Talk:List of oldest military units and formations in continuous operation

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history: National CL‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

CL

This article has been rated as CL-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force

Untitled

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The oldest units with reasonable claims appear to date to the 1530s. Earlier dates may be "traditional" and should be mentioned with proper caveats. Some of these units seem to have notable traditions of having been derived from older formations, and in some cases even from assorted "medieval men-at-arms", but this is not the same as asserting continuous operation of an identifiable military unit. Also "continuous operation" is far from established for most of these units. The only units that can reasonably be said to predate 1530 are all guard units with primarily (or exclusively) ceremonial function, i.e. Yeomen of the Guard, Swedish Life Guards and Papal Swiss Guard.

This is no coincidence. Military units in the modern sense develop in the 16th century. Medieval armies were organised in very different ways, and it is meaningless to claim that a modern military unit somehow is to be identified with medieval levies. It may be different with navies, but a navy is not a "military unit", and the mere fact that, say, the kings of Denmark always owned ships since the Viking Age doesn't reasonably translate to the claim that "the Danish Navy was founded in the Viking Age". --dab (𒁳) 14:56, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Order of Malta

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Deleted from the list. The "Corpo Speciale Volontario Ausiliario dell'Esercito Italiano dell'Associazione dei Cavalieri Italiani del Sovrano Militare Ordine di Malta" (Italian Army Special Volunteer Auxiliary Corps of the Association of the Italian Knights of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta" is a thiny part-time auxiliary medical unit (not three "divisions" or "brigades" as stated here!!!) organized since 1877 by the ACISMOM (the association that groups the italian knights of Malta), not by the Sovereign Order of Malta itself. As such, it doesn't qualify, as it is not an active service military unit, it had been in "continuous operation" since 1877 only, and do not represent a sovereign state in itself, being is simply an auxiliary unit of the Italian Army. (See at [1]). No direspect of any sort intended to the *glorious* Order of Malta. Quite the contrary: their history is so splendid and ancient that they simply have no need to add any dubious claim to it. --Arturolorioli (talk) 12:57, 4 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Unsourced, unencyclopaedic and factually wrong

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The oldest still existing military units with a proven year of formation date from the 16th century, all units said to have been created before then are only unsubstantiated claims, with no proof at all for it, but even few, if any, of the units created during the 16th and 17th centuries have been in continuous operation since formed, but have been disbanded and then raised again under the same name at a later date, in several cases multiple times, making this list pure fiction, not facts, and utterly unencyclopaedic. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 11:36, 9 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

While I do not agree in considering this voice "unencyclopedic" (as it has a recognizable encyclopedic historical interest), I *fully* and strongly agree with @Thomas.W: about the overwhelmingly factual inaccuracy and generalized unsubstantiated claims in this voice. To give just a few examples, the spanish "Inmemorial del Rey" regiment could trace a more or less continuous history from not earlier than 1634 (with a long break during the Guerra de Independencia), the french 1st Inf. Rgt could either be dated 1479-1794 *or* 1794-today (with two breaks 1815-1820 and 1942-1944), the pope's Swiss Guards were disbanded at least four times during their history (1572-1548, 1799-1801, 1808-1814 and 1848-1849), the Italian "Granatieri di Sardegna" was not active in 1798-1813 and 1944-1948, etc etc. With all due respect for the authors, in its present form the voice in fully unreliable and a prime candidate for a quick deletion. All the best --Arturolorioli (talk) 17:07, 3 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Chronoligical limitation of this list?

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Due to the large amount of possible inclusions, the list should probably be chronoligically limited to units and formations before the French Revolution (1789), when still existing, large standing units and formations were levied in greater quantities. Another candidate, if this list grows too large, would be units and formations established before the Peace of Westphalia (1648). Chicbyaccident (talk) 12:36, 7 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

clean up and removal of unreferenced material

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have removed all unreferenced material from the list. The list prior to clean up can be found here. Skjoldbro (talk) 08:31, 17 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

moroccan army

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

For that one who claimed that royal morrocan army dates back to 1088. How could it that be true while the royal armed forces celebrated its 65th anniversary ( not 933rd) this year https://www.mapnews.ma/en/activites-royales/65th-anniversary-far-hm-king-sends-order-day-royal-armed-forces ? 197.2.218.101 (talk) 22:26, 29 August 2021 (UTC) @SquirrelCrown: the list is about militaries that are in continious work while we know that the army of bukhari was totaly dissoluted during the french protectorate. I am asking for a source to lay the claim that the army was in continious work since 1088 102.157.33.18 (talk) 10:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply