shippingsteel Posted 28 January , 2012 Share Posted 28 January , 2012 I was wondering if anyone could assist in dating this photo from the patterns of equipment shown, or alternatively from the style of uniform worn (that man could be wearing a kilt).? Any assistance provided or insights offered would be appreciated, as always. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Shippingsteel, As I think I owe you one! I knew I had to get you the answer, and I know you will like it - and no kilt. On page 131 of Stephen Bull's relatively new book " Trench " a history of trench warfare on the Western Front, he shows this photograph with the caption :- " A scene in an Australian front line trench at Croix du Bac, near Armentieres, 18 May, 1916. The soldier is adjusting a wind vane, which would serve as a direction indicator in th event of a gas attack. Note the 1907 type bayonet and helve for the entrenching tool worn at the soldier's left hip. A spare bayonet - often used against regulations - as a hook for equipment, is pushed into the parapet. A plank forms an alcove for munitions at bottom left of picture ". Regards, LF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Shippingsteel, Here is the complete photograph showing the wind vane. LF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 29 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Thats very interesting LF and thanks for your determined efforts to track down the photo for me - I reckon we are all square now.! Thanks again. However you can't always believe all you read. I wait with bated breath for the dreaded "caption hunters" to descend on this and mercilessly tear it all to shreds.! I would dream that we could put an exact date towards a photo such as this, but my experience tells me that books can be notorious for ill-informed comment. My first question from a non-specialist perspective would be "Why does that man in the 'Australian front line trench, near Armentieres' look to be wearing a kilt".? PS. I have now located the photo (thanks for the tip-off) and it appears the caption has been cited directly from the IWM collection HERE. I still wonder if it is correct.? Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Thats very interesting LF and thanks for your determined efforts to track down the photo for me - I reckon we are all square now.! Thanks again. However you can't always believe all you read. I wait with bated breath for the dreaded "caption hunters" to descend on this and mercilessly tear it all to shreds.! I would dream that we could put an exact date towards a photo such as this, but my experience tells me that books can be notorious for ill-informed comment. My first question from a non-specialist perspective would be "Why does that man in the 'Australian front line trench, near Armentieres' look to be wearing a kilt".? Cheers, S>S Oh for another couple of inches to the bottom of the photograph, perhaps it is just a soldier keeping his legs warm with a blanket. Hopefully, some kind member may have the lower half of the photograph, and at least we shall know if it is indeed a kilt. There are many members who when given a date and a location, can track down who was in that location on that day, hopefully some member will tell us which Regiment, or which Australian Regiment was in those trenches ? Anyway, I hope it turns out to be an Australian. LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 My first question from a non-specialist perspective would be "Why does that man in the 'Australian front line trench, near Armentieres' look to be wearing a kilt".? It's not a kilt, from that angle all you'd see would be the very distinct pleats at the rear, and they're not showing. Even a kilt cover has a few pleats at the rear, and it's not that either. Would suggest they're just baggy trousers, or more likely breeches of some sort that are just puckered up somewhat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 29 January , 2012 Share Posted 29 January , 2012 (edited) Interesting to see Hooked Quillon P1907 bayonets (2!) in 1916. just goes to show... Chris PS pretty sure he is an Australian from the style of jacket - big lower front pockets and looser sleeves etc Edited 29 January , 2012 by 4thGordons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 29 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Thanks Andrew and I'm sure that your probably correct - I know nothing of kilts, my Scottish blood has been Aussie now for far too long to be too concerned with kilts.! Getting back to the caption I think I'll take the first shot. If that photo was taken in a 'frontline trench' then surely the amateur meteorologist is a dead man due to a sniper.? Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 29 January , 2012 Author Share Posted 29 January , 2012 Been scouring through the IWM photos taken by photographer Lt. Ernest Brooks during that period, and there is quite a series of images recorded as being taken at that time. All in that particular series mention the Australian troops (2nd Division) located near Armentieres, and also mention a 'support trench', so we may now be closer to the truth. If the uniform and equipment match for an Australian soldier at that time, then perhaps that also explains the presence of the hooked quillon bayonets still obviously in use. The arms factory at Lithgow continued producing the hooked bayonets right up to 1915, and the Australians showed a marked reluctance to accept any imposed modifications. This is noticeable in the application of the clearance hole to the P1907 bayonets which was hardly ever done by the Aussies. The hookie shown also appears to have been blued. Bluing of the bayonet blades was also something which was routinely done by the Australians, and is something which you would not expect to see on a British service bayonet. So it looks like the question may have been answered with date of 18th May 1916, which is far more precise than I ever could have hoped. Thanks to all for your helpful comments. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts