Talk:List of British units in the American Revolutionary War

message: Before I go nuts trying to create this list, is there no corresponding list of American forces?  --Leifern 00:38, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've certainly not seen such a list on Wikipedia, so I'd imagine there isn't. I wish you all the best in your endeavour - as you can imagine, the process of compiling a list like this is so exhausting (that's encouraging! ;-)). SoLando (Talk) 11:02, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I made a start - probably needs more work, but now there's at least an article. --Leifern 15:02, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  No corresponding list for American forces? 

message: I propose deletion of this unit, because this article is for units and this unit did not participate as a unit. BradMajors (talk) 22:58, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Royal Irish Regiment of Artillery

message: The way the article is currently structured, Hanoverian units are places with other German auxilliaries and thus look as though they fall under the "Hessian" category.  Yet they were subject to the British monarch as opposed to auxilliaries as the House of Hanover was the ruling dynasty in Britain at the time and the Wikipedia article on Hessians does not include Hanoverian troops.  They may warrent their own category in this list.  Thoughts?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.95.126.178 (talk) 21:24, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Hanoverian Forces

message: Any Grenadier units serving in the ARW? Vought109 (talk) 05:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grenadier units 

message: This regiment did not exist at the time of the American War of Independence.Plucas58 (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: 110th Regiment of Foot

message: Why is this regiment mentioned in the narrative text but not included in the list of regiments? If 110th Regiment of foot(see above) is a misprint for 90th Regiment of Foot then both problems are explained.  Plucas58 (talk) 20:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: 90th Regiment of Foot

message: I removed links from 4 references to the term "British establishment", as the links all led to the article on the social phenomenon known in Britain and elsewhere as "The Establishment". As this is not the kind of establishment being referred to, I removed the links.
For those interested, there is a link in the article to "American Establishment (British army)" which in turn has a link to "Irish Establishment (British army)" that leads to the article Irish Royal Army (Kingdom of Ireland). These articles are good links from this one, and give the correct flavour of what was meant by the use of the term "establishment" in the military context. 
Wikipedia could use an article, with appropriate cross links, on the usage of this term in period army organization, as it played an important role in finance and recruiting, and occasionally had political significance.
Basically, the Establishment represented the regular army raised and funded by a particular realm under the crown, and normally located in it or used in its defence. In theory, it represented the respective "armies" of the kingdoms of England, Scotland, Ireland and later briefly the American colonies. The English and Scottish ones ended up united of course. The usage varied- Scotland was governed separately enough under the union of the crowns that one sees few references to crossover of army units. With Ireland, closely subjugated in law by England, one sees the Irish establishment used to raise extra troops paid by Irish taxation, over and above what parliament allowed for England, or to put English units on the irish establishment at cost to save English revenues. 
The usage did not cover regular troops raised by the East India Company, and was archaic by the 19th century so it was not used for the Indian Army of the Raj very much, nor for Dominion permanent troops. Nor did it address other types of troops in the 17-18c like Provincial regulars, volunteers, Fencibles or militia. Random noter (talk) 19:57, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "British establishment" 

message: The article states that the Battalion was raised and based in the Americas. This is incorrect, they were raised in Woolwich in London (UK) and deployed to the American colonies before the outbreak of the war as garrison troops. They were not raised in the Americas. I can provide the references if needed but I suggest the article is updated. Cunobeline (talk) 18:17, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  4th Battalion, Royal Regiment of Artillery