Quartermaster? In a band?
Andrew & Kristen Lenz
idea. Anyone know what duties this person would have, if they play, and
where they would rank in a band (i.e. above/below "sergeant," etc.)?
Thanks,
Andrew
--
Andrew & Kristen Lenz
al...@alumni.cse.ucsc.edu
Santa Cruz, California U.S.A.
Michael Martin
nutshell, the Quartermaster is responsible for the safekeeping and
accounting of equipment of the band. In addition, the Quartermaster can
make available to the members a list of the minimum items and potential
sources for those items needed to be in uniform. The Quartermaster is an
officer of our band and attends all band officer meetings. He/she promptly
reports to the other officers issues and/or problems associated with the
accounting, inventory or purchase of band equipment.
Andrew & Kristen Lenz <al...@alumni.cse.ucsc.edu> wrote in message
news:3988A485...@alumni.cse.ucsc.edu...
Ian Ferguson
always have our "Pipe Corporal" take on the duties of "Band Storeman". Pipe
Cpl. is a member who is up and coming in the ranks and being groomed for
Pipe Major one day but has good musical ability. The Pipe Major & Pipe Sgt.
are normally too busy with the Musical side of the band. i.e. Training
,setting up band.
Andrew & Kristen Lenz wrote:
> Someone asked me what a "quartermaster" is in a band. I said I had no
> idea. Anyone know what duties this person would have, if they play, and
> where they would rank in a band (i.e. above/below "sergeant," etc.)?
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
> --
> Andrew & Kristen Lenz
> al...@alumni.cse.ucsc.edu
> Santa Cruz, California U.S.A.
--
-----------------------------------------------------
Click here for Free Video!!
http://www.gohip.com/freevideo/
oshpiper
Andrew & Kristen Lenz <al...@alumni.cse.ucsc.edu> wrote:
>... Anyone know what duties this person would have, if they play,
and
> where they would rank in a band (i.e. above/below "sergeant," etc.)?
The Quartermaster accounts for the bands equipment.
Most of the time it's someone who has the room at home to store all the
extra band equipment when not in use. Little or no rank is assigned.
Pat
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Stewart Nimmo
disabilities in his hips. He looks after all of the band owned equipment,
arranges orders of new supplies as necessary -- through a pipe sergeant in
the band who owns a Scottish/piping supply store and who can no longer
parade/march due to disabilities in his knees.
So the Q/M had his rank through his drumming, and we don't demote, although
we have been known to eject....
Slàinte
Stewart Nimmo,
Maitland, ON, Canada.
My website: Canadian Bagpipe Links
URL is http://web.ripnet.com/~nimmos/
/
O///
<|o>
/_\
| \
Tim Sullivan
"Ian Ferguson" <fer...@bconnex.net> wrote in message
news:39895BCD...@bconnex.net...
> Quartermaster refers to a Military supply NCO, In my Military Pipe Band,
we
> always have our "Pipe Corporal" take on the duties of "Band Storeman".
Pipe
> Cpl. is a member who is up and coming in the ranks and being groomed for
> Pipe Major one day but has good musical ability. The Pipe Major & Pipe
Sgt.
> are normally too busy with the Musical side of the band. i.e. Training
> ,setting up band.
>
True, but this illustrates a question that I have wrestled with for a
long time. In the MILITARY forces, a Quartermaster is essiancially a supply
sergeant or officer. In NAVAL parlance a Quartermaster is the fellow that
drives the ship - although this can include navagational duties.
Anybody have a clue as to how two such differing roles ended up with the
same title???
Zudupiper
>long time. In the MILITARY forces, a Quartermaster is essiancially a supply
>sergeant or officer. In NAVAL parlance a Quartermaster is the fellow that
>drives the ship - although this can include navagational duties.
> Anybody have a clue as to how two such differing roles ended up with the
>same title???
Maybe the naval usage comes from "quarterdeck" or some such....I'm curious
myself.
You could try asking Stumpers-L.
Zu
John Brock
a
> >long time. In the MILITARY forces, a Quartermaster is essiancially a
supply
> >sergeant or officer. In NAVAL parlance a Quartermaster is the fellow
that
> >drives the ship - although this can include navagational duties.
> > Anybody have a clue as to how two such differing roles ended up
with the
> >same title???
>
In the maritime services (Navy, Coast Guard), the Quartermaster has
navigating and message responsibilities. He usually works on the bridge
of the ship. The Storekeeper is the supply officer that takes care of
pay, travel, shipping, requisition, warehousing, etc. The Yeoman (we
called 'em Yo-boys) take care of
personnel and record keeping.
John "Popeye was a Coastie" Brock
Andrew & Kristen Lenz
Ian Ferguson wrote:
> Quartermaster refers to a Military supply NCO, In my Military Pipe Band, we
> always have our "Pipe Corporal" take on the duties of "Band Storeman". Pipe
> Cpl. is a member who is up and coming in the ranks and being groomed for
> Pipe Major one day but has good musical ability.
What's the difference (if any) between a "Lance Corporal" and a "Pipe Corporal"?
Andrew
--
Andrew & Kristen Lenz
al...@alumni.cse.ucsc.edu
Santa Cruz, California U.S.A.
William Tyler
personally owned. Impeccable records are kept. Our band has it's own
storage area so it is not kept in the QMs' home.
Our QM is being considered for some type of rank, but is treated as an NCO.
Bill Tyler
Pipe Corporal
Calgary Police Service Pipe Band
"Andrew & Kristen Lenz" <al...@alumni.cse.ucsc.edu> wrote in message
news:3988A485...@alumni.cse.ucsc.edu...
> Someone asked me what a "quartermaster" is in a band. I said I had no
> idea. Anyone know what duties this person would have, if they play, and
> where they would rank in a band (i.e. above/below "sergeant," etc.)?
>
> Thanks,
ccc31807
A bit of silliness, which is historically correct. If there is
any demand for it, I'll do the same for naval ranks, and
enlisted ranks.
A (true) story:
Long, long ago, in the days of knights and castles, there were
lords and serfs. The lords lorded, and the serfs serfed, or did
whatever serfs did. The lord had a problem with security,
though. He couldn't defend his castle by himself, and the serfs
were to busy serfing to help him. So he did what lords, ancient
and modern, tend to do - he delegated the duty to a band of
servants and a headman. The headman was known as the headman,
hauptmann in German, Capitain (sp?) in French, and Captain in
English, which all means the same thing - headman. Taken from
the Latin for head, and from which we derive our English
word "capital." The servants were always known as servants.
Change the "v" to a "j" or a soft "g" and you get the picture of
what the servants were.
As time went on, the captain accompanied the lord more and more,
and it became necessary to appoint a place holder to hold his
place while we was gone. The place holder was known as
placeholder, or in French, lieutenant.
As the feudal system developed, the bands, who often fought
together in battle, were kept together more and more often.
Since the bands marched in columns, and since the senior captain
lead the column, he began to be known as the column captain,
which in time was corrupted to colonel captain, and then
shortened to colonel.
Since the colonel, too, had to spend time with his lord, he
needed a place holder, so he appointed a lieutenant-colonel.
Still later, when the columns themselves began to be kept
together, so you had several columns composed of several bands
each, they needed a general captain. As I understand it, in the
Spanish army, the officer still retains the title of Capitan-
General. This was eventually shortened to general.
And the same thing happened to his place holder, so we had the
lieutenant general.
The "major" ("mayor") was merely an administrative rank, and for
convenience was designated the mayor of the unit he
administered, i.e., mayor captain, mayor colonel, and mayor
general. We still have the major general, but the other ranks
were folded into the staff positions as they developed, and the
title "major" was given to the lowest field grade officer.
The rank of sergeant major never existed before modern times.
It's just a made up rank composed of older military terminology.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
JOHN MITCHELL
> any demand for it, I'll do the same for naval ranks, and
> enlisted ranks.
There is no ranks in a civilian musical operation!
1st: bands compete and perform in a circle which eliminates
any kind of ranking system.
2nd: mistakes are all equal, regardless of who made them!
Scott Russell
garbage is getting old. Time to move on to thinking of ourselves as
musicians instead of getting caught up in all this military GI Joe crap.
Cheers, Scott
oshpiper
"JOHN MITCHELL" <sunn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> There is no ranks in a civilian musical operation!
> ...
> 2nd: mistakes are all equal, regardless of who made them!
In your mind.
JOHN MITCHELL
> "JOHN MITCHELL" <sunn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > There is no ranks in a civilian musical operation!
> > ...
> > 2nd: mistakes are all equal, regardless of who made them!
>
> In your mind.
>
> Pat
No in the mind of a judge!
Ken MacKenzie
My favourite band rank is "Groupie". There was a thread here a while
back about "Band Trollops" and some tenor drummers took offence. I
never did understand their problem.<G>
Ken
Matt Buckley
Ken MacKenzie <akm...@dccnet.com> wrote
> My favourite band rank is "Groupie". There was a thread here a while
> back about "Band Trollops" and some tenor drummers took offence. I
> never did understand their problem.<G>
Perhaps they were preoccupied with practicing their note.
Zudupiper
Or their flourishing.
Zu
Zudupiper
>any demand for it, I'll do the same for naval ranks, and
>enlisted ranks.
>
I found it very interesting! Curious as to why the quartermaster in the army
does such different things from the quartermaster in the navy.
I'd be interested in the story of the naval and other ranks if it isn't too
much trouble...
Zu
ccc31807
Not nearly as interesting as military ranks, at least to me.
The first and only rank for a long, long time was Captain. The
Captain was God. There were other personnel on board the ship,
mates, masters, etc., but the Captain was it. And in European
navies, the only rank there was was Captain.
The next rank to evolve was lieutenant, for much the same reason
that this rank developed in the military forces, with one big
difference - a lieutenant COULD NOT command a naval vessal. The
only officer that could command a navel vessal was a Captain.
Makes sense, doesn't it?
But that created a problem with the smaller vessals, like
sloops, corvettes, and the like. Those ships were too small for
any self respecting Captain to command, yet by tradition, they
could not be commanded by a lieutenant. How was the problem
solved? By putting a lieutenant in command. They just didn't
call him a lieutenant; they called in a "lieutenant in command."
Which was later shortened to lieutenant commander. Thus,
lieutenant commander is not a sub-commander, like lieutenant
colonel is to colonel in the army, but is a super-lieutenant.
Commodore was developed for the fleet commanders, merely to
designate the senior captain. It's virtually identical to the
word "commander" and has exactly the same meaning.
I don't know how admiral developed, except that it is an Arab
word translitereated into English. It means "commander of" in
Arab. As far as I know, it is not related in any way to the
Latin for admirable; that story is a myth. I'm sure, though,
that this rank was created as the equivelent to general in the
military forces.
The ranks of ensign and commander are more or less modern
creations so that the naval ranks and the military ranks would
have the same number or steps. And of course, in the American
navy, the rank of commodore does not exist.
Rear admiral was an actual functional title, as the junior
admiral was usually given command of the trailing flotilla,
which was in the rear, and he was called the rear admiral, as
opposed to the lead or middle admiral. Vice admiral is merely a
lower rank, like vice-president, or vice-roy.
oshpiper
"JOHN MITCHELL" <sunn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Oh. You mean a mistake by one player is equal to that of another player
performing the exact same mistake. But, just how equal would that
exactness have to be?
Gerald Griffith
>NAVAL RANKS
>>But that created a problem with the smaller vessals, like
>sloops, corvettes, and the like. Those ships were too small for
>any self respecting Captain to command, yet by tradition, they
>could not be commanded by a lieutenant. How was the problem
>solved? By putting a lieutenant in command. They just didn't
>call him a lieutenant; they called in a "lieutenant in command."
>Which was later shortened to lieutenant commander. Thus,
>lieutenant commander is not a sub-commander, like lieutenant
>colonel is to colonel in the army, but is a super-lieutenant.
Actually, I sem to recall that the rank of Commander came first.
the rank of Lieutenant-Commander was created some time around
the turn of the last century by the Royal navy as an automatic
promotion for Lieutenants with more than 8 years service in that
rank.
Zudupiper
>
Thanks, Ccc!
Zu
justi...@my-deja.com
> >Which was later shortened to lieutenant commander. Thus,
> >lieutenant commander is not a sub-commander, like lieutenant
> >colonel is to colonel in the army, but is a super-lieutenant.
>
> Actually, I sem to recall that the rank of Commander came first.
> the rank of Lieutenant-Commander was created some time around
> the turn of the last century by the Royal navy as an automatic
> promotion for Lieutenants with more than 8 years service in that
> rank.
>
>
Correct about Commander. It was originally Master and Commander, for
officers commanding vessels too small for a full captain (sloops,
mostly). Until the 1820s, this was their only job, they could not
serve under captains as seconds-in-command.
Lieutenant Commander is a unique case of the Royal Navy following a US
Navy innovation. In an effort to expand the naval officer corps during
the Civil War, the US Navy added some ranks so there was a naval
officer rank corresponding to every Army rank. Lieutenant-commander
was one of these. The Royal Navy adopted the title in 1914, though
previously lieutenants became equal to majors after eight years of
service.
See http://www.history.navy.mil/trivia/trivia04.htm or
http://users.sisna.com/justinb/line.html
--Justin Broderick