Talk:Frederick Roberts, 1st Earl Roberts

Post-nominal

Charles Hardinge also had eight. William Avery 21:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Lord Kitchener has 9 according to his article. He was as "royal" as Roberts. Peter1968 22:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Lord Mountbatten of Burma also had eight (though he could possibly be considered royalty, having been born as a German noble but relinquishing his titles as a teenager), and I'm sure there are others who have as many; the factoid should really be removed from the article. By the way, Peter1968, you should really pipe your links on talk pages; Lord Kitchener takes you to a dab page. TysK 20:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed. William Avery 13:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

New file File:Frederick Sleigh Roberts, 1st Earl Roberts by George Frederic Watts.jpg

Recently the file File:Frederick Sleigh Roberts, 1st Earl Roberts by George Frederic Watts.jpg (right) was uploaded and it appears to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think it would be a useful addition, please feel free to include it. Dcoetzee 07:31, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Now used in the article. Dormskirk (talk) 17:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Robertsganj

I presume Robertsganj in India is named after him. If so, this should be noted. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 01:13, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Now noted and referenced. Dormskirk (talk) 17:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

WP:SAFRICA assessment

As a broad outline this article is an excellent introduction, but much is left out that could be included in a biography. Not everything need be left to the article on the South African War. The death of his son trying to rescue British guns from capture at Colenso was an important part of his motivation in travelling to South Africa and deeply affected him. Captain Congreve reported him bursting into tears -- which field marshals did not do in those days, if ever -- when Congreve described his son's heroic death. South African historians, Nasson, Scholtz and especially Wessels have written of his brilliant strategy of deception at the outset of his campaign in February, 1900. The capture of 4000 Boers under Cronje at Paardeberg, nearly a tenth of Boer strength then mobilised, was the major turning point of the war. On the relief of Kimberley the Daily Mail crowed, 'There is no one like Bobs!' [Roberts was known as Bobs throughout his career.] I hope it might be possible for the editors to include some of this detail to bring Roberts to life. ----

Assessed as C-Class. Just weak referencing letting it down. Ron2K (talk) 14:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Referencing now improved and some additional colour added. Dormskirk (talk) 17:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

outrage

there is no talk about outrage by public? did it exist then, or ever? 20,000 women/children died in concentration camps like the holocaust? Roberts set example for HITLER to followJuror1 (talk) 16:05, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Roberts' titles and post-nomnals

I think that the order in which Roberts' post-nominals is stated is incorrect. My understanding is that KG takes precedence over all others. Also, at some point he is referred to as "Lord Frederick," which he was not -- surprising to see here ignorance about the difference between a courtesy title and the title of a peer. 71.146.92.124 (talk) 19:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

VC takes precedence over all others, it is the highest honour/award/decoration in the British system. I don't think Baronet (Bt) should be before them both though. Woody (talk) 22:53, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

@Woody: @71.146.92.124: According to the holy grail of British honours (Debrett's), 'The abbreviation 'Bt' (for a baronet), and 'Esq', if applicable, precede all other letters.' Therefore, the post-nominal of a Baronet (Bt), goes before all honours, including the Victoria Cross and the Order of the Garter. According to Debrett's, the Victoria Cross and George Cross go before the Order of the Garter and all other honours apart from Baronet.

References

Stature

mention could, I suggest, be made of Lord Roberts' diminutive stature [As I Understand]/ .Nurse Eleonora Pemberton apparently saw his 'little coffin' brought down to the quay at Boulogne. Autochthony wrote - 2255z 18 December 2011. 109.154.0.195 (talk) 22:54, 18 December 2011 (UTC) sorry - missed his!

He was a very old man. (92.7.9.228 (talk) 14:43, 8 February 2012 (UTC))

I think he always was short though - OTOH to the point where he might not have met height requirements to join the army in other eras, unless I've misremembered that - even before, like most very old people, he shrank. There's a drawing of him visiting Kitchener at the War Office in 1914 - a wizened old man perched on the edge of big chair, while K leans forward solicitously to listen to what his old boss has to say.Paulturtle (talk) 12:01, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I read somewhere that his nickname in India was "wee Bobs".Southdevonian (talk) 19:33, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh, 'e's little but 'e's wise,

'E's a terror for 'is size,

An' -- 'e -- does -- not -- advertise

Do yer, Bobs?

(Kipling, 'Bobs', 1898. Kipling was not a big man himself, but he certainly regarded Roberts as being on the small side.) Khamba Tendal (talk) 09:30, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Ribbons

I earlier put a visual display of Roberts's ribbon bar on the page, and had it removed for reasons of "historical nonsense". I have noted several other articles on British general officers with their respective ribbon bars displayed; if someone could provide a good reason for not including a ribbon bar on this page, do let me know. Aumnamahashiva (talk) 22:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

there is some discussion on the subject here: Talk:David Richards (British Army officer). There seems to be a consensus that such ribbons are not helpful. Please note that the article has recently been re-assesed as B class. Dormskirk (talk) 22:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Victorian Ranks

Might be worth adding a footnote or a link to another article to explain what "second captain" and "supernumerary general" were. It's non-obvious even to someone (me) with a reasonable knowledge of military history.Paulturtle (talk) 12:01, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

And answer came there none. Since writing the above, I've learned that "supernumerary" meant an officer who was allowed to tag along on an expedition despite not being formally part of the command structure. Normally it applied lower down the ladder, eg. to captains. But in this case, perhaps to a general as well. I think "second captain" might have meant second-in-command of a company (a company commander being normally a captain in those days, which remained true into the twentieth century in other armies but not in ours) and was sometimes treated as a formal rank, but that's with a bit of guessing on my part. Paulturtle (talk) 13:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Reforms were brought in just before WW1, in which infantry battalions comprised four large companies commanded by majors (divided into platoons, which were a new formation). Before that each battalion had eight small companies commanded by captains. But that doesn't conclusively prove what the mid nineteenth century organisation was, or what a "second captain" was.Paulturtle (talk) 05:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Intro

I have removed a few words, a link and a footnote from the intro. Here is why. I don't think you need to say he was distinguished since being commander in chief speaks for itself. Anglo-Indian is confusing because nowadays it is usually used to refer to someone with both British and Indian ancestors and I can't see any evidence that either of Roberts' parents had any Indian ancestors. On the Kipling page which is used as a source (unpublished?) it does say he came from an Anglo-Indian family but the author may be using the term with its other meaning - British but born in India. It is clear from the next section that he was born in Cawnpore. Southdevonian (talk) 19:15, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. The Anglo-Indian comment does not add anything. Better removed. Dormskirk (talk) 19:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

What about the Anglo-Irish bit as well? I would go for removing that as well. The source is a note in a book about something else, and the only explanation that the author gives is that Roberts chose Waterford in his title. It looks odd to start the footnotes off with a passing mention in a book about something else. It is clear from the next section that his family was Irish.Southdevonian (talk) 19:28, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Also agreed. The article lead should really be a summary of the article and should not introduce any new material. In my view no footnoted material should appear in the lead. Dormskirk (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I will go for it then.Southdevonian (talk) 20:21, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

VC

Didn't Roberts win a VC? One would hardly know it reading this article. Perhaps those with a proprietory concern for this page really should remedy the situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.100.213.3 (talk) 15:03, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

There is already a whole section on the Indian Rebellion of 1857 and Roberts' VC. Dormskirk (talk) 21:31, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Commander-in-Chief of the British Army

There is nothing under this heading except the post's abolition.

Roberts achieved a good dealPaardeberg (talk) 12:26, 6 November 2015 (UTC).

Gerald Ellison who worked with both Roberts and the subsequent Esher Commission on War Office reform and in creating a General Staff for the British Army, wrote that Roberts had already begun this work and except for nomenclature his proposals anticipated Esher's changes. Working with his political masters, Roberts introduced the SMLE (Short-Magazine Lee-Enfield) rifle for all arms including the cavalry. He also introduced the 18-pounder field gun, backbone of British field artillery 1914-1918, and for the Royal Horse Artillery the 13-poounder. His education reform was extensive and constructive. He brought some of his ablest followers, men such as Henry Rawlinson and Henry Wilson. They produced a Manual of Combined Training which became Part II of Field Service Regulations, and after that a staff manual which became the nucleus of Part I of Field Regulations. Both Rawlinson and Wilson became outstanding commandants of the Staff College and invigorated its teaching. Salisbury Plain, which had been acquired by Lord Wolseley, became Britain's second military station with new barracks at Tidworth. In September 1903 building on his Indian experience, Roberts held manoeuvres by four infantry divisions and supporting arms across more than 1,000 square miles. Lady Roberts had pioneered Army Nursing in India, and understandably there were reforms of the RAMC and the establishment of Queen Alexandra's Imperial Military Nursing Service, of which Lady Roberts was vice-president.

There is much more, but this would be a minimum. You can cite chapter 11 of Rodney Atwood's new biography published by Bloomsbury. [Paardeberg]

Hi - I have now added a bit on the Short Magazine Lee Enfield Rifle, the 18-pounder Gun and improved education and training for soldiers. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 12:20, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Styles of address

@Dormskirk: I don't see how the information added by myself to create a 'Styles of address' section is unsourced. I did not randomly trawl the internet to find the said information; all of the information from that section is based on previously existing information already present on the page. Sdrqaz (talk) 17:09, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi - Quite a lot of work goes into getting an article like this assessed. To achieve such an assessment everything in the article needs in-line citations. I have, on a number of occasions, seen editors downgrade assessments as a result of unsourced material being added. And I have certainly seen tables of "styles of address" subsequently marked as "unsourced section". Tables of "styles of address" also seem to be frowned upon because, as you say, they duplicate previously existing information already present on the page. I hope this helps. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 22:27, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

@Dormskirk: I'm confused. Should I re-add the styles of address section with source citation?

Sdrqaz (talk) 17:45, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi - Basically, no. When an article gets assessed this sort of thing tends to be removed as it is not prose (see WP:PROSE). It duplicates previously existing information already present on the page. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 18:36, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Second Anglo-Boer War section

This section begins with the following text:

"On 23 December 1899 Roberts returned to South Africa on the RMS Dunottar Castle to take overall command of British forces in the Second Boer War, subordinating the previous commander, General Redvers Buller. His appointment was a response to a string of defeats in the early weeks of the war and was accompanied by the despatch of huge reinforcements.[36] For his headquarters staff, he appointed military men from far and wide: Lord Kitchener (Chief of Staff) from the Sudan, Frederick Burnham (Chief of Scouts), the American scout, from the Klondike, David Henderson from the Staff College, Neville Chamberlain from Afghanistan..."

Neville Chamberlain is hyperlinked to Fld Mshl Neville Bowles Chamberlain, who retired in 1881, and would have been 79 at the time of this "call up". I have no idea who the correct Neville Chamberlain is, but evidently this must be a wrong one! Hope this helps...

86.141.249.103 (talk) 17:46, 8 March 2017 (UTC) Rædwulf (not a member)

I have de-linked Chaimberlain. Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 21:29, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Neville Chamberlain hyperlink

Re the earlier, I've just searched Wiki, and it would appear that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Francis_Fitzgerald_Chamberlain is the correct man. "He rejoined Lord Roberts in South Africa in December 1899", says part of the article on him. Apologies, I should have though of this first time round. Amusingly, Neville Francis & Neville Bowles appear to have exactly the same photo on their pages - the gods only know which one it is!

86.141.249.103 (talk) 23:29, 8 March 2017 (UTC) Rædwulf

Thanks for that. I have inserted the link to Neville Francis Fitzgerald Chamberlain in the Roberts article. I now think the photo is of Neville Francis Fitzgerald Chamberlain. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 23:54, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Frederick Sleigh Roberts, 1st Earl Roberts by John Singer Sargent.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Frederick Sleigh Roberts, 1st Earl Roberts by John Singer Sargent.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 30, 2017. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2017-09-30. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:23, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Picture of the day

Frederick Roberts, 1st Earl Roberts (1832–1914), was a British soldier who was one of the most successful commanders of the 19th century. He served in the Indian Rebellion, the Expedition to Abyssinia, and the Second Anglo-Afghan War before leading British Forces to success in the Second Boer War. He also became the last Commander-in-Chief of the Forces before the post was abolished in 1904.Painting: John Singer Sargent

WW1

What was his role in World War 1? It just says he died at the army headquarters in St. Omer. It was Roberts whom Kipling lobbied to arrange a commission for his son John Kipling and a posting to the front line, despite his having been decisively rejected for near-blindness. Valetude (talk) 00:07, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

No official role AFAIK - he was in his eighties. He was just an influential elder statesman, although without opening any book I dare say he continued to lobby for conscription, as many right-wingers did at the time (it finally came in in Jan 1916, tearing Asquith's Coalition apart in the process). There's a drawing of him visiting Kitchener in the War Office to give his advice (it's in the 1986 Trevor Royle biog of Kitchener), although whether drawn from life or an invention of some journalist I couldn't say.

His death was also used on recruitment posters: there was one in Wales with the caption (in Welsh): "He did his duty, make sure you do yours"Paulturtle (talk) 03:18, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Racist

Roberts is commonly regarded as being the introducer of the martial race theory to India, a now-discredited notion of scientific racism that still has disruptive ramifications in Indian/Pakistani military and society generally. I'm working on other stuff and had always assumed that this would figure prominently in his bio but in fact I cannot see where it is even mentioned. There are loads of sources out there (eg: Chowdhry, Prem (May 2013). "Militarized Masculinities: Shaped and Reshaped in Colonial South-East Punjab". Modern Asian Studies. 47 (3): 713–750. JSTOR 24494165.). Does anyone have the time to cover it in this article? It's a major omission, unless I have completely misread what we have written. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 08:23, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Other refs:

• Barua, Pradeep (1995). "Inventing Race: The British and India's Martial Races". The Historian. 58 (1): 107–116. JSTOR 24449614.
• Rand, Gavin; Wagner, Kim A. "Recruiting the 'martial races': identities and military service in colonial India". Patterns of Prejudice: 232–254. doi:10.1080/0031322X.2012.701495.
• Roy, Kaushik (July 2013). "Race and Recruitment in the Indian Army: 1880–1918". Modern Asian Studies. 47 (4): 1310–1347. doi:10.1017/S0026749X12000431.
• Streets, Heather (2004). Martial Races: The Military, Race and Masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857-1914. Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-0-71906-962-8.

Plenty more out there. I don't see how this can possibly be a B class article without a section on this issue. - Sitush (talk) 08:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

I removed the category "scientific racism"; the "martial race" page makes no mention of "scientific racism" and the theory seems to be based on Roberts' long experience of India, rather than on "scientific" theories. It should be included in the article but I would point out that in Roberts' Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry, the "martial race" theory is mentioned just twice and in passing.--Britannicus (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2021 (UTC)