Postcards

[FROGSMILE]

7 hours ago, Muerrisch said:

 So how is "middle class" 1914 defined?

I agree that there are invariably nuances, but to answer what seems to be a specific question pointed at me, I would say defined by hailing from a family not employed in jobs characterised by manual labour.

That is not my wisdom, but how I have seen it expressed by academics and others who study the matter in a way that I do not.  Often characterised by so-called white collar workers, but also blue collared men who had been elevated to become shop floor managers.

Of course all of them fell within a certain income level, which is key, and were generally further sub-divided into upper and lower stratas.

It is these that I was referring to in my post about the Kitchener men and specifically their stark contrast with the traditional prewar regular.

NB.  Wrist watches are quite a good litmus test for that time as they were generally more expensive than a pocket watch and, more importantly, often a hindrance (likely to get damaged) for men reliant upon working with their hands.  Again, it is that aspect which I was referring to, as most I think will have understood.

Edited 29 February by FROGSMILE

[Muerrisch]

49 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

but to answer what seems to be a specific question pointed at me,

I was hoping for a wider engagement, it is an interesting subject.

Returning to the subject of RWF being offered conversion to Welsh Guards, indeed Robert Graves mentions it in his chapter 11, but does not tell the anecdote about the approval of the Prince of Wales. Regimental Records Vol III 1914-1918 does not deign to mention WG in the index!

Perhaps Sassoon?

Yesterday I spoke to a Trustee of the Regimental Museum / Archive ..................... they knew both parts of the tale but knew not any reference!

[FROGSMILE]

15 minutes ago, Muerrisch said:

I was hoping for a wider engagement, it is an interesting subject.

Returning to the subject of RWF being offered conversion to Welsh Guards, indeed Robert Graves mentions it in his chapter 11, but does not tell the anecdote about the approval of the Prince of Wales. Regimental Records Vol III 1914-1918 does not deign to mention WG in the index!

Perhaps Sassoon?

Yesterday I spoke to a Trustee of the Regimental Museum / Archive ..................... they knew both parts of the tale but knew not any reference!

Thank you for the feedback about WG, I am relieved to learn (have it confirmed) where I’d first read about it.  I’d not heard about the comment of the Prince of Wales before so that’s new to me.  I wonder if it’s apocryphal, or a true reflection of his sentiments at the time.

Edited 29 February by FROGSMILE

[gunnerwalker]

6 hours ago, Muerrisch said:

I am not at all sure that what we understand as "middle class" and "working class" in 2024 has much bearing, if any, on 1914. Not that I understand "class" anyway.

"The past is a different country"

And, from what I have seen in my career [almost continuously attached to the army and RAF] , and read and studied regarding the Great War, nothing is more different than the army itself. As an example, in 1913 it was almost impossible for a subaltern to survive on his pay

What I can add, without controversy, is that the army immediately post Boer War was becoming hugely different from Victorian times. In the early 1900s what used to be called "the virtuous working class" young men, and those with a skilled, continiously in paid work parent, often received rapid recognition by promotion in good regiments. Corporal in a couple of years, sergeant in five.. Such young men were the colour sergeants and sergeants of 1913 and were commissioned very soon after 4th August 1914. They played a significant part in weathering the storms of 1914/15 to fight another day. 

So how is "middle class" 1914 defined?

 

Broadly speaking, at the time you could view the working class as those engaged in laborious professions, be they agricultural, manufacturing, mining etc. They would dress in workwear most of the time, reserving a clean and smart set of clothing for church on Sundays. Any children they had, regardless of whether they were fortunate enough to have a basic education, were likely to begin working life in the same levels of profession and fit into the same level of social status. Not a blanket rule, but common for the 95%.

Middles classes were a strange and broad group, as you can view both moderately sized land and property owners as middle class (shopkeepers, artisans etc.) but also the people who work for them (clerks, typists etc.) as they were likely required to dress in a suit for work and possessed some literacy or numeracy qualification that set them apart. If you were to divide the group further you'd probably categorize the latter as lower-middle class. They probably weren't much more well-off than the machinists in the local factory, but they were required to maintain a clean appearance for the sake of their profession and environment and that set them apart.

This all changes over time of course. It was a much simpler distinction pre-Industrial Revolution, and likewise today it's more complicated than 100 years ago when you now take into account aspects such as intellectual and technological wealth and access.

In the case of the photo I posted of George Cousins; his father was a house painter and his two older brothers were horticulturalists, one working in a garden nursery and the other as a domestic gardener for Teignmouth council. All three professions probably straddle the line between working and lower-middle class but, in my opinion, probably land in lower-middle class as each requires some sort of ability to interact with a customer base who are wealthy enough to have some decent disposable income. 

EDIT -- I believe my great-great-grandfather worked as a chauffeur before the war, which would be a good example of lower-middle class - a skill to set you apart and a requirement to appear presentable in order market yourself to a higher social status (politely spoken, clean car, well-dressed). Not a lot of disposable wealth, but an attitude of 'respectability' in how you behaved which would be imparted onto the children and result in a gradual increase in social security through the generations.

 

4 hours ago, CorporalPunishment said:

Apparently "Middle Class" is defined by sitting in a photographic studio wearing a watch.         Pete.

It's actually not wrong to see a wristwatch as a sign of someone having some money and social standing. A quick read online suggests that by the early 1900s they'd only been widely available for about 50-60 years, and were a luxury item predominantly marketed to women while men preferred the pocket watch. A wristwatch would be much more at risk of getting scuffed, cracked or smashed while at work. It's mostly due to military needs that the wristwatch became more popular among the officer classes in the 1890s due to the need to check the time quickly for coordinating movements and attacks and recording the timeline of events. Mappin & Webb were one company who marketed a 'campaign wristwatch' during the Sudan campaign, which saw considerable success, so they ramped up production during the Boer War as they found it was of huge use to cavalry units especially. The company which would become Rolex started as an affordable wristwatch manufacturer in the 1900s. The First World War sealed the deal for the popularity of the wristwatch: pilots needed a better way to check the time; officers again required coordinating things like creeping barrages; luminous dials made of radon and toughened glass faces were developed to make them suitable for the rigours of trench warfare.

 

EDIT -- Only after posting did I realise that there had been responses on the next page and that some of this had been highlighted already.

Edited 29 February by gunnerwalker

[GWF1967]

"Try Cleo's Eggs" -  Royal Marine Artillery Concert Party - Egypt.  

 

[GWF1967]

10 hours ago, tankengine888 said:

Ah, interesting, thanks for that.

He was born 'William Naunton Evans' on August 9th, 1889 in... Ystradyfodwg

Oddly, there's an entry for a 2Lt William Naunton Evans of the MGC- same man I suppose?. The subaltern was wounded whilst with the 70th Battalion, MGC in 1918.

He became a solicitor after the war, married, had 3 children, Died January 4th, 1965 in Caerleon, Monmouthshire.

Zidane.

Many thanks for your help Zidane.

[FROGSMILE]

17 hours ago, GWF1967 said:

"Try Cleo's Eggs" -  Royal Marine Artillery Concert Party - Egypt.  

 

Again this would be a really interesting one for @Kate Wills (not come across a Royal Marines concert party before) does anyone know where she is, I’ve not seen her here for a while now? 

[GWF1967]

49 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

Again this would be a really interesting one for @Kate Wills (not come across a Royal Marines concert party before) does anyone know where she is, I’ve not seen her here for a while now? 

Her last visit was over a year ago.  

Edited 1 March by GWF1967

[FROGSMILE]

21 minutes ago, GWF1967 said:

Her last visit was over a year ago.  

Yes I noticed that before during a similar shout out regarding a concert party photo a few weeks back, but she didn’t respond as she usually does and so I wondered if any forum member knew what her situation is. 

Edited 1 March by FROGSMILE

[GWF1967]

"The Stag Boys"  26th May 1917. Stafford.

Seated, centre.  -  Driver William Taylor. M2/201581.  Mechanical Transport, Army Service Corps.

Edited 1 March by GWF1967

[GWF1967]

Spr. William Barlow. 264269.  Royal Engineers.

[GWF1967]

"Signals Ratings at Mudros. 1917"

HMS Europa - HMS Abercrombie - HMS M No. 20  Cap Tallies. 

[Muerrisch]

On 29/02/2024 at 14:05, FROGSMILE said:

I agree that there are invariably nuances, but to answer what seems to be a specific question pointed at me, I would say defined by hailing from a family not employed in jobs characterised by manual labour.

That is not my wisdom, but how I have seen it expressed by academics and others who study the matter in a way that I do not.  Often characterised by so-called white collar workers, but also blue collared men who had been elevated to become shop floor managers.

Of course all of them fell within a certain income level, which is key, and were generally further sub-divided into upper and lower stratas.

It is these that I was referring to in my post about the Kitchener men and specifically their stark contrast with the traditional prewar regular.

NB.  Wrist watches are quite a good litmus test for that time as they were generally more expensive than a pocket watch and, more importantly, often a hindrance (likely to get damaged) for men reliant upon working with their hands.  Again, it is that aspect which I was referring to, as most I think will have understood.

WRIST WATCHES IN THE GREAT WAR

There appear to be a substantial number of watches displayed in period portraits and groups. This forum has discussed affordability on occasion, with the reasonable suggestion that they marked soldiers who enlisted post-Declaration and who were better off than run-of-the-mill pre-war enlistments. This turns out to be rather questionable.

Cheap watches can be found on the Expeditionary Forces Canteen price list of 1916, available on this Forum. Whereas a tin of marmalade or 50 cigarettes cost  about1 Fr Franc*, a luminous wristlet was only 15. War-time mass production no doubt, but a wrist watch.

A substantial ratio of watch-wearers in a group may well not indicate a white-collar Pals battalion, it may suggest an aversion to marmalade and tobacco.

*The monetary units are not stated.  Fr Franc is a reasonable assumption. 

[FROGSMILE]

6 hours ago, Muerrisch said:

WRIST WATCHES IN THE GREAT WAR

There appear to be a substantial number of watches displayed in period portraits and groups. This forum has discussed affordability on occasion, with the reasonable suggestion that they marked soldiers who enlisted post-Declaration and who were better off than run-of-the-mill pre-war enlistments. This turns out to be rather questionable.

Cheap watches can be found on the Expeditionary Forces Canteen price list of 1916, available on this Forum. Whereas a tin of marmalade or 50 cigarettes cost  about1 Fr Franc*, a luminous wristlet was only 15. War-time mass production no doubt, but a wrist watch.

A substantial ratio of watch-wearers in a group may well not indicate a white-collar Pals battalion, it may suggest an aversion to marmalade and tobacco.

*The monetary units are not stated.  Fr Franc is a reasonable assumption. 

I read your post on trivia with interest and am aware that WW1 drove a large and sustained increase in the number of wrist watches purchased over the course of the war.  https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/309278-muerrischs-occasional-trivia/#comment-3279186

The other and more important point that I made clear was that for soldiers used to labouring with their hands such watches were a hindrance and likely to get damaged.  There is a gulf of difference between the practicality of a junior officer and platoon sergeant wearing a wrist watch, and rank and file who were routinely required to improve trenches using digging implements and their hands, and attend to myriad other chores, fatigues and constant work parties in a likewise manner.  A working-class soldier would instinctively have understood that.

I made the point in the thread concerned after learning from the original poster of the image that the individual depicted was in the succeeding year or so commissioned into the MGC and post war became a lawyer.  His appearance in the quality portrait photograph struck me as typical of a middle class man, with all those factors of dress and appearance combined that one wouldn’t see in a prewar regular private.  In short he was typical of the middle-class make up, or as a minimum leavening, within a great many of the Kitchener battalions.

Based on the foregoing factors, and my observation of a great many WW1 era photos, where far fewer wrist watches than pocket watches are apparent, I stand entirely by the observation that I made though I agree that as the war advanced the cost of wristwatches became more reasonable due to greater demand being met by greater supply . 

Edited 3 March by FROGSMILE

[johnmelling1979]

A recent colorized picture I came across in my research

John (Sagar) Reynard

Born on 4 Dec 1899, Chorley

No Idea who he served with

No further details

 

John

[Muerrisch]

51 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

observation of a great many WW1 era photos, where far fewer wrist watches than pocket watches are apparent, 

Really? Surprising.

Perhaps someone should start a thread; counting the factual soldier to wrist-watch ratio over a large sample should be easy, if boring.

[FROGSMILE]

1 minute ago, Muerrisch said:

Really? Surprising.

Perhaps someone should start a thread; counting the factual soldier to wrist-watch ratio over a large sample should be easy, if boring.

Perhaps you should volunteer.

[Muerrisch]

2 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

Perhaps you should volunteer.

Too busy writing my next article for the MHS Bulletin.

[GreyC]

4 hours ago, Muerrisch said:

observation of a great many WW1 era photos, where far fewer wrist watches than pocket watches are apparent

Same is true for German army. However, there was a device like an armband with holding device, that allowed soldiers to wear small pocket watches as wrist watches.

GreyC

[FROGSMILE]

5 hours ago, Muerrisch said:

Really? Surprising.

Perhaps someone should start a thread; counting the factual soldier to wrist-watch ratio over a large sample should be easy, if boring.

As so often a subject discussed many times before:

1.https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/267228-other-ranks-watches-at-the-front/

2.https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/281258-other-ranks-wrist-watches/#comment-2884223

3.https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/153347-postcards/page/309/#comment-2879995

Hence my lack of enthusiasm for yet another.

Edited 3 March by FROGSMILE

[FROGSMILE]

22 minutes ago, GreyC said:

Same is true for German army. However, there was a device like an armband with holding device, that allowed soldiers to wear small pocket watches as wrist watches.

GreyC

Yes I think they became popular on both sides GreyC, there was some discussion about a good example worn by a New Zealand soldier on 8th December that included some illustrations: https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/153347-postcards/page/456/#comment-3255109

 

[GreyC]

Thanks, exactly what I meant.

GreyC

Edited 3 March by GreyC

[Muerrisch]

In real money, could a soldier easily afford a wrist watch? Emphatically yes. It was a matter of choice. Photos suggest that, if a man had such a watch, he was as keen for it to be visible as his proficiency badges and rank etc.

The rate of exchange for issues of cash to the troops of the Expeditionary Force was fixed at the rate of 5 francs = three shillings and seven pence for the month of JULY, 1916. My cursory sampling suggests that it varied little.

Thus a 15 franc watch cost a soldier 3 x 3.5 shillings approximately, and, further approximating, 10 day’s basic pay. He would have to go easy on the marmalade whilst saving of course.

[FROGSMILE]

Corps of Royal Engineers, mounted duty, dressed for walking out.  A good view of the velvet collar and cuffs in garter blue, a distinctive feature of corps full dress.  No collar badges were worn by other ranks (below commissioned officer) at the time.  He appears to be wearing short wellington boots with jack spurs. 

Edited 3 March by FROGSMILE

[FROGSMILE]

Two Dorsetshire Regiment privates dressed for walking out - less gloves - circa 1914.  Both are wearing well tailored 7-button undress frocks in lieu of full dress tunics.  This use of frocks seems to have been popular with many line infantry regiments in the years immediately before the war.