A comprehensive bibliography of AZ war books

Les, spot on mate, especially with the airbrushed from history. And just look at some of the guff that they come out with on there, they even quote Bromhead as being in the SWB when he was awarded the VC, not even a mention of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, it is as though the English history of this regiment and the Englishmen that were in its ranks never existed, almost everything being geared towards the welsh, no wonder the myth lives on with stuff like this being put to the public.

Mr M Cooper
Thanks for the response, If I am reading your post correctly you are saying that the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) held that name up until 1881, The SWB was a new regiment formed from a number of regiments, one of those being the old 24th.

Having looked at a number of forums, I have read many interesting posts by Mike Snook, he argues that, 'The reason that this is so is that it was the Localisation Act (part of the Cardwell reforms) which for the first time established regimental recruiting areas: the very act which affiliated the 24th with Brecon and which was later to lead to the 1881 SWB name change. But the point is this: the brackets 2nd Warwickshire close brackets designation was purely nominal. There was no Warwickshire depot and recruiting for all regiments prior to the Localisation Act was conducted willy nilly across the country. About the only connection with the county was that colours going out of service would be laid up in Warwick Cathedral, and the designation of the tune 'The Warwickshire Lads' as the regimental march. Thus it is a historic nonsense to think of the people who went to make up the regiment as having a Midlands affiliation. Rather, there would be a distinct possibility, true of many regiments at that period, that the largest single affiliation (breaking up the English/Welsh by region) was actually Catholic Irishmen.

From my own point of view its not important where the men of the 24th were drawn from, the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) ceased to be in 1881, the argument appears to be quite simple, you either believe that the 24th were abolished and a new regiment (SWB) was created from the ashes of old regiments or that the 24th were renamed as the SWB, and in that I think is the problem, especially when a number of men from the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) found themselves in the SWB, I wonder how they would have viewed the situation. My feeling is that they would have been proud to have been known as the men from the 24th and they would have carried that pride with them in their service of the SWB, perhaps they were reluctant to let go of their history which would explain why the SWB viewed themselves as the old 24th (2nd Warwickshire)  of course that is just my humble opinion but you can still see the same sort of thing today with the amalgamated Line Infantry Regiments.

Regards
Waterloo.

Just out of interest the new drums of the 1st Btn.Royal Welsh still carry the 24th.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Steve

A must have from the Zulu perspective..


COPE, TREVOR,
The Zulu People A Select Bibliography.

ymob wrote:

My problem with the Brecon Museum  is that he doesn't answer to my e-mails....

Last example in mind my request for a copy of the Banister's letter to his father....This letter is not found elsewhere:no:
Cheer
Frédéric

Bonsoir,
Today, i received an answer from Mr Richard Davies the Curator of the Brecon Museum. In his message, he very kindly answered in detail to all my requests. In fact, his answer to my previous e-mail had been stopped by the "firewall" of my computer...
So, I sincerely apologize to him and the staff of the Brecon Museum.

Cheers.

Frédéric

Frederic

That's good news and thank you for the update.

Steve

rusteze wrote:

Frederic

That's good news and thank you for the update.

Steve