GalacticCactus Forum
Forums => English & Linguistics => Topic started by: Tante Shvester on January 29, 2009, 08:07:17 AM
-
Why does the army have Lance Corporals? They're not actually armed with lances, right? Were they ever armed with lances? Seems kind of old fashioned.
-
It is. And traditional.
A lance can also be defined as a group, such as a squad.
The Lances fournies was a medieval army squad that would have surrounded a knight in battle, consisting of a four to ten man team built of squires (man-at-arms, (usually mounted swordsmen), archers, attendants (pages) and the knight himself. These units formed companies under a captain either as mercenary bands or in the retinue of wealthy nobles and royalty.
A Lance was usually led and raised by a knight in the service of his liege, yet it is not uncommon in certain periods to have a mounted swordsman, such as a serjeants-at-arms, lead a lance. More powerful knights, also known as a knight bannerets, could field multiple lances.
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lances_fournies)
-
Also, the army doesn't have lance corporals. At least, the United States Army doesn't. The Marines do, though.
-
Yeah. I realized that mistake later. I was hoping that no one would notice.
But someone did. Or maybe everyone did, and you were the only one bold enough to confront me.
-
*hides from Tante*
-
We all value your friendship so much that we would rather overlook your minor mistakes than publicly shame you by pointing them out.
But not Mike. He's just a straight-up jerk.
-
You confirm my suspicions.
-
I am a terrible person, it's true.
-
You can try Porter's Two Step Program:
- Admit you have a problem.
- Stop doing that.
-
:cool: