(Vol. vii., p. 155.)
Z.'s _third_ application relative to the names and numbers of regiments has
roused me into activity, {242} and I now forward you the required
information, viz.:
Query 1. What was the origin of giving British regiments the name of
certain officers, instead of numbering them as at present?
Regiments were numbered, but it was generally customary to designate them
by the name of their colonel previous to 1751.
2. If in honour of an officer commanding the corps, was the name changed
when that officer died or removed to another regiment, or what was the
rule?
The name of the regiment changed by death or removal of the colonel.
3. When did the present mode of numbering regiments begin, and by whom was
it introduced?
1st July, 1751, by royal warrant of George II., when the number of the
regiment was directed to be embroidered on its standard; even after the
numbering became general, the names of colonels were for some time
retained.
4. What was the rule or principle laid down in giving any regiment a
certain number? Was it according to the length of time it had been
embodied?
In 1694 a board of officers assembled to decide the relative rank of
regiments, and the regiments formed in England were placed by seniority of
raising, but those from Scotland or Ireland on their being placed upon the
English establishment.
5. What is the guide now in identifying a named with a numbered regiment;
for example, at the battle of Culloden in 1746, Wolfe's, Barrett's, and
Howard's Foot were engaged. Now, what is the rule for ascertaining the
numbers of these and other old regiments in the British army at the present
day?
The Army List with colonels of that date. In 1746 Wolfe's was the 8th Foot,
Barrett's the 4th Foot, and Howard's the 3rd Foot. There were two Howards
of the same date (1746), Green and the Buff Howards, known by their
facings.