Lieutenant, Leutnant or Leftenant?

[Rhandolph]

I am trying to sort out the title of this rank in some writing I'm
doing. I am lead to believe in the German army a 2nd lieutanant was
called a 'Leutnant' and a 1st Lieutenant just Lieutenant.

At the same time the term 'Leftenant' is sometimes used (albeit
mainly in war films and mainly refering to Americans).
In the British army a 2nd Lieutenant used to be called an 'Ensign'
was this title dropped by WWII?

Thanks for any help you can give in dispelling my confusion!

[Hal Hanig]

Post by Rhandolph
I am trying to sort out the title of this rank in some writing I'm
doing. I am lead to believe in the German army a 2nd lieutanant was
called a 'Leutnant' and a 1st Lieutenant just Lieutenant.
At the same time the term 'Leftenant' is sometimes used (albeit
mainly in war films and mainly refering to Americans).

The last time I looked, the Germans pronounced the rank Lieutenant something
that sounds like "Loitnant" to my untutored ear, while the Brits call the same
word "Leftenant". We call it something that sounds like "Lootenant" while, it
being a French word, the French pronounce it correctly. It's all the same
word....merely pronounced differently.

Incidentally, the same rank to Italians is called "Tenente", pronounced
"Tenentay". As you can probably imagine, the rank to Italians was taken from
the second part of the French word. However anybody calls it, it's still the
bottom of the commissioned barrel.



Does that help?

--

[Mike Corrigall]

Whilst on a trip round HMS Victory somes years ago, it was explained to me
that the word lieutenant is derived from the French words (as you say)
"lieu" meaning "place" and "tenant" meaning "taking". Thus if the captain is
killed the lieutenant takes his place.

Mike

Post by Hal Hanig
The last time I looked, the Germans pronounced the rank Lieutenant something
that sounds like "Loitnant" to my untutored ear, while the Brits call the same
word "Leftenant". We call it something that sounds like "Lootenant" while, it
being a French word, the French pronounce it correctly. It's all the same
word....merely pronounced differently.

[Bill Shatzer]

Post by Rhandolph
I am trying to sort out the title of this rank in some writing I'm
doing. I am lead to believe in the German army a 2nd lieutanant was
called a 'Leutnant' and a 1st Lieutenant just Lieutenant.

The German officer ranks were Leutnant and Oberleutnant - corresponding
the the US ranks of 2nd Lieutenant and 1st Lieutenant respectively.

Post by Rhandolph
At the same time the term 'Leftenant' is sometimes used (albeit
mainly in war films and mainly refering to Americans).

The British rank is "lieutenant" and is spelled the same as
the American rank. "Leftenant" (or "leften't") is merely
the British pronunciation of the word.

Post by Rhandolph
In the British army a 2nd Lieutenant used to be called an 'Ensign'
was this title dropped by WWII?

The infantry rank of "ensign" (as well as its cavalry equivelent,
"cornet") was discontinued in 1871 and replaced by 2nd Lieutenant
for both branches.

Cheers and all,


--

[Kurt Watzka]

Post by Rhandolph
I am trying to sort out the title of this rank in some writing I'm
doing. I am lead to believe in the German army a 2nd lieutanant was
called a 'Leutnant' and a 1st Lieutenant just Lieutenant.

2nd lieutenant -> Leutnant
1st lieutenant -> Oberleutnant

Kurt Watzka


--

[n***@hotmail.com]

Post by Rhandolph
I am trying to sort out the title of this rank in some writing I'm
doing. I am lead to believe in the German army a 2nd lieutanant was
called a 'Leutnant' and a 1st Lieutenant just Lieutenant.

No. 2nd Lt = Leutnant, 1st lt = Oberleutnant.

Post by Rhandolph
At the same time the term 'Leftenant' is sometimes used (albeit
mainly in war films and mainly refering to Americans).

I haven't seen those films. Leftenant was, IIRC,
a Victorian-era change, within the British army.
(It may be that both Germans and British dropped
the old French spelling from the same cultural
motives, at much the same time. The Americans have
been happy all along with loo-tenant.)

Post by Rhandolph
In the British army a 2nd Lieutenant used to be called an 'Ensign'
was this title dropped by WWII?

Not sure, but I think so.

Post by Rhandolph
Thanks for any help you can give in dispelling my confusion!

HTH.

Ed Frank
--

[Michael Emrys]

In the British army a 2nd Lieutenant used to be called an 'Ensign' was this
title dropped by WWII?

The infantry rank of "ensign" (as well as its cavalry equivelent, "cornet")
was discontinued in 1871 and replaced by 2nd Lieutenant for both branches.

I would like to inquire how the term 'subaltern' fits into this scheme. I
had always supposed that it was fully the equivalent to 2nd. lieutenant in
the US Army. Was it just an informal designation then?

Michael

[Cub Driver]

Post by Michael Emrys
was fully the equivalent to 2nd. lieutenant in
the US Army. Was it just an informal designation then?

Strictly speaking, a subaltern is any officer lower in rank than a
captain, so would refer equally to 1st or 2nd lieutenant. Whether it
was used in that sense as late as WWII, I don't know. (It was in use
in the first world war.) And yes, it was informal.

Like so many army words, it evidently came to us from the French:

\Sub*al"tern\, a. [F. subalterne, LL. subalternus, fr. L. sub under +
alter the one, the other of two. See Alter.] 1. Ranked or ranged
below; subordinate; inferior; specifically (Mil.), ranking as a junior
officer; being below the rank of captain; as, a subaltern officer.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: ***@mailblocks.com (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

Post by Rhandolph
'Leftenant' is sometimes used (albeit
mainly in war films and mainly refering to Americans).

This is the pronunciation of "lieutenant" in the British army, in the
1940s and today. Americans find it laughable--as the British do when
they hear Americans say "loo-tenant", which inevitably brings up the
concept of a tenant of the loo (toilet).

"Ensign" went out in 1871, to be replaced by Second Lieutenant, in the
British army.

The major difference in the officer ranks, between the British and
American armies in WWII, was the lowest order of general officer,
known as Brigadier to the British but Brigadier General to the
Americans. The British also had a super-general called Field Marshal,
which the Americans did not adopt until the end of the war (and then
called it General of the Army, so as not to make risible Marshal
Marshall.)

Can't help you with the German army.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: ***@mailblocks.com (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com

[Connal Townsend]

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.

[Rich]

Post by Connal Townsend
I believe the change from "brigadier-general" was made in the early 1920s.
Heaven only knows why. The new rank of Brigadier became a sort of
super-Colonel with a Crown and three "Pips", and a special cap badge.

Brigadier General was a rank in British service beginning in 1678.
The rank "Brigadier General" was abolished after World War I and
replaced with the title "Colonel-Commandant" which was, in turn,
abolished in 1928 and replaced with the current Brigadier.

Regards,

Rich
--

[Louis Capdeboscq]

Post by Cub Driver
The major difference in the officer ranks, between the British and
American armies in WWII, was the lowest order of general officer,
known as Brigadier to the British but Brigadier General to the
Americans.

So there's an anecdote of that scruffy French soldier evading
Vichy-controlled Syria and reaching Alexandria, where the British asked
him his rank. He answered "brigadier" and was very pleasantly surprised
with the accomodations provided for him. Of course, when the British
learned that a "brigadier" was simply the word for "corporal" in certain
parts of the French army (cavalry, engineers, train, gendarmerie, and a
few others) he was promptly kicked back to a camp...


LC

[Neil Gerace]

Post by Cub Driver
The British also had a super-general called Field Marshal,
which the Americans did not adopt until the end of the war (and then
called it General of the Army, so as not to make risible Marshal
Marshall.)

I thought Pershing was the first five-star, but anyway.

[Bill Shatzer]

Post by Neil Gerace

Post by Cub Driver
The British also had a super-general called Field Marshal,
which the Americans did not adopt until the end of the war (and then
called it General of the Army, so as not to make risible Marshal
Marshall.)

I thought Pershing was the first five-star, but anyway.

Pershing was appointed to the newly-created rank of "General of
the Armies" in 1919 and was authorized to design his own insignia
of rank. He never did so however, and continued to wear the four-star
General's insignia throughout his life until his death in 1948.

When the five-star rank of "General of the Army" was created in
1944, it was provided that "General of the Army" should
rank -below- Pershing's rank of "General of the Armies".

So Pershing was never a "five-star general" though what the
insignia of rank might have been for "General of the Armies"
was never specified.

Cheers and all,

[Cub Driver]

Post by Bill Shatzer
When the five-star rank of "General of the Army" was created in
1944, it was provided that "General of the Army" should
rank -below- Pershing's rank of "General of the Armies".

Interesting. Thank you. (I reckon we can assume therefore that
Pershiping was a six-star general!) I am glad to know that the fear of
"Marshal Marshall" was not the only, and perhaps not at all, the
reason for dubbing the five-star rank General of the Army (Admiral of
the Fleet).

Did the U.S. Marines get authorization for five-star rank? And if so,
what would it be called if conferred?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: ***@mailblocks.com (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com

[Justin Broderick]

Post by Cub Driver
Interesting. Thank you. (I reckon we can assume therefore that
Pershiping was a six-star general!) I am glad to know that the fear of
"Marshal Marshall" was not the only, and perhaps not at all, the
reason for dubbing the five-star rank General of the Army (Admiral of
the Fleet).

"Fleet Admiral" in the USN. Thomas Buell's bio of Ernest J. King tells of
some of the wrangling back and forth over the new ranks and their titles.
King was worried that if Gen Pershing died the vacant General of the Armies
rank would go to Marshall, which he didn't want, so he pushed for the new
ranks. King liked the titles "Arch Admiral" and "Arch General." IIRC Frank
Knox didn't like those, thought they sounded clerical. Marshall liked
"Chief General" and "Chief Admiral." Also proposed were "Colonel General"
and "Captain Admiral." Finally it was decided to modify Pershing's rank
title and the Biritsh rank of Admiral of the Fleet.

Earlier in the war a proposal was floated by Forrestal to send King as CinC
US Fleet to the Pacific to command in person, and revive George Dewey's old
rank of Admiral of the Navy to sweeten the deal. King saw this as an
attempt to diminsh his influence in Washington -- which it was -- and killed
the idea.

Another note on titles in WW2: Sometime around the Democratic National
Convention in 1944, Adm Leahy approached King and said that the President
would prefer that King and the Atlantic and Pacific fleet commanders abandon
their "commander in chief" titles so the President would be the only person
with that title. King asked if that were an order, and Leahy said no, but
the President would prefer it. King felt that this was an election year
tactic by FDR to emphasize his leadership in the war. King said he would do
it when the President issued the order, and that was the last that was heard
of it.

Nearly 60 years later, the term Commander in Chief was in fact abolished
from the US armed forces by the Secretary of Defense, leaving the President
the only CinC.

Post by Cub Driver
Did the U.S. Marines get authorization for five-star rank? And if so,
what would it be called if conferred?

I don't believe it was ever contemplated. Five stars went to members of the
Joint Chiefs or theater commanders only, which left the Marines out. Also,
the Marines were much more a subsidiary of the navy than they are today, and
the Commandant was under Cominch-CNO. Even though Arnold was technically
under Marshall, he was a member of the JCS as the American counterpart to
Chief of Air Staff Portal. At any rate, the USMC was a much smaller service,
and Vandegrift was the only four star Marine during the war, while the army
and navy had about a dozen each.

--Justin
--

[Bill Shatzer]

Post by Cub Driver
Did the U.S. Marines get authorization for five-star rank? And if so,
what would it be called if conferred?

A five-star rank was never authorized for the Marines - only the
Army rank of General of the Army and the equivalent Navy rank of
Admiral of the Fleet. Following the creation of the Air Force as
an independent branch, the rank of General of the Air Force was
created to accomodate "Hap" Arnold whose previously bestowed rank
of General of the Army was no longer appropriate.


Cheers and all,
--

[Merlin Dorfman]

Cub Driver (***@mailblocks.com) wrote:


...
: Interesting. Thank you. (I reckon we can assume therefore that
: Pershiping was a six-star general!) I am glad to know that the fear of
: "Marshal Marshall" was not the only, and perhaps not at all, the
: reason for dubbing the five-star rank General of the Army (Admiral of
: the Fleet).

In the US, the Navy five-star rank (Nimitz, King, Leahy, and
later Halsey) was "Fleet Admiral." "Admiral of the Fleet" was the
British rank. No Marshals in the RN!

: Did the U.S. Marines get authorization for five-star rank? And if so,
: what would it be called if conferred?

The authorization was for four each for the Army and Navy. If
the Marines were to have gotten one, it would have had to come from
the Navy allotment, and you know what the chances of that were!
I believe "Howlin' Mad" Smith was the first four-star general
in the Marine Corps and therefore might have gotten the fifth star
if anyone in the Corps did. But if that happened, he would have
outranked the commander of the fleet that included his amphibious
force (Spruance or possibly Halsey), so it was extremely unlikely.

[a425couple]

Post by Bill Shatzer
When the five-star rank of "General of the Army" was
created in 1944,

Interesting. Thank you. --------reason for dubbing the
five-star rank General of the Army (Admiral of the Fleet).
Did the U.S. Marines get authorization for five-star rank? And if so,
what would it be called if conferred?

I did not totally research this, but my sources and logic
would say, no.
The Marine Corps mission is to seize and defend advanced
naval bases. The Marines always operated under the
overall command of the Navy (sometimes temp. under
Army) and there was no opportunity for any Marine
to exercise independent command of any operation
larger than that of a corps.
Fairly important (and at times frustrating) distinction there.
The Naval Commander has the top authority. So when
they decide that their ships are in too much danger, they
can leave (as they did around Guadalcanal).
The US Navy did not wish the risks of having ships
somewhat fixed in positions near islands being seized.
So they expected the USMC to complete operations
quickly, and this lead to the USMC having high
causality rates.

The Commandant is a General (4 stars).


--

[Y. Macales]

Post by Neil Gerace

Post by Cub Driver
The British also had a super-general called Field Marshal,
which the Americans did not adopt until the end of the war (and then
called it General of the Army, so as not to make risible Marshal
Marshall.)

I thought Pershing was the first five-star, but anyway.

Regarding the rank of "Field Marshal" two points:
(1) The British Royal Air Force has ranks of "Air Vice-Marshal",
"Air Marshal" and "Air Chief Marshal" instead of the
American Air Force's "Generals", so we see that the
"field" has moved up to the "air".

(2) After General Douglas MacArthur completed his term as
Army Chief of Staff in the 1930's, he retired from the
Army. He was then offered the job as Commander-in-Chief
of the fledgling army of the Philippines who were on
their way to receiving independence from the United States.
He was given the title "Field Marshal", possibly the only
American ever to hold that title. It was rather ironic
but with such an imposing title, he actually had only a
few thousand men under his command. When Japan attacked
the US in December 1941, he was recalled to active duty
in the US Army, but he wisely didn't insist on maintaining
his "Field Marshal" designation. I doubt people like
Patton would have liked that!

[Bill Shatzer]

On 4 Jun 2004, Y. Macales wrote:

-snips-

Post by Y. Macales
When Japan attacked
the US in December 1941, he [MacArthur] was recalled
to active duty in the US Army,

MacArthur was recalled to active duty as a Lt. Gen. and appointed
as Commander, United States Army Forces, Far East in July,
1941.

Some months before Pearl Harbor.


Cheers and all,

[KP]

Y. Macales wrote in message ...

Post by Y. Macales

Post by Neil Gerace

Post by Cub Driver
The British also had a super-general called Field Marshal,
which the Americans did not adopt until the end of the war (and then
called it General of the Army, so as not to make risible Marshal
Marshall.)

I thought Pershing was the first five-star, but anyway.

(1) The British Royal Air Force has ranks of "Air Vice-Marshal",
"Air Marshal" and "Air Chief Marshal" instead of the
American Air Force's "Generals", so we see that the
"field" has moved up to the "air".

RAF air marshal titles are more analogus to RN admiral rank titles than Army
general officer titles.

Post by Y. Macales
(2) After General Douglas MacArthur completed his term as
Army Chief of Staff in the 1930's, he retired from the
Army. He was then offered the job as Commander-in-Chief
of the fledgling army of the Philippines who were on
their way to receiving independence from the United States.
He was given the title "Field Marshal", possibly the only
American ever to hold that title. It was rather ironic
but with such an imposing title, he actually had only a
few thousand men under his command. When Japan attacked
the US in December 1941, he was recalled to active duty
in the US Army, but he wisely didn't insist on maintaining
his "Field Marshal" designation. I doubt people like
Patton would have liked that!

Dougout Doug's "rank" of Field Marshal was in the Philippine Army. At the
time he received it the PA was not in Federal Service and thus not strictly
part of the US Army. So that rank wasn't really one he could have carried
over into the US Army.

When recalled to command US Army Forces in the Far East on 26 Jul 41 his
official rank was Major General (2-star). This was upgraded to Lieutenant
General (3-star) the next day. He didn't get his 4th star until 18 Dec 41.

There are some who believe the only reason he was recalled at all was FDR
following the adage to "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer."
Whether he could have "insisted" on anything in 1941 is open to question.

[Y. Macales]

Post by KP
Dougout Doug's "rank" of Field Marshal was in the Philippine Army. At the
time he received it the PA was not in Federal Service and thus not strictly
part of the US Army. So that rank wasn't really one he could have carried
over into the US Army.
When recalled to command US Army Forces in the Far East on 26 Jul 41 his
official rank was Major General (2-star). This was upgraded to Lieutenant
General (3-star) the next day. He didn't get his 4th star until 18 Dec 41.
There are some who believe the only reason he was recalled at all was FDR
following the adage to "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer."
Whether he could have "insisted" on anything in 1941 is open to question.

First, I want to thank everyone for the correction about MacArthur
being recalled to active service BEFORE December 7, 1941. I am
aware that he couldn't have transferred the "Field Marshal"
designation over to the US Army so I was making
a little joke. This was because everyone was aware
of what an immense ego he had, so it actually wouldn't
have been very surprising if he had tried to maintain
the Field Marshal rank, if possible.

Is it correct that when he retired from the US Army after
his term as Chief of Staff he was a Lieutenant General?
If so, how could they have reactivated him as a Major
General, albeit for only one day?
--

[Bill Shatzer]

Post by Y. Macales
Is it correct that when he retired from the US Army after
his term as Chief of Staff he was a Lieutenant General?
If so, how could they have reactivated him as a Major
General, albeit for only one day?

When he left his post as Chief of Staff, he reverted to his
permanent rank of Major General - his rank as General was
a temporary rank which went with the position.

When he was recalled to active duty in July, 1941, he was
recalled at his permanent rank (which was how such things
were done) but immediately thereafter promoted to Lieutenant
General.

Cheers and all,

[DaveW50789]

Pershing was a General of the Armies (plural), the second man after George
Washington to hold that title. I have read that this is a six-star rank, but
never saw any verification. I don't think that George Washington wore six
stars.

Dave
Seattle
www.Historylink.org

[Y. Macales]

Post by DaveW50789
Pershing was a General of the Armies (plural), the second man after George
Washington to hold that title. I have read that this is a six-star rank, but
never saw any verification. I don't think that George Washington wore six
stars.

I recall years ago hearing that whenever a new rank of General
with more stars than Washington held was created, Congress
would pass legislation retroactively, posthumously
promoting Washington to this new higher rank, so that
no one would ever hold a higher rank than him.
--

[Justin Wigg]

Post by Cub Driver
This is the pronunciation of "lieutenant" in the British army, in the
1940s and today.

Was the rank pronounced "leftenant" in the non-British commonwealth
forces during WWII? eg., did Australians and Canadians pronounce it
as "leftenant"? What about other WWII-era armies - Polish, Czech,
Rumanian etc...

If you consider the origin of the word "lieutenant", the American
pronunciation is presumably correct over the British.

The word is French for literally a "place holder". You have a
temporary "tenant" in "lieu" of the original person - in this case the
Captain of an armed force. So a Lieutenant is a person who takes on
the role of a Captain if the Captain is mortally wounded or does not
take the field of battle.

Considering that people who speak English do not pronounce the word
"lieu" as "lef" in the other contexts in which it is used, I do no see
why a Lieutenant would be a "Leftenant".
--
SQL> select * from users | Justin Wigg - Perth, AUSTRALIA
where clue > 0; | http://www.dws.com.au
no rows selected | Reply: ***@dws.com.au
--

[Andrew Clark]

Post by Justin Wigg
Was the rank pronounced "leftenant" in the
non-British commonwealth forces during WWII?

Yes. "Lef-tenant" was the standard British English
pronunciation and it was followed by all those with
linguistic links to Britain. The US Army's own guides to
Britain mention the distinction in these terms.

For what it's worth, there is no such thing as a
trans-language "correct" pronunciation of lieutenant.

[Cub Driver]

Post by Andrew Clark
For what it's worth, there is no such thing as a
trans-language "correct" pronunciation of lieutenant.

The poster was making the point that "lew-tenant" was closer to the
French pronunciation than "left-tenant".

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: ***@mailblocks.com (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
--

[Louis Capdeboscq]

Post by Cub Driver
The poster was making the point that "lew-tenant" was closer to the
French pronunciation than "left-tenant".

The French pronunciation is like "lee-uh (as in fur/hurt/burn)-tenant".

I don't see how any of the American loo-tenant, the British lef-tenant
or the German loi-tenant can be determined to be closer to it. For what
it's worth, current French prononciation is unlikely to be the same as
that of the medieval French who coined that term.



LC

[Bill Shatzer]

Post by Louis Capdeboscq
I don't see how any of the American loo-tenant, the British lef-tenant
or the German loi-tenant can be determined to be closer to it.

The German pronunciation is, roughly, "loit-naut" which corresponds
to the German spelling, 'Leutnant'.

The German rank is -not- "lieutenant" though "leutnant" derives from
the French word.


Cheers and all,

[Cub Driver]

Post by Justin Wigg
Was the rank pronounced "leftenant" in the non-British commonwealth
forces during WWII? eg., did Australians and Canadians pronounce it
as "leftenant"?

Yes, as pertains to Australians and New Zealanders.

Very likely it was universa through the Commonwealthl, though it's
worth noting that South Africa did not have a *Royal* air force, and
the South African Air Force used American-style officer grades rather
than RAF. E.g., 2nd Lieutenant, not Pilot Officer.

Similarly, the Indian Air Force was not "royal' though it did, I
believe, use RAF-style officer grades.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: ***@mailblocks.com (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com

[Merlin Dorfman]

Cub Driver (***@mailblocks.com) wrote:


...
: The major difference in the officer ranks, between the British and
: American armies in WWII, was the lowest order of general officer,
: known as Brigadier to the British but Brigadier General to the
: Americans.

If I understand the system correctly, Brigadier is not a
general/flag officer in the British army; the lowest such rank
is Major General.
This fact leads to a hiccup in the insignia array. The O-1
through O-6 insignia are:
1 "pip"
2 "pips"
3 "pips"
1 crown
1 crown and 1 "pip"
1 crown and 2 "pips"
Then Major General is one crossed-sword thingy and one
pip, Lt. General is one crossed-sword thingy and one crown,
and full General is with a pip and a crown. So the logical thing
would be for a Brigadier to have the thingy with nothing ; but
since that is not a General Officer rank it can't be done, so
the Brigadier gets a crown with three pips.
This was all from memory, but a quick check of
<http://www.britishairborne.org/insigniarank.html> seems to
verify it.

[Cub Driver]

Post by Merlin Dorfman
The O-1
1 "pip"
2 "pips"
3 "pips"

etc

Thanks for the illumination. The three-step progression is also used
in Japanese service, though the terms are traditionally translated by
their American equivalents. The same I believe is true of Chinese and
Vietnamese, no doubt because the same (Chinese) term is the basis for
officer grades in all three languages. In any event, I find that using
the Vietnamese "daiwee" for captain is understood by natives of the
three countries.

Thus there were, in Japanese service: three grades of lower ranks,
three grades of sergeant, three grades of what Americans would call
company-level officer, three grades of field-grade officer, and three
grades of general officer, with the word structure of each grade
constructed in the same manner. Very comforting. None of this
confusion about brigadier / brigadier general / super colonel.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: ***@mailblocks.com (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com

[Ed Frank]

Post by Rhandolph
I am trying to sort out the title of this rank in some writing I'm
doing. I am lead to believe in the German army a 2nd lieutanant was
called a 'Leutnant' and a 1st Lieutenant just Lieutenant.

No. 2nd Lt = Leutnant, 1st Lt = Oberleutnant.

Post by Rhandolph
At the same time the term 'Leftenant' is sometimes used (albeit
mainly in war films and mainly refering to Americans).

I haven't seen those movies. "Leftenant" IIRC is a
Victorian-era pronunciation of the Brits. (The Germans
and British may have devised their spellings and pronun-
ciations from similar cultural motives in the same
period, to distance the rank from the original French
word. Americans have been happy all along with "loo-tenant.")

Post by Rhandolph
In the British army a 2nd Lieutenant used to be called an 'Ensign'
was this title dropped by WWII?

I believe that the ensign rank was replaced by
2nd Lt, again in the Victorian era.

HTH.

Ed Frank