Postcards

[FROGSMILE]

16 minutes ago, GWF1967 said:

Territorial Yeomanry Signallers.

An intriguing photo, I’d lay wager that the young woman affectionately embracing the two rearmost men is an Egyptian, and probably Coptic.

Edited 20 March , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[58 Div Mule]

On 19/03/2023 at 22:13, GWF1967 said:

Royal Marine Medical Unit?

The RM officer could also be from the RND Divisional Train or RM Engineers. IIRC all three units wore the Globe and Laurel badge without the strung bugle horn above.

58 DM.

[poona guard]

On 16/02/2014 at 10:17, Ron Abbott said:

For the other pipers on the forum.....

Interesting that his instrument has three drones and not two as was common in 'Irish' units back then (indeed, until the 1960s).

Maybe it's just the way that they're under his arm but it looks as though all three are different.

I wonder if this is one of the sets made by Starck which included a bass drone, tenor drone and alto/barritone drone?

The chanter looks like a normal one....and not one of the keyed 'Brian Boru' chanters.

Just looking the back pages and cam across this interesting post but can't find the photo or am I not looking properly?

[FROGSMILE]

31 minutes ago, poona guard said:

Just looking the back pages and cam across this interesting post but can't find the photo or am I not looking properly?

Unfortunately photos from before a particular date were lost when the forum carried out an update of its software.

[poona guard]

Thanks that explains why so many are missing

[FROGSMILE]

35 minutes ago, poona guard said:

Thanks that explains why so many are missing

An unfortunate side effect, many excellent images were lost [from the forum at least].

Edited 21 March , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[MBrockway]

1 hour ago, poona guard said:

Just looking the back pages and cam across this interesting post but can't find the photo or am I not looking properly?

I think Ron’s comments refer to an earlier post by Tocemma even further back - see here - and which contains this photo:

Mark

 

[FROGSMILE]

14 minutes ago, MBrockway said:

I think Ron’s comments refer to an earlier post by Tocemma even further back - see here - and which contains this photo:

Mark

 

London Irish Rifles, going by cap badge and the double bugle above the four inverted stripes on his right cuff.  I’ve not seen overseas service stripe’s superimposed in that way before.

I do recall that the photos lost were within a specific time window Mark, but I don’t know what the period was that it spanned.

NB.  The battalion’s tailor (presumably) has fitted his SD jacket with a facing coloured collar and mitred cuffs.  They appear to be in dark green.

Edited 21 March , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[MBrockway]

Apologies - the full text from these posts would have been more helpful …

Tocemma’s text from 2011:

“Piper R Taylor from Poplar. 1/18th London Irish, 1918. 

Note the dark green cuffs, dark green diamond battalion sign and TOS with dark green badge backing. Note the way the overseas service have been applied to the bandsman's inverted 4 chevrons surmounted by the bugle badge. Dark green cords with a loop worn around the neck. Dark green hose worn with full length puttees and saffron kilt. Dark green bagpipe cords.

The hose flashes were also saffron coloured. The jacket is a normal SD issue, complete with London Irish black buttons, with the front skirts roughly tacked back to simulate a highland 'cut away' look. This was very common in kilted units and it avoided permanent alteration to the jacket, which had been prohibited by a GRO earlier in the war.

Regards

Tocemma“

 

Ron’s additions from 2014:

“For the other pipers on the forum.....

Interesting that his instrument has three drones and not two as was common in 'Irish' units back then (indeed, until the 1960s). 

Maybe it's just the way that they're under his arm but it looks as though all three are different. 

I wonder if this is one of the sets made by Starck which included a bass drone, tenor drone and alto/barritone drone? 

The chanter looks like a normal one....and not one of the keyed 'Brian Boru' chanters.“

 

Mark

[FROGSMILE]

Fantastic Mark, that’s very helpful.  It’s a cracking photograph, that’s for sure. 

[MBrockway]

11 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

I do recall that the photos lost were within a specific time window Mark, but I don’t know what the period was that it spanned.

You’re quite right - a lot of my own older posts have lost their images.  Whenever I spot a gap I try and repair it, but it’s too big a job to go back and methodically re-post the image … and not always possible anyway 

Also correct in that ‘upgrades’ were the root cause 

[FROGSMILE]

5 minutes ago, MBrockway said:

You’re quite right - a lot of my own older posts have lost their images.  Whenever I spot a gap I try and repair it, but it’s too big a job to go back and methodically re-post the image … and not always possible anyway 

Also correct in that ‘upgrades’ were the root cause 

It’s a shame Mark I agree, but I take some comfort that the originals are hopefully not lost and also that fellow enthusiasts like you take the trouble to restore them where possible.  

Edited 21 March , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[6RRF]

Earlier Tocemma was quoted as saying back in 2011 "The jacket is a normal SD issue, complete with London Irish black buttons, with the front skirts roughly tacked back to simulate a highland 'cut away' look. This was very common in kilted units and it avoided permanent alteration to the jacket, which had been prohibited by a GRO earlier in the war."

Can anyone provide chapter and verse on that "permanent alteration to the jacket, which had been prohibited by a GRO" ?

[Andrew Upton]

1 hour ago, 6RRF said:

Earlier Tocemma was quoted as saying back in 2011 "The jacket is a normal SD issue, complete with London Irish black buttons, with the front skirts roughly tacked back to simulate a highland 'cut away' look. This was very common in kilted units and it avoided permanent alteration to the jacket, which had been prohibited by a GRO earlier in the war."

Can anyone provide chapter and verse on that "permanent alteration to the jacket, which had been prohibited by a GRO" ?

"Very early in the war this practice was also supposed to be stopped by direction of Army Orders 356 and 391 of 1915 (which were modifications of the Clothing Regs). It was felt that rounding the skirts was unnecessary in wartime as no sporran or purse was to be taken into the field. These orders were for the most part ignored."

For more details see:

 

[aodhdubh]

15 minutes ago, Andrew Upton said:

"Very early in the war this practice was also supposed to be stopped by direction of Army Orders 356 and 391 of 1915 (which were modifications of the Clothing Regs). It was felt that rounding the skirts was unnecessary in wartime as no sporran or purse was to be taken into the field. These orders were for the most part ignored."

For more details see:

 

I recollect the sporran was replaced by a sort of apron with a front pocket?

[MBrockway]

And from the same topic Andrew has just quoted, Pal Lancashire Fusilier adds these to Joe Sweeney's AO refs...

"these rounded jacket skirt corners were against then standing regulations ( WO letter ACD/42 RD/1134 - RACD of 30th July 1915 and ACI 398 of 6th March 1917 ) which stipulated that the rounding off of the fronts of service dress jackets was forbidden."

 

The texts for AO 356 and AO 391 are not terribly helpful as the content relevant to altering SD jackets is in the Clothing Regs these AOs amended.

Army Order AO 356 of 1915 (published Sep 1915) ...

Army Order AO 391, 1915 (published Oct 1915) ...

Mark

 

[6RRF]

Ah very helpful thanks. I was aware the practice was frowned upon, but didn't know what authority was applied.

[6RRF]

1 hour ago, aodhdubh said:

I recollect the sporran was replaced by a sort of apron with a front pocket?

There was a pocket on the front of the ochre-ish camouflage wrapping which hid the tartan. I can recall that there was ain intended purpose for this pocket, but don't recall what

[MBrockway]

Presumably any cutting back of SD jacket fronts would interfere with the First Field Dressing pocket on its reverse and hence perhaps the ban?

[6RRF]

Perhaps the pocket on the front of the apron was intended for the First Field Dresssing

[FROGSMILE]

43 minutes ago, MBrockway said:

Presumably any cutting back of SD jacket fronts would interfere with the First Field Dressing pocket on its reverse and hence perhaps the ban?

That would have been a factor I imagine Mark, but there was also an intention to simplify the wartime supply chain.  You can imagine how much complication having two different types of standard Service Dress (excluding emergency simplified), each with the full range of sizes would have created for manufacturers (again consider the need for emergency pattern early on), clothing storage depots, ordnance supply chains, and front line quarter-masters.  If it had been accepted that a sporran was no longer needed in the field**, given the purpose designed pocket in the kilt apron, then one can see why the cutaway front was seen as unnecessarily frivolous.

**i.e. an outdated concept.

Edited 22 March , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[FROGSMILE]

17 minutes ago, 6RRF said:

Perhaps the pocket on the front of the apron was intended for the First Field Dresssing

It was intended to replace whatever had traditionally been carried in the sporran given the kilt’s inherent absence of pockets.  The individual soldier’s cargo capacity was reduced still further by retrospectively cutting away yet more pocket space with cutaway fronts, not to mention the waste of cloth from fragments removed, which must have added up substantially**.

**worn out SD was officially categorised as ‘reduced to rags’ for making into blankets, I don’t know if wastage from tailored jackets was fed in too, but imagine that it might have been.

Edited 22 March , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[poona guard]

I am glad I asked about the photo - an interesting exchange of information.

[MBrockway]

6 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

That would have been a factor I imagine Mark, but there was also an intention to simplify the wartime supply chain.  You can imagine how much complication having two different types of standard Service Dress (excluding emergency simplified), each with the full range of sizes would have created for manufacturers (again consider the need for emergency pattern early on), clothing storage depots, ordnance supply chains, and front line quarter-masters. 

Fair point about simplifying the supply chain, but at this time all the Highland modifications to SD jackets were made by regimental tailors - the text by Joe Sweeney quoted by Andrew probably deserves to be posted in full as you will definitely find the dates interesting ...

"There was no Highland Cut SD Jacket at this time and would not be a regular issue pattern until until September 1929. This is when the Service Dress jacket would have a cutaway pattern was approved, “Jackets ORs, Highland and Scottish Regiments”. However, regimental tailors could modify the jackets to the Scottish consistency as long as permission was granted. Originally, even this modification was not permitted. It was not until 4 December 1902 that it became permissible to modify the jacket to a cut away to “show kilt”. Very early in the war this practice was also supposed to be stopped by direction of Army Orders 356 and 391 of 1915 (which were modifications of the Clothing Regs). It was felt that rounding the skirts was unnecessary in wartime as no sporran or purse was to be taken into the field. These orders were for the most part ignored."

Here's a link to Joe's post if you want to read it in its full context (in a topic discussing four kilted POWs)

 

Mark

[FROGSMILE]

On 22/03/2023 at 21:55, MBrockway said:

Fair point about simplifying the supply chain, but at this time all the Highland modifications to SD jackets were made by regimental tailors - the text by Joe Sweeney quoted by Andrew probably deserves to be posted in full as you will definitely find the dates interesting ...

"There was no Highland Cut SD Jacket at this time and would not be a regular issue pattern until until September 1929. This is when the Service Dress jacket would have a cutaway pattern was approved, “Jackets ORs, Highland and Scottish Regiments”. However, regimental tailors could modify the jackets to the Scottish consistency as long as permission was granted. Originally, even this modification was not permitted. It was not until 4 December 1902 that it became permissible to modify the jacket to a cut away to “show kilt”. Very early in the war this practice was also supposed to be stopped by direction of Army Orders 356 and 391 of 1915 (which were modifications of the Clothing Regs). It was felt that rounding the skirts was unnecessary in wartime as no sporran or purse was to be taken into the field. These orders were for the most part ignored."

Here's a link to Joe's post if you want to read it in its full context (in a topic discussing four kilted POWs)

 

Mark

Thanks Mark, although I realise you weren’t to know it, I am well aware of all those aspects, and this subject (Scottish cutaway jackets) has been more covered in this forum than I care to recall (some might say ad nauseam).  The Scottish battalion tailors had been modifying jackets for years, even before SD, when in the case of say KD, their unit, or bazaaar durzis, could and did readily modify standard issue garments into cutaways when the issued Scottish patterns happened for some reason to not be available.

My point was purely concerning why, in the case of SD, the authorities did not originally wish to provide a cutaway version at source (via manufacturers) in the way that had previously been sanctioned for scarlet frocks, blue patrols and other garments.  The intent being to have a standardised field dress for all, without national foibles that were arguably unnecessary, expensive, and reducing a solder’s capacity to carry things in his pockets.

Unfortunately, they undermined any chance of that argument getting any traction by not insisting that officers of the Scottish Regiments wear standard SD in the field too**, albeit ordering it via their outfitters and tailors.  Thus it was inconceivable to the regiments themselves that their officers would be dressed in Scottish style but their soldiers would not.  It therefore undermined the whole intended direction of travel.

In a sense this entire aspect of Scottish dress had been a constant thorn in the side of the British Army administration for several centuries.  For example, when erstwhile highland regiments were no longer able to recruit sufficient recruits from the highlands during the Napoleonic era, several regiments were ordered to lose their highland association, cease wearing kilts and tartan, and left only with diced headdress.

Even when decades later attempts were made to reverse that situation the regiments concerned were authorised for just trews, and it was only as a sop during Cardwell/Childers mergers in 1881 that they were permitted to return to kilts.  At the same time, distinctly reluctant Lowland Scots regiments, that had not only fought the highlanders at Falkirk and Culloden, but had centuries of lengthier service to the crown, were suddenly obliged to adopt a form of Scots dress too, in effect adopting the clothing of their old enemies.  How that must have stung!

Even though they generally wore no sporrans, the Lowland Scots were suddenly obliged to adopt cutaway jackets purely so that there was coherence with their pipers, who were placed in full kilts, sporrans and shoulder plaids for the first time (e.g. the Royal Scot’s and KOSB had long had pipers, but they had not during the Napoleonic era and for some years after, worn kilts).  In short, there was a kind of endemic tussle with a mafia like Highland culture going on in various echelons of the Army, and this battle over SD was the latest in a long line of conflicts over dress.  It had cost a lot less to dress the Lowland Regiments before all the Scots paraphernalia (itself largely invented by the author of ‘Rob Roy’) was foisted upon them.  The Royal Scots Fusiliers in particular had resisted this fiercely, not least because in terms of dress it suddenly placed them outside the centuries old and distinctively recognisable brotherhood of fusilier units and leaving them oddly dressed.

**this would have required the 1902 Scottish Pattern to be phased out in 1912, when the jacket collars were modified to be open, it was a missed opportunity.

Edited 24 March , 2023 by FROGSMILE