't get the "2/"

[The_Enigma]

Lol

Ah i see, i did see the comment about them needing to double up but didnt realise thats how they would show this. Thanks for the information!

[Andreas]

My guess is it also had to do with the seniority of the battalions in the regiment. If e.g. the 2nd had been split at a time there were (let's say) 10 battalions raised already, you would have the split out battalion become the 11th. Clearly, that would not do, having to get in line behind some uppity TA chaps. By using the 1/2, 2/2, both halves could claim the seniority that they deserved.

All the best

Andreas

[richardlionheart]

Just a quick note

1/5 Queens Battalion refers to the following, The answer to this lies in the fact that this battalion was Territorial formation and it belong to the 1st line formations which were created.

2/5 Queens Battalions refers to a 2nd Line formation Battalion of TA

Go this web site Regiments.Org


A.I.F prefix refers to the 2nd Australian Imperial Force.

Regards
Richard.

[The_Enigma]

I understand what the A.I.F. prefix is for, i was initially thinking (after i couldnt figure out what the hell the other numbers where for) did the first number refer to something like that as in there second raising or something.

I did quickly glance the Regt website before asking however on re looking through it after you mentioned it i found (which i hadnt realised prior) that you can click on the battalions etc and get information on them etc thus:
7th Battalion:

1937.08.10 7th (Southwark) Battalion, The Queen's Royal Regiment (West Surrey)
1939.03.31 1/7th (Southwark) Battalion, The Queen's Royal Regiment (West Surrey)
renumbered on formation of duplicate 2/7th Battalion

I cant quite get my head around this duplicate thing*, is this like Richard has just said first line and second line?

Hate to sound dopey but what exactly does that mean?

*like divisions raising duplicate of themselves and divisions being renamed to replace others which have been lost because there, there duplicate.

[richardlionheart]

Hi,

I would recommend the following book, which you can buy from the Nafziger collection and that is "The British Armies in World War Two Volume Three" by David Hughes which covers this subject in detail.

Reqarding your question to me, yes it is a duplication according to the above ref which I mention. The British Army in 1939 duplicated 1st/5th Queens Battlion to form the 2nd /5th Queens Battalion, which is why I refer to them as Ist line Territorials and 2nd line Territorials formations.

And the example that David Hughes gives is the following:

The Essex Regiment form 1st/4th like your Queens Battalions 1st/5th then the Essex Regiment double it by forming 2nd/4th just like the 2nd/5th Queens Battalions.

Any way I hope this helps
Regards
Richard

Have a look at this website
http://www.ordersofbattle.com/UnitIndex.aspx
http://www.army.mod.uk/unitsandorgs/ta/index.htm

The last website is the army TA site. If you want to get the full story about the numbering system I would write them a note.

Regards
Richard

[richardlionheart]

Hi,

I have just found this link which explains everthying in detail for you.
http://www.ordersofbattle.com/StateNotes.aspx
Regards
Richard

[offog]

Enigma,
This question came up the other day and the correct explanation was given. Ignore any and all reference to the OZ army.

The first thing to remember is the Queen’s were a London regiment and had a lot of TA Bn. My grandfather and uncle were 6 Queen’s in Bermondsey. At the out break of war the Bn were split and formed new Bn (forget first and second line). So to show it’s original Bn it kept it’s number, 6, and to show that there was more than one Bn formed from the original it was given a number, in this case 1.

So the number shows that it is the 1st Bn formed from the original 6th Bn.

The 2nd Bn of the original 5th,6th and 7th Bn formed the 169 Queen’s Brigade with 2/5, 2/6 and 2/7. At Salerno both brigades lead the division in the break out as part of the US 5th army.

The above does not mean that this was standard, some regiments did similar and some did something totally different. Regiments in the British army are a law unto them selves and only toe the party line when it suits.

[richardlionheart]

Hi Offog,

I beg to differ that the Queens Regiment is an West Surrey Regiment not an London Regiment. Here is the full list of battalions that were raised in World War Two.

1st Battalion Regular Army
2nd Battalion Regular Army
3rd Battalion Militia Battalion not raised during WW2
4th Battalion Militia Battalion not raised during WW2
1/5th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 5th Bn (TA)
2/5th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/5 Bn (TA)
1/6th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 6th Bn ( Bermondsey) Bn TA
2/6th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/6 Bn (TA)
1/7th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 7th (Southwark) Bn TA
2/7th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/7th Bn (TA)

Although I am an Australia I do a lot of research and collect a vast amount of material on this subject. And Surrey is not aprart of London nor did they formed or have any links with London Regiment untill after the War. When Regiments began to merge.

[Gooner1]

Hi Offog,

I beg to differ that the Queens Regiment is an West Surrey Regiment not an London Regiment. Here is the full list of battalions that were raised in World War Two.

1st Battalion Regular Army
2nd Battalion Regular Army
3rd Battalion Militia Battalion not raised during WW2
4th Battalion Militia Battalion not raised during WW2
1/5th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 5th Bn (TA)
2/5th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/5 Bn (TA)
1/6th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 6th Bn ( Bermondsey) Bn TA
2/6th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/6 Bn (TA)
1/7th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 7th (Southwark) Bn TA
2/7th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/7th Bn (TA)

Although I am an Australia I do a lot of research and collect a vast amount of material on this subject. And Surrey is not aprart of London nor did they formed or have any links with London Regiment untill after the War. When Regiments began to merge.

Actually by traditional boundaries parts of Surrey are in London. Bermondsey and Southwark are both in Surrey by its traditional but not administrative boundaries, which would be the County of London.

Anyone born there would consider themselves a Londoner.

[offog]

Hi Offog,

I beg to differ that the Queens Regiment is an West Surrey Regiment not an London Regiment. Here is the full list of battalions that were raised in World War Two.

1st Battalion Regular Army
2nd Battalion Regular Army
3rd Battalion Militia Battalion not raised during WW2
4th Battalion Militia Battalion not raised during WW2
1/5th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 5th Bn (TA)
2/5th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/5 Bn (TA)
1/6th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 6th Bn ( Bermondsey) Bn TA
2/6th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/6 Bn (TA)
1/7th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 7th (Southwark) Bn TA
2/7th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/7th Bn (TA)

Although I am an Australia I do a lot of research and collect a vast amount of material on this subject. And Surrey is not aprart of London nor did they formed or have any links with London Regiment untill after the War. When Regiments began to merge.

The Tangier Regiment was formed on Putney heath in 1661.

Put Putney Heath into Google earth and see were it takes you.
Put Southwark into Google and see where in London it is.
Put Bermondsey into Google and see where in London it is.

My grand father was from East London (Irish) and joined the Queen’s Royal Regiment in 1922 when his regiment was dispended. He left and joined the TA in Bermondsey being from the east of London were he lived until being rehoused in 48 in Egham, Surrey. 3 generations of my family, including me have served in the Queen’s.

[offog]

Hi Offog,

I beg to differ that the Queens Regiment is an West Surrey Regiment not an London Regiment. Here is the full list of battalions that were raised in World War Two.

1st Battalion Regular Army
2nd Battalion Regular Army
3rd Battalion Militia Battalion not raised during WW2
4th Battalion Militia Battalion not raised during WW2
1/5th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 5th Bn (TA)
2/5th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/5 Bn (TA)
1/6th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 6th Bn ( Bermondsey) Bn TA
2/6th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/6 Bn (TA)
1/7th formed March 1939 by redesignation of 7th (Southwark) Bn TA
2/7th formed April 1939 as duplicate of 1/7th Bn (TA)

Although I am an Australia I do a lot of research and collect a vast amount of material on this subject. And Surrey is not aprart of London nor did they formed or have any links with London Regiment untill after the War. When Regiments began to merge.

Actually by traditional boundaries parts of Surrey are in London. Bermondsey and Southwark are both in Surrey by its traditional but not administrative boundaries, which would be the County of London.

Anyone born there would consider themselves a Londoner.

To emphasize your point this map of 1899 shows that everything south of the Thames and west of Greenwich is in Surrey. I think it was the GLC who gobbled up large parts of Surrey, Middlesex and Kent.

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com ... y_1899.htm

[richardlionheart]

Yeah I was wrong.

You would think if those battalion the 6th and 7th were raised in London why on earth they would not apart of the London Regiment?

Regards
Richard

[Michael Emrys]

Tradition, tradition, tradition.

Michael