Author Topic: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION  (Read 144219 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 52,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,962
WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« on: December 20, 2009, 11:37:42 »
(I searched this topic first, but didn't find much to prevent me from posting anyway...)

This topic has been touched on in these pages in the past, but I think it's worth raising again now. In two years or so, we will celebrate the 200th Anniversary of the War of 1812, a shaping event in our evolution as a nation, and one that still arguably affects our view of ourselves and the US.  Even though we were not a country, nor even yet an autonomous dominion, and even though the British regular Army was the true "load-bearing organization" throughout the War, Canadians fought in almost every engagement in the northern theatre of the War. Our participation ranged from the marginal to the significant (with Chateaugai being perhaps our proudest moment as fighting Canadians). We fought as aboriginal warriors, as embodied militia, and as fencibles. The experience wasn't just military: Canadian civilians had their homes and villages burnt (Newark and York, for example). But, despite all this, to the best of my knowledge, as an Army we have never perpetuated an official recognition of this proud time in our history. Now, my understanding is that the Militia Act of 1856 prevented Militia units from officially tracing their  lineages (and thus any battle honours) back before the date of the Act. So, even though the Queen's York Rangers might say they are descended from Butler's or Rogers' Rangers, our regulations prevent this.

I think it's time we grew up a bit more as a country, and changed all this. As part of the events of the bicentennial of the War of 1812, we should make an official recognition of the fighting services of our ancestors. Obscure bureaucratic regulations dating from our colonial past should not be permitted to obstruct this goal. Laws are made by people: they can be amended by people, or struck down if they no longer serve a useful purpose.

I propose that we do the following:

-amend the Militia Act to allow designated representative units to officially carry devices commemorating the War of 1812;

-present the designated representative units with either: a battle honour for "The War of 1812" (to avoid the endless and impossible squabble over what company of colonial militia fought where), or a unit commendation (such as 2 PPCLI received for Medak), with the same title; and

-restrict the selection pool of potential representative units to those Reserve units located in the former theatres of operation: this would be the Erie, Niagara and Lake Ontario areas of Ontario, the Montreal-Quebec City area of PQ, and perhaps the Maritimes where appropriate. Don't attempt to "please everybody": it would clearly be representative not totally inclusive, although there need not be an arbitrary limit to the number of units designated.

Thoughts?


Cheers
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline Target Up

    ........pull, patch, and score.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 227,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,869
  • that's how we roll in redneck land
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2009, 11:51:45 »
While commendable, I don't agree with this, primarily because the 19th Alberta Dragoons actually won the war singlehandedly, and therefore no other units are eligible.
Apparently, a "USUAL SUSPECT"

“In peace there's nothing so becomes a man as modest stillness and humility; but when the blast of war blows in our ears, then imitate the action of the tiger; stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, disguise fair nature with hard-favor'd rage.”

 Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats

Offline Old Sweat

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 220,845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,869
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2009, 13:26:56 »
On the surface, it falls into the why not give it a try category? I have passed it on to a couple of friends who are respected historians of the war for comments on the pros, cons and bureaucratic hurdles. If printable, I will post their replies here.

Offline Dennis Ruhl

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 9,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 522
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #3 on: December 20, 2009, 15:20:13 »
While commendable, I don't agree with this, primarily because the 19th Alberta Dragoons actually won the war singlehandedly, and therefore no other units are eligible.

The 19th Alberta Dragoons were the 1st Division cavalry squadron for the whole of WWI.  They fought and died as in any other unit.  I'm not sure that mocking them presents yourself in a light that you would want to show the world.

Yes I would like to see them revived as part of gaining some equity in the reserves for Northern Alberta.  Northern Alberta has a population similar to the Maritime Provinces at about 1.7 million but is 1/2 brigade compared to the 2 Maritime brigades, has armouries in 2 cities instead of 23, has 1/4 the total reserve units and subunits, and 1/11th the infantry and armour.  Successive Liberal governments took a big elephant dump on Alberta reserve units and I would like to see some rectification.  Silly me.

I apologize for the off-topic but can't ignore it.
Banned for being a repeated administrative burden and not taking responsibility for his actions

Offline Target Up

    ........pull, patch, and score.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 227,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,869
  • that's how we roll in redneck land
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #4 on: December 20, 2009, 15:33:16 »
EDITED- because I really don't have the patience to defend what was clearly meant as humour.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2009, 15:38:03 by Kat Stevens »
Apparently, a "USUAL SUSPECT"

“In peace there's nothing so becomes a man as modest stillness and humility; but when the blast of war blows in our ears, then imitate the action of the tiger; stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, disguise fair nature with hard-favor'd rage.”

 Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats

Offline RangerBoy

  • Member
  • ****
  • 1,342
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 109
  • I
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #5 on: December 20, 2009, 16:09:12 »
As a reservist in a regiment that traces its lineage to just before the war and a confirmed War of 1812 nerd, I think this is a great idea. And likely do-able within the two-year timeframe before the 200th anniversary. And I`m not just saying that because of the upcoming 200th anniversary next year being celebrated by a certain senior reserve cavalry regiment ...
One suggestion: avoid involving DHH if at all possible. That would probably push the initiative back to the 300th anniversary of the war.  ::)
"Canadians are good fighters, but their politicians are weak."
Mullah Dadullah Akhund (late)

Offline Dennis Ruhl

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 9,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 522
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #6 on: December 20, 2009, 18:51:28 »
The Lincoln and Welland Regiment claims Butler's Rangers because they moved en masse to Canada and started the militia in the Niagara area which has continued more or less seamlessly until today.  Butler's Rangers fought in a least a dozen battles and are blamed for some massacres.  I would guess that most of the Loyalist regiments including remnants thereof disbanded in Canada, mainly the Maritimes after sailing from New York.

It is not unreasonable that The Lincoln and Welland Regiment perpetuate Butler's Rangers plus units called up for the War of 1812, the Rebellions of 1937, and the Fenian Raids.  It simply appears that there has never been a will to change the rules to include the older history nor does it appear likely to happen now.  The disinterest in unit history in the forces and among their political masters is legendary.  That said, work with whomever you can to try to get it done.



Banned for being a repeated administrative burden and not taking responsibility for his actions

Offline NFLD Sapper

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 285,191
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,092
  • CFSME STAFF
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #7 on: December 20, 2009, 20:05:18 »
Since we are discussing this, then the Royal Newfoundland Regiment should be granted this honor too....

A Newfoundland regiment was first founded, to serve in the British Army, in 1795. It was disbanded and refounded several times under different names, including His Majesty's Royal Newfoundland Regiment of Foot, The Royal Newfoundland Veterans Companies and, The Royal Newfoundland Companies. The regiment dates its origin to 1795, when Major Thomas Skinner of the Royal Engineers stationed in St. John's at Fort Townshend, was ordered to raise a regiment.

The regiment was significantly involved in the War of 1812. Soldiers of the regiment fought aboard ships as marines in battles of the Great Lakes, as infantry in Michigan, and in the battle to defend York (Toronto). It was largely distributed throughout the zone as attached sub-units and not as a formed battalion. It was disbanded in 1816. A monument depicting a toy soldier of the 1813 Royal Newfoundland Regiment standing over a fallen American toy soldier was unveiled in Toronto in November 2008.

CHIMO!
First in, Last out
Sappers Lead the Way

Just tell your wife she owes your life to some Muddy Old Engineer,
Some dusty, crusty, croaking, joking Muddy Old Engineer

Offline Dennis Ruhl

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 9,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 522
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #8 on: December 20, 2009, 21:56:22 »
My notes aren't on the computer I'm at but I think the Newfoundland regiment fought in 16 battles in the War of 1812.  Prior to that Newfoundland was invaded about 6 times by the French or Dutch and many battles were fought by the militia.  I say wrap it all up and tie it with a bow.
Banned for being a repeated administrative burden and not taking responsibility for his actions

Offline Michael O'Leary

  • The moral high ground cannot be dominated by fire alone, it must be occupied to be claimed as held.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 342,670
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,686
    • The Regimental Rogue
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #9 on: December 21, 2009, 09:17:02 »
I would like to see a more defined proposal, since we all know how well such things as the plans for distribution for the Canada 125 and QGJ Medals were so well received.  I would challenge anyone here to draft possible terms of reference that give clear and supportable guidance to units on establishing and proving lineage and entitlement to make direct claims for local heritage purposes - whether or not formal recognition follows.  The simple weight of long-lived oral narrative should not be taken as "proof."
« Last Edit: March 11, 2010, 09:30:12 by Mike Bobbitt »

Offline Dennis Ruhl

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 9,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 522
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #10 on: December 21, 2009, 09:43:19 »
That's not necessarily a good thing.

Is this like saying that a birthday party is not a good thing because eating cake can cause cholesterol overload in old age, breathing air can cause cancer, sleeping can cause insomnia.  There is no downside.  If a county militia was in a battle and there is an existing accepted county regiment, that's enough.  The geographic link is obvious and adequate.
Banned for being a repeated administrative burden and not taking responsibility for his actions

Offline Michael O'Leary

  • The moral high ground cannot be dominated by fire alone, it must be occupied to be claimed as held.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 342,670
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,686
    • The Regimental Rogue
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #11 on: December 21, 2009, 09:50:12 »
The geographic link is obvious and adequate.

So what you're saying is that if I move into your house, your grandfather is now my grandfather?


Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,600
  • Crewman
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #12 on: December 21, 2009, 09:52:02 »
That's not necessarily a good thing.

I would like to see a more defined proposal, since we all know how well such things as the plans for distribution for the Canada 125 and QGJ Medals were so well received.  I would challenge anyone here to draft possible terms of reference that give clear and supportable guidance to units on establishing and proving lineage and entitlement to make direct claims for local heritage purposes - whether or not formal recognition follows.  The simple weight of long-lived oral narrative should not be taken as "proof."


To me, this looks like a good definition of what he was trying to say in it being "not necessarily a good thing" . 
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 52,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,962
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2009, 16:01:11 »
Very interesting comments (especially about the 19th Dragoons...)

I anticipated the concerns expressed by Mike and by the unnamed person in DHH: reasonable for the traditional handling of specific battle honours where unit lineage can be clearly established, but much too process-oriented to get this done in time. My thought is to approach this from a totally differentangle than the glacial, bureaucratic system for battle honours that we have traditionally been used to. I think there is hope here: since Afghanistan started the Forces (and by extension the country) seem to have broken out of that longstanding stingy, narrow-minded CF mentality that we should avoid recognizing anybody for anything, ever, unless layers of irrelevant staffs pick it to bits first.  Thankfully we've passed that hurdle: now let's try this one.

Start by publicly identifying the objective: to have, by the end of the commemorative period (let's say the year 2012) representative units officially recognized as bearers of an honour commemorating the service of Canadians in combat operations in the War of 1812. Make this clear so that bureaucratic foot dragging and proceduralism don't delay things.;

Specify that the recognition device will be either a generic battle honour for the War, or a GG Unit Commendation. (We will need an equivalent recognition device to recognize the First Nations warriors, such as those who fought under Tecumseh-they need to be included in this). Whether or not we've ever previously given a "generic battle honour for a war" or not is really irrelevant and shouldn't be allowed to hold things back.

State very clearly and from the get-go that this is not a "free-for-all" to make all Army Reserve units in the former northern theatre area feel good: it is a representative recognition, meant to publicly and permanently enshrine the memory of service, not glorify any particular existing unit or CO. RCA units already carry the omnibus honour "Ubique" in their motto, so I haven't given any further thought to Gunners. (Maybe they should be included to commemorate the militia batteries?) I could see designating a representative cavalry unit to commemorate the mounted militia, if that is appropriate. Units such as Signal Squadrons, Service Battalions and (I think) Engineers would not be in the running, as no such Canadian units existed at the time. (Newfoundland might bear special consideration, as one poster points out). The representative infantry units that come to mind are:

Niagara Frontier:

The Lincoln and Welland Regt (representing the Lincoln Militia)
Any designated infantry unit in Toronto (representing the York area Militia)



St Lawrence Frontier
A designated infantry unit in 33 CBG
Les Voltigeurs de Quebec

Maritime Canada
A designated infantry unit

Exactly how we honour the First Nations effort needs some more thought, but it needs to be part of the whole thing.

Cheers
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline NFLD Sapper

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 285,191
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,092
  • CFSME STAFF
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #14 on: December 21, 2009, 16:06:42 »
Not the best source of information but....

Canadian units of the War of 1812
CHIMO!
First in, Last out
Sappers Lead the Way

Just tell your wife she owes your life to some Muddy Old Engineer,
Some dusty, crusty, croaking, joking Muddy Old Engineer

Offline Old Sweat

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 220,845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,869
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #15 on: December 21, 2009, 16:18:30 »
There already is a precedent for a "campaign" honour, for example South Africa 1899-1900 and North West Canada 1885.

Offline AJFitzpatrick

  • Distracted by shiny things
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 12,888
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 510
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #16 on: December 21, 2009, 16:28:42 »
Perhaps perpetuation rather than lineage should be invoked again.


Edit for spelling
« Last Edit: December 21, 2009, 16:31:49 by AJFitzpatrick »

Offline Michael O'Leary

  • The moral high ground cannot be dominated by fire alone, it must be occupied to be claimed as held.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 342,670
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,686
    • The Regimental Rogue
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #17 on: December 21, 2009, 16:34:51 »
It would have to be through perpetuation since we know that formal lineage does not exist.  The requirement remains that the terms of reference and eligibility would need to be developed.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 196,390
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,763
  • Freespeecher
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #18 on: December 21, 2009, 19:21:57 »
If I may;

Lets form a non profit organization or foundation to:

a  Research the claims
b. Make recommendations
c. If needed, set up awards ceremonies to recognize the deserving units (perhaps with a plaque they can bolt on the Armoury walls recognizing their contribution on behalf of the "National War of 1812 Bicentennial Foundation"

This has a few advantages I can think of:

1. We have a pool of talented and interested people within Army.ca who can do a lot of the work
2. An "Army of Davids" can work a lot faster and cover more ground than an army of bureaucrats
3. Collectively "we" can probably gather enough relevant information to sniff out BS claims ("Our unit perpetrates Barret's Privateers!"), research questionable claims and unearth lots of interesting tid bits that no one else will (especially since we can leverage both our internal Army.ca connections and "Six Degree of Separation" connections outside). Maybe professional historians could turn this into a good book.
4. By the time DND or the government gets organized it will be 2013 (especially if political events or elections disrupt the governing process)
5. If the government or DND declines to get involved or refuses to allow direct recognition of units via a medal, battle honour or other official mark of recognition, then organizing a ceremony and putting a plaque on the wall should not be too difficult.

I'm sure there are plenty of arguments pro and con, but if nothing gets started in the near future, then we will have to see if the Tricentennial committee will take up the challenge...
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,600
  • Crewman
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #19 on: December 21, 2009, 19:34:45 »
If I may;

Lets form a non profit organization or foundation to:

a  Research the claims
b. Make recommendations
c. If needed, set up awards ceremonies to recognize the deserving units (perhaps with a plaque they can bolt on the Armoury walls recognizing their contribution on behalf of the "National War of 1812 Bicentennial Foundation"

This has a few advantages I can think of:

1. We have a pool of talented and interested people within Army.ca who can do a lot of the work
2. An "Army of Davids" can work a lot faster and cover more ground than an army of bureaucrats
3. Collectively "we" can probably gather enough relevant information to sniff out BS claims ("Our unit perpetrates Barret's Privateers!"), research questionable claims and unearth lots of interesting tid bits that no one else will (especially since we can leverage both our internal Army.ca connections and "Six Degree of Separation" connections outside). Maybe professional historians could turn this into a good book.
4. By the time DND or the government gets organized it will be 2013 (especially if political events or elections disrupt the governing process)
5. If the government or DND declines to get involved or refuses to allow direct recognition of units via a medal, battle honour or other official mark of recognition, then organizing a ceremony and putting a plaque on the wall should not be too difficult.

I'm sure there are plenty of arguments pro and con, but if nothing gets started in the near future, then we will have to see if the Tricentennial committee will take up the challenge...



That looks like a rallying "Call to Arms".
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline Dennis Ruhl

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 9,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 522
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #20 on: December 22, 2009, 00:24:53 »
Very interesting comments (especially about the 19th Dragoons...)

Exactly how we honour the First Nations effort needs some more thought, but it needs to be part of the whole thing.


Award a battle honour to His Majesty's Native Troops or more specifically His Majesty's Mohawk Troops etc. and let it sit as there are no units to perpetuate it.  And no, they can't have one for Oka.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2009, 00:29:41 by Dennis Ruhl »
Banned for being a repeated administrative burden and not taking responsibility for his actions

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 52,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,962
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #21 on: December 22, 2009, 08:41:44 »
I think Thucydides has a good idea here: I'm also afraid that if left in the hands of NDHQ and the  MND office, it may be swept aside by other things. Still, support for the military is definitely at the highest point I've seen in 35 years of wearing a uniform, so striking while the iron is hot might be the best course of action. Perhaps it will pressure ("shame") the federal govt into action in time for the bicentennial.

Mike O'Leary has rightly raised the issue of eligibility: a potential squabbling point and source of hissy fits. My first cut at suggested criteria would be:


-Reserve units only: including Regular units would be too much of a stretch, even for me;

-First Nations recipient organizations to be agreed upon in consultation with Mohawk leadership (assuming they are interested...)

-the unit HQ must currently be located in one of the counties that constituted the Erie, Niagara, St Lawrence or Atlantic frontiers;

-there must be a credible and reasonable historical linkage between the existing unit and a unit which served in the Canadian theatre."Credible and reasonable" needs more work but I suggest that the existence of primary documents substantiating the case for perpetuation would be the gold standard. The unit list provided by Nfld Sapper looks very comprehensive and might be a good start point. The minimum requirement would be that the unit is the sole Reserve unit in the county in question (OntR in Durham, SD&G in those counties, etc);

-the unit's current type will not be a barrier to perpetuating a historical unit of a different type (ie: 56 Fd RCA perpetuating Merrit's Troop of Dragoons) if the historical connection above could be demonstrated; and

-the current unit leadership and senate are willing to cooperate with research efforts (there would need to be a number of concurrent local efforts across the provinces if this is to be done in time).

We might want to ask one or two leading Cdn mil historians for advice and adjudication. A well-known "champion" or "door opener" might be useful too. Dominion Institute?

How do you go about forming a non-profit foundation?

Cheers

(And Merry Christmas!)






The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,600
  • Crewman
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #22 on: December 22, 2009, 08:46:54 »
-Reserve units only: including Regular units would be too much of a stretch, even for me;

I don't see any stretch here.  Some Reg Force units have lineages back to the 1700s. 
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline Old Sweat

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 220,845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,869
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #23 on: December 22, 2009, 08:57:13 »
I don't see any stretch here.  Some Reg Force units have lineages back to the 1700s.

Please provide an example.

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,600
  • Crewman
Re: WAR OF 1812: UNIT RECOGNITION
« Reply #24 on: December 22, 2009, 09:39:34 »
The Artillery can trace back to garrisons in Quebec and Kingston.

The RCR and RCD originated in the Infantry School Corps and the Cavalry School Corps respectively. 

The RCD, whose home station was la Citadelle in Quebec, can trace back through the Cavalry School Corps to the Queen's Own Hussars, derived from the Quebec Volunteer Cavalry who perpetuated Bell's Cavalry who may have had lines back into the volunteer cavalry from the days of Montcalm.  They also drew from the Governor-General's Body Guard who perpetuated 1st and 2nd Troops of Volunteer Cavalry of the Count of York. 

Many of the RCD officers were drawn from the QOCH, as well as GGBG and the Montreal Militia Cavalry.  The first CO, LCol Turnbull, was from the QOCH and this has lead some historians to link back to Bell's Cavalry raised in 1812, perpetuating earlier Quebec volunteer units.

With a British garrison in Quebec since 1759, there is room for many of the Regiments to claim lineages back to Volunteer Cavalry, Volunteer Infantry and Volunteer Artillery units, even back into the French Regime.

DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.