Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Wars and ConflictsΒ  permalink

Regimental Cap Badges

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 14 of 14
  • Message 1.Β 

    Posted by Sabre-Wulf (U2142937) on Wednesday, 30th November 2005

    Hi all,

    I was sure I'd read somewhere that in order for a regiment to include a crown on its cap badge they had to have the word Royal in their name.

    Is this correct? If so, why does the Parachute Regiment have a crown? Or was my source flawed?

    Many thanks.

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by DL (U1683040) on Wednesday, 30th November 2005

    Mr Sabre-Wulf!

    Just read your post on the the "politics" thread so thought I'd have a quick look at yours before replying!

    You are (I believe) totally correct in your assumption with regards to cap badges. To have a crown shown as part of the regimental crest, the unit (whether a corps such as Royal Corps of Signals, or a regiment such as for example the Royal Tank Regiment) the unit must have been allocated "Royal" status. As yet the Paras don't have a Royal title, neither do the SAS, and I know the SAS have no crown on their cap badge, I don't think the Paras do either (but I may be wrong!!!). Mani is the one to confirm this.

    As an aside to this, cap badges for Royal units have a different crown for whether there is a King or a Queen on the throne, although I have never really been able to make out the difference!

    Cheers

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by DL (U1683040) on Wednesday, 30th November 2005

    Just did a bit of research on this.

    The Paras do have a crown on their badge which seems to throw the rule out, and also the Queens Royal Lancers don't have crown, they just have the Death's Head badge. I was going on memory there, and quotind what I was told in basic (you have to learn regimental history and all that rubbish!), and they definitely told us that the Royal title had to be given to a regiment in order for it to wear a crown on its capbadge.

    You learn something new every day!

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by Sabre-Wulf (U2142937) on Wednesday, 30th November 2005

    Thanks DL,

    I remember getting very confused doing some research on the Royal Marine's cap badge, as they seem to have different beret badges and lapel badges depending on whether you're an officer or not, with the officer badge having the crown separate from the rest of the badge. And as far as I know the kings crown is slightly larger than the queens, but I'm not too sure.

    I was under the impression that the Para badge had a lion with a crown on top of the wings, but maybe I'm mistaken.

    Cheers.

    (Had to change my name to Mr having been mistaken for a woman on another board!)

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by Sabre-Wulf (U2142937) on Wednesday, 30th November 2005

    The Queen's Royal Lancers used to be the 17th/21st didn't they, so maybe they need to be awardeded it specially? And to be honest the skull would look a bit silly with a crown on top!

    Can't wait to see what cap badge they come up with for the new Royal Regiment of Scotland if they go ahead with it...

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by DL (U1683040) on Wednesday, 30th November 2005

    They did indeed used to be the 17th/21st Lancers!

    Death or Glory and all that! I would guess they gained the Royal title in a merger, but kept the cap badge as it is one of the scarier regimental insignia (and IMO one of the coolest without doubt!).It would look a bit naff with the crown on top, unless you made it a particularly scary crown!

    You are correct on the Para capbadge as well, it is a crown with a lion above it.

    Cheers

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by DL (U1683040) on Wednesday, 30th November 2005

    Just a thought, the best person to ask on the Paras would be Mani, a regular poster on here and ex-para from a long line of paras, so he'd know practically anything worth knowing on them.
    Don't ask him about marines though!!!

    I don't really have much knowledge of special forces/airborne type units though I'm afraid, being as my military service was in the erm.. spookier branch of Signals!

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by Sabre-Wulf (U2142937) on Wednesday, 30th November 2005

    My mate's a bit of a para groupie whereas I prefer the Green Berets, which has lead to some amusing arguments in the past.

    I know you gave your opinion of Territorials in a previous message, but my old man was in the Signals in a sponsored regiment - he certainly enjoyed himself and has some amusing stories to tell!

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by KCLUndergrad (U2561619) on Wednesday, 30th November 2005

    I have never heard of the rule about only 'royal' regiments having crowns on their capbadges, but I can think of loads of regiments which do have crowns and arn't 'royal' and even one or two which are 'royal' and don't! There are some which have a crown and arn't 'royal' but are "queen's" or "king's" own, do you think that counts or is that too pedantic?! From what I can remember, the following have crowns which arn't 'royal':

    King's Own Borders
    The Black Watch
    The Highlanders
    The Green Howards (although I think that's a different crown from a king or queen of UK, should probably check)
    Queen's Lancashire Regt.
    The Life Guards
    Queen's Royal Hussars
    The Light Dragoons
    The Army Air Corps
    The Intelligence Corps
    Adjutant General's Corps (SPS, ETS, MPS and ALS branches)
    Small Arms School Corps
    Army Physical Training Corps

    Those last ones are corps and are maybe exempt from the rule if it exists, and also maybe excluding the queen's and king's is too pedantic? But then there are kings and queens own which don't have crowns?

    It seems that it's probably based along the army-wide policy of organised chaos, but maybe a regular can put me straight (or a more clued up territorial)?

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by Sabre-Wulf (U2142937) on Thursday, 1st December 2005

    Interesting points here, KCL. Think I'll have to do some more digging.

    I know that the Green Howard's badge was designed by Queen Alexandra back in the late 19th century and its her princesses coronet on the badge.

    I guess there have been so many reorganisations that the conventions have broken down. My local regiment, the RGBW, is set to be merged again as The Rifles, and who knows what's going to happen to their cap badge and how many they'll be allowed to wear!

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Thursday, 1st December 2005

    HI DL,

    We certainly do have to Crown on our cap badge...

    To be honest, I have no idea why, I never gave it too much thought? I'll ask the old man, see if he knows...

    It must be something to do with the Royals as the older chaps in the regiment have the Kings crown on theirs where as we 'young spuds' have the queen's crown?

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Thursday, 1st December 2005

    Hi MR S-W,

    "I was under the impression that the Para badge had a lion with a crown on top of the wings, but maybe I'm mistaken" The Lion's on top of thwe King's or Queens crown. on top of the wings

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Thursday, 1st December 2005

    "My mate's a bit of a para groupie whereas I prefer the Green Berets"

    You savage!!!!

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by Sabre-Wulf (U2142937) on Thursday, 1st December 2005

    "My mate's a bit of a para groupie whereas I prefer the Green Berets"

    You savage!!!!Β 


    Sorry! From the South West so a bit of local loyalty perhaps!

    Report message14

Back to top

About this Board

The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.

or Β to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

The message board is closed for posting.

This messageboard is .

Find out more about this board's

Search this Board

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.