Every so often, something perfectly obvious that has never occurred to me before strikes me and I experience what I can only describe as a Homer Simpson moment. I can still recall lying on the analytic couch 56 years ago or so talking about I cannot recall what, when it suddenly occurred to me for the very first time in my life that New England was named after England, that New York was named after York, and of course that New Orleans was named after Orleans.
Last night, I was lying in bed awake at 2 AM explaining to
some imaginary audience why the rank of Captain in the Navy is the equivalent
of Colonel in the Army (you may well ask why I felt called upon to explain that
at 2 AM. I have no idea.) As part of my
explanation, I rehearsed the organizational structure of the Army, something I
learned 65 years ago when I went off to Fort Dix to do the active-duty portion
of my National Guard service.
As I explained (to nobody at all) that several regiments
could be put together to form a brigade, it suddenly struck me why the
commander of a brigade is called a Brigadier General. But how to explain that
the next ranks up are, in order, Major General, Lieutenant General, and General?
And then I realized that the Lieutenant General is the assistant to the General
and stands in for the General when the General is not available. The Lieutenant
General takes the place of the General – he is a place holder, a lieu tenant.
With that, I was able to go back to sleep. It only took me
65 years to figure this out. I thought I would tell you and save you some time.
22 comments:
I think it was in part because if the many uses of Vice in English (vice as moral shortcoming or vice as "holding firm") that it never occurred to me that Viceroy came from the same root--Latin "Vice" as "in place of"-- as Vice President. So obvious now that Viceroy was "in place of the king".
Why is a major general lower in rank than a lieutenant general? I get it that the latter is "A person who takes the place of another; esp. an officer (civil or military) acting for a superior; a representative, a substitute" (OED). But the terminology is still confusing since a major is higher in rank than a lieutenant. Who does a lieutenant fill in for? A captain? And all this reminds me of Major Major in Catch-22.
Or better yet, a Eureka moment, ala Archimedes.
Since I am the only member of my immediate family who served in the military, I was proud of the fact that I could name the army ranks in ascending order from private to General of the Army. (I never got any higher than Private, First Class.)
Today I had a Eureka moment. In the course of writing a brief in which I am claiming that the principal witness at the trial he won five years ago offered false testimony against my current client, I wanted to adapt the phrase, “None dare call it treason,” stating, regarding this witness, that none dare call it perjury. So I looked up the source of the phrase, “None dare call it treason” and found that the original quotation, spoken by Sir John Harington in the 17th century, was: “Treason doth never prosper, what’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it Treason.” I pondered that, thinking, does this mean that committing treason results in poverty? Then it hit me – no, it means if treason does proper, no one will have the courage to call it treason. Very astute of Sir Harington.
The commander of a Company is a captain and the assistant commander is a first Lieut. (The company is made up of platoons, each of which is commanded by a second lieutenant.) That is clear enough. But why a two star general is called a Maj. Gen. I do not know. Maybe there are some things they do not tell privates :)
Pedantry alert - I think that New York was renamed (from New Amsterdam) in honour of the Duke of York who captured it from the Dutch (brother of Charles II and later James II), rather than directly from the city of York.
Similarly, I think that New Orleans was named in honour of the Duke of Orleans who became regent of France after the death of Louis XIV.
Obviously their titles come from the cities concerned, so ultimately what you write is correct, but there was a little toadying along the way.
Quite right, Robert D. My bad.
More grist for the mill.
Here in Canada and given that we were ruled by the British, it's pronounced "leftenant". A search as to why gives this as one possible explanation:
According to military customs, a lower ranking soldier walks on the left side of a senior officer. This courtesy developed when swords were still used on the battle field. The lower ranked soldier on the "left" protected the senior officers left side. Therefore, the term leftenant developed.
Another explanation however is that it did come from the French but pronounced differently for this reason:
In British slang, of which there is a great deal, the word loo refers to a toilet. I assume they do not want to give the impression that a leftenant is a resident of a toilet as in loo-tenant.
source: Why exactly do the British say lieutenant as 'leftenant'?
From the above site, this interesting fact:
Just want to clarify, Americans speak proper English, not the British. English is a rhotic language. At the time of the American Revolution, everyone spoke English like Americans do today. After the American Revolution, in order to differentiate themselves and pretend to be of higher class, the British began incorrectly pronouncing their R's. Now, British English is a non-rhotic language, like Boston English, which traditional English is NOT.
Ahmed
Thank you for that fascinating information. Now, whenever someone says to me, "In lieu of your appearance, we have invited Mr. Jones to speak," I will know they are commenting on my lack of personal hygiene.
And thank you for introducing me to a new work - rhotic. Good for Scrabble.
Checked my recollections with wiki and indeed it seems that the designation back in the day in England was General, Lieutenant General and Sergeant Major General. Over time the "Sergeant" was dropped. The history gets really, really messy but I don't believe that LGs took the place of the G because (in the US at least) LG (three stars) was the highest rank except for when MGs were with formal terminology varying (again, really messy).
I guess the point with military ranks (as with many other things) is that reason alone doesn't get one very far absent specific historical knowledge.
“Fools will give you answers. Wise men never try.”
This is the appropriate response to many questions in life.
A bit of musical trivia:
Tonight marks the 73rd anniversary of the opening of South Pacific on Broadway.
What’s the connection?
For extra points, without Googling it, who starred in the two main roles in the original production, and who replaced them in the movie?
Without a mere glance at Google, Sir:
Mary Martin and Ezio Pinza
Oh.... and in the movie:
Mitzi Gaynor and Rosanno Brazzi.
[Far inferior...thought Mitzi was a real trouper.... but Rosanno could not sing a note.]
David,
Excellent. Congratulation.
If I recall, you also gave the answer A Face In The Crowd, starring Andy Griffith.
And tell us the connection.
Da da da da da, da da da; da da da da, da da da; da da da da, da da da da da da da!
(That’s the tune from Final Jeopardy.)
Times up.
"Fools will give you answers. Wise men never try" is a line from the main song in South Pacific, "One Enchanted Evening," sung by Ezio Pinza in the stage production, and Rosanno Brazzi in the movie.
If memory serves, the line is "Fools will give you reasons," not answers.
Apropos of nothing ...
Someone named Robert Paul Wolff posted the following in this space once upon a time.
;-)
Reading over past posts reminds me once more of the high level of intelligence and knowledge exhibited by the many people who have posted comments. On a number of occasions, a debate develops among the commentators that far outshines my original post. I say without a hint of false modesty that this is a really classy blog -- a kind of on-going graduate seminar open to anyone in the world who has the interest and time to contribute.
Eric,
You are correct. My bad. I lost everything on Final Jeopardy.
Here is a special treat. Bob Dylan singing Some Enchanted Evening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiILa62alAU
Will she stick around after Bob stops singing?
And here’s Ezio Pinza’s version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktvnNhwBaeY
"As I explained (to nobody at all)"
You really are a treasure, Professor Wolff! :-)
Cheers,
I believe the song is "Some Enchanted Evening" not "One Enchanted..."
Jeesh, I can’t get anything by you guys. Yes, “Some Enchanted Evening.”
The musical is particularly notable because it contains one of the earliest songs, with lyrics written by Oscar Hammerstein, condemning discrimination and racism, “You Have To Be Carefully Taught.”
Oops. Force of habit.
Post a Comment