Marines have camps, Army has forts?

Question

Maybe this is obvious, but I just realized that most places where Marines live and train are called "camps", and most places Soldiers live and train are called "forts".

Is this due to the fact that Marines are a smaller force geared toward quick response, kind of "get in, do your business, and get out"? A "camp" does denote transience and mobility. Set up shop, do what you have to do, pack up and move on. And the Army has "forts", a more permanent fixture, because they are large and tend to dig in for the long haul when they go somewhere?

Or do these characteristics have nothing to do with the nomenclature?

Answer 1

You are correct with your assumption regarding the historical origins of Fort, Camps, and Barracks.

The U.S Army has all three, plus a couple of more designations (such as Depots and Army Airfields). There is Ft Bragg, NC, Ft. Lewis, WA, Camp Hialeah, S. Korea / Camp Clatsop, OR and Schofield BKS, HI / Campbell BKS, Germany.

Historically, Camps or barracks is a semi-permanent facility that was not designed to be defended or fought from. Fort, short for fortification, was designed to be defended.

This is moot, historical distinction though. Schofield BKS, HI is no different then Ft. Knox, KY and Fort Hamilon, NY (actually under the Brooklyn bridge) is only a MEPS station and NY district headquarters for the Army Corp of Engineer.

Answer 2

The Army used the phrase "Camp" themselves to describe a smaller base. Fort is and has been for some time the word to describe a very large multi use location. My Dad went to Basic and AIT at Camp Callan CA. It was where the bulk of UC San Diego is just above La Jolla. He was discharged at Camp Beale which is now Beale AFB CA. The Marines don't seem to like to use any term the Army or others use to keep them unique. Just a guess though.

Answer 3

You are very close to right. Our only "occupation" force is the US Army. The army was sent out to "occupy" Indian territory, and they built forts. Soldiers manned the forts that guarded our nations harbors. So the Army has forts. The Marines were originally a force that was deployed on ships. When they came ashore, they "camped". When their business ashore was done, they re-boarded their ships and left.

Now if you really want to get into this ask why the Army has a post, and the Navy has a base.

Answer 4

Tradition. Army posts are called 'forts' because many of them started out literally as fortifications.

BTW - the Army also has 'camps.' These are facilities that are mostly used by the reserve components.

Answer 5

You're correct... You might also note that a number of Army forts are former camps (Rucker, Bragg, Riley, Leavenworth) that became "forts" following World War II.

In Naval Aviation we do it by size... Air Station (NAS), Air Field (NAF), or Outlying Field (OLF).

Answer 6

And, of course, the Air Force has bases. And the Navy has Navel Bases and Navel Air Stations. Just to complicate the subject.

Answer 7

forts are called that due to the nature of the posting. army personnel are basically ground forces. marines, being part of the navy, are mainly water-borne troops and live in camps because of the impermanent staus conditioned by naval service.

Answer 8

You answered your question in the 2nd paragraph. Also, I think this was one way of telling which was Army and
which one was Marines.

Answer 9

Don't forget the Coast Guard has "Stations"...

Answer 10

Actually it goes back to the Jackson-Foster bill of 1856.

Thats how it got its name.