Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Photo Lancashire Fusilier - what is this uniform?


Aurel Sercu

Recommended Posts

I am doing some research on 2nd Bn. Lancashire Fusiliers, Boezinge, 7-9 July 1915, including the only headstone in Talana Farm Cemetery. (90 other men of the Bn. only a name on the Menin Gate Memorial).

This is a portrait of the man. Pte Charles Stoddart, fallen 7 July 1915. (The caption says Stoddard, and died August, but this must be wrong. As to the age: he probably was 37.

 

My problem is not at all essential for the article I am writing, but I am puzzled by the uniform. Can someone tell me more about it?

 

Aurel

Stoddart - Stoddard.jpg

Edited by Aurel Sercu
Adding more accurate information
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Aurel Sercu said:

I am doing some research on 2nd Bn. Lancashire Fusiliers, Boezinge, 7-9 July 1915, including the only headstone in Talana Farm Cemetery. (90 other men of the Bn. only a name on the Menin Gate Memorial).

This is a portrait of the man. Pte Charles Stoddart, fallen 7 July 1915. (The caption says Stoddard, and died August, but this must be wrong. As to the age: he probably was 37.

 

My problem is not at all essential for the article I am writing, but I am puzzled by the uniform. Can someone tell me more about it?

 

Aurel

Stoddart - Stoddard.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aurel the man shown is wearing pre-1904 artillery uniform of pill box forage cap and undress frock, which had 5-buttons instead of the 9 of full dress.  The confusion is caused by the 'universal pattern' collar grenade, which although originally worn by the artillery only was, from 1905, ordered for engineers in certain forms of dress, Grenadier Guards and all fusilier regiments, as one element of two-part shoulder titles worn on service dress.  After 1922 (and by some battalions during the war) it was also worn by fusilier regiments as a collar badge.  The last two regiments to retain it were the Lancashire Fusiliers, who wore it until 1968, and the Royal Welch Fusiliers, who wore it until 2006.

 

I imagine that your man was either, previously a short service regular and when recalled went to the infantry (he might have been combed out as many artillerymen were), or he might have been a part-time volunteer artilleryman around the period just after the 2nd Boer War.  Many casualties photos are years old and not contemporary to death.  His advanced age of 35, whilst still only a private in 1915, would seem to bear this supposition out.

Early-ROYAL-ARTILLERY-at-BRIGHTON-Novelty.jpg

ra1880.jpg

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks you so much, Frogsmile.

And apologies. I had seen your reply yesterday, but did not have the time to post my reply. Also because I wanted to add... , and first wanted to find a booklet and make scan. (See farther.)

This is more than I had expected, and makes everything clear. And indeed, the man looks younger than approx. 35 or 37 (age when he came to the war and died here).

 

May I thank you with ... a new "uniform" question ?  :-)   It is related to the article I am writing. (About spoons we (The Diggers) found on the Boezinge battlefield).

 

In a French booklet I have, Laurent Mirouze, Soldats de la Première Guerre Mondiale,, Europa Militaria N° 3, there is a photo + description (p. 22-23) of a "Fantassin Anglais, Front de l'Ouest, Octobre 1915". Actually photo frontside and photo backside. I am posting a detail, but if you want me to I can post the whole photo.)

 

As to the spoon + fork you can see, the author writes (I translate from French) : Spoon and fork "reglémentaires" (regulatory, according to the rules) here put in the puttees in order to be within reach of the soldier, a practice observed "couramment" at the time. (Current, , standard, prevailing, ... ?)

 

My question : was the way the spoon + fork were put in the puttees "réglémentaire"? I mean : "prescribed". I had always thought that in the first place it was easy, and practical for the soldier, maybe "tolerated" by the military authorities. For admit it, it does not really look ... "military".  More like ... decorative ... So I was a little surprised to read that it was "réglémentair". (But then at the end : "pratique couramment observée à l'époque".)

 

Do you know more ?

 

I must say : when with the Diggers I was always surprised when we found spoons. Even in no man's land, knowing that these were lost during a fight. And I even thought : What kind of a soldier would go into a fight having his spoon + fork with him ?! But we found quite a lot. (Unfortunately seldom with a service number... :-(  )

 

By the way, we rarely found forks. (Yes, I know, spoons are more important, for with a fork you cannot eat soup, but with a spoon you can eat potatoes ...) And so another question : the length of a standard spoon (the ones we found) appears to be 21 cm. It seems to me that a standard fork was shorter : 17 cm. But I have only 1 fork of which I think (looking at the handle) that it was the standard fork. Does anyone know the length of a standard spoon?

 

Aurel

lepel spoon puttees detail.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was glad to help Aurel,

 

The knife fork and spoon were issued to each soldier as part of his 'holdall', which was a canvas roll containing washing eating and repair kit.  The repair kit was a small pouch (pochette) containing needles, thread and a few buttons.

 

The fork and spoon were the same length and the knife a little longer.

 

Men carried their holdall within a pack as part of 'marching order', but did not generally carry that in 'fighting order' so in some units local orders, known as 'battalion standing orders', laid down local instructions to suit the conditions experienced at the time.  It is clear that many units probably laid down in these Batt SOs that the fork and spoon could be carried tucked into the tops of puttees, alternatively the instruction could have been given at company level.  I doubt that there was a precise way specified to do this, but common sense would have dictated that the cup of the spoon and the tines of the fork were pointed inwards, so as not to snag on netting or frayed hessian sandbags, etc as they moved down trench ways.

 

Very often just a spoon was carried and this could be sharpened on the reverse side (so as not to cut the mouth) in order to form a cutting implement.

 

You can read more about the holdall here: 

 

MED_1039.jpg

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Frogsmile.

Yes, no doubt : spoon and fork the same length. (Which is logical of course.)

But this photo shows why I was confused and misled.

I have several spoons. Almost all same size and model. The photo shows two of them. Of which I think : standard spoons.

 

I have only 3 forks. And the 3rd one is the same pattern (model) as the spoons, but smaller, shorter. (Identical shape where the handle becomes the cup, two 'things' sticking out a bit.) So I had thought that the standard fork was shorter (4 cm) than the standard spoon.

 

Maybe the one I have is a dessert fork. Though it looks rather M than S to me.

 

Aurel

Lepels & vorken res.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the smaller forks that you have are probably just variations carried by some soldiers, sometimes from home (to make them feel close to family perhaps) and other times 'liberated', or found in their day-to-day activities.  I imagine some were obtained in France.  Also, bear in mind that there were many different contractors and there could have been some minor differences in specification between British, Canadian and ANZAC supplied items of equipment.  Overall though, I think that larger forks, to match the spoons, were the standard War Department (WD) specification.  In almost all cases contract supplied items will be marked with a broad arrow (stamped, or embossed), although sometimes this was omitted if the 'demand' was urgent.  In well-regimented umits, especially regulars, KFS would also often be stamped with each soldiers last 3 numbers (of his regimental number) or sometimes, even name.  Each company QMS was issued with a stamp set (numerals and letters) for this purpose.

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Frogsmile. Makes sense.

As to the broad arrow, I know about it, but on other items. I have half a dozen spoons with a number, but looking at them now again, no broad arrow ... From a period with 'urgent demand' ...

Right now I am cleaning a silver spoon. No number, no name, no initials. (Yet I think if one sort of spoon deserved a way to ID, then it is a silver one ...)

 

Aurel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Aurel Sercu said:

Thanks, Frogsmile. Makes sense.

As to the broad arrow, I know about it, but on other items. I have half a dozen spoons with a number, but looking at them now again, no broad arrow ... From a period with 'urgent demand' ...

Right now I am cleaning a silver spoon. No number, no name, no initials. (Yet I think if one sort of spoon deserved a way to ID, then it is a silver one ...)

 

Aurel

 

It is often overlooked that the Army that Britain placed in the field in WW1 was the largest ever that our island nation ever deployed, before or since.  I think that the peacetime niceties and regulations did in some cases simply become overwhelmed by the sheer scale of what was being attempted in such a short space of time.  I suspect that many items of equipment were not stamped as required both at supply level and unit level.  As for the men, a spoon was a spoon and they did not much care where it came from or what metal it was made of, as long as they could use it to feed a hungry stomach.  I am positive you must find so many such spoons in your digging and I feel sure that if they could talk many would have quite a tale to tell.

_74268552_q_001580_iwm_highres.jpg

9d1f576723eade0ae8c9b68bc944c806.jpg

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...