Stamford standoff: honour, status and rivalry in the Georgian military

Matthew McCormack, Kevin Linch (Editor), Matthew McCormack (Editor)

Research output: Contribution to Book/ReportChapterpeer-review

Abstract

Anyone who has worked on the military history of the eighteenth century will be familiar with officers’ acute sensitivity to questions of precedence and decorum. Christopher Duffy has noted their ‘rancorous and touchy’ nature, and nowhere was this truer than in Britain’s militia. Reformed in 1757 as a parallel establishment to the regular army but officered by civilians who qualified by virtue of their social rank and landed property, militia officers were at once sensitive to accusations of military inferiority and conscious of their social superiority. To date, historians have underestimated the rivalry between army and militia, whereas in fact there were numerous petty disputes that could result in brawls, public insults, courts martial and lengthy correspondences with the Secretary at War. By focusing on one such incident in Stamford in April 1761, this chapter explores the relations between regulars and militia in this period, and in doing so thinks about interpersonal conduct in the military more widely. It shows how military discourse and honour codes were indebted to civilian codes such as politeness, gentility and manliness – and how their slightly different inflections on the parts of the army and militia could lead to conflict between these two branches of the service.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationBritain's Soldiers: Rethinking War and Society, 1715-1815
Place of PublicationLiverpool
PublisherLiverpool University Press
Pages77-92
Volume5
ISBN (Print)9781846319556
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2014

Publication series

NameEighteenth-century worlds

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Stamford standoff: honour, status and rivalry in the Georgian military'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this