I was curious, why are generally all military Salutes even in different countries the same or at elast very similar. With the hand at the brow or temple and then salute?? Does this come from some kind of long ago tradition??
And along the vein of tradition, why is it that when sailors perish at sea, they are always described as souls, as in: “when the Titanic sank 120 souls on board perished” whatever the number was, its just for illustration purposes.
Thanks
There are stories that saluting began with approaching warriors raising their dominant hand to show it was empty of a weapon, and evolved during the period of knights on horseback to the practice of raising one’s face shield as a sign of recognition and respect. A more authoritative history is here.
“Souls” is used in aviation as well as maritime travel to indicate total number of people onboard. Normally quantities are broken into crew and “pax”, or passengers. My WAG is that count is mostly needed in case the craft crashes and all perish, hence the semi-morbid term of “souls”. But I could not find a cite.
Oops, bad link, Try this one here.
I really was going to preview, I really was.
As I was passing again through Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs, and Steel just the other day, I noticed that he pointed out that when a group of people reaches the gray line somewhere between tribes and chiefdoms two interesting things happen.
First, tribal members are almost always expected to show some sort of deference to the Big Guy or Gal. This can be a salute, or prostration, or averting the eyes.
Second, the Big Guy or Gal almost always adopts a ceremonial form of dress which is easily recognizable at a distance. Perhaps it’s to extend the groveling-range.
(I cite generally the chapter “From Egalitarianism to Kleptocracy.”)
So when I think of armies, which often operate as the business-end of a political entity’s power, and I see the same sort of behavior going on, I cannot help but think that both saluting and overdressed leaders are somehow hard-wired into our psyches. However, it’s just a passing thought–I’m sure I’ve proven at this point that I’m no expert.
I’d like to point out that higher ranking officers in the US military (as well as those of most other nations) wear the same uniforms as lower-ranking officers, just with different rank insignia. All other decorations on the uniform are indications of their field of specialization (like pilot’s wings or a submariner’s pin) or indications of qualifications or awards (like an expert rifleman’s award or a purple heart ribbon) and are not indications of higher rank. The only US military service with a significant difference in dress between officers and enlisted men is the Navy, but otherwise Sofa King’s theory doesn’t hold water.
"First, tribal members are almost always expected to show some sort of deference to the Big Guy or Gal. This can be a salute, or prostration, or averting the eyes. "
Most militaries I know of both the higher and lower rank salute each other, the lesser rank just generally goes first.
Honestly I’m going to have to read this book someday but every time I see a reference to Guns, Germs, and Steel(which seems to be in every other thread) the less impressed I am.
Just read the book. The reason that references always seem a bit off is that people cite it for propositions that it has nothing to do with. Both Diamond’s assertion about saluting and dress and the specific example of the U.S. Army can be true without contradiction. Generalisations about human culture and development are often true on the macro level while untrue in any one specific example. Actually, I don’t even think that what we’re talking about here is a good example of what Diamond is talking about.
As CarnalK pointed out, the salute is normally mutual, if among two uniformed personnel, and the relative rank determines who has to initiate. It’s a sign of respect of the other warrior’s merit and of recognition of the command hierarchy, rather than of subservience; at parleys or surrenders, officers who believe their opponents are scum will often refuse to return a salute, as a way of putting down the adversary.
2. Now, does someone know how come we got both the palm-forward (British Army style) and palm-down (British Navy/Almost every other armed force) forms of salute?
The rhetorical device at work here is synecdoche, the same jewel that gives us “all hands on deck,” “two hundred thousand head of cattle,” and “trod the boards.” Frankly, this particular one (souls for persons) has always been a little strange to me, in the sense that if you are talking about “souls,” it should be fair to presume that you believe in the “soul,” which according to every religion I’ve ever heard of, is immortal.
So how can any number of souls perish?
The theory doesn’t work, as (in American militaries, at least) non-officers don’t salute each other. And even I, a career officer, admits that a private should have more respect for a command sergeant major than he should for a lieutenant.
Also, anyone who thinks that a general is saluting a lieutenant is at least slightly delusional. The general is simply acknowledging the salute and allowing the lieutenant to drop his after the general does.
The souls do not perish, the people do. The craft goes down with 73 souls on Board.
I agree with you that that is how it should be used, but I know for a fact that I’ve heard “73 souls perished when the craft went down.” I should have made more clear that it is the incorrect usage that torques me off. 
In fact, I just did a Google search for that phrase, and found this link right near the top (scroll down to 1912, April 14).
Just to nitpick, the usual phrase is not “x souls perished,” but rather “x souls were lost.” I think you could argue that a soul could be lost (from the ponit of view of the living).
True, leave it to the media to screw up a good term. As I googled I saw many examples like you say.
Then as I think, I know from experience the term DOES translate to “Total People on Board”, and if 7 crew and 31 passengers die, then 38 people die, and that could be described using the avaition and maritime term for “people” as “38 souls perish”. Using soul=person, not soul=ethereal spirit thingy. Whatever sell papers.