Unit identities please.

[MoleCatcher]

Hi All,

I'm researching members of my family that served in the forces and I have a bit of a conundrum with a couple of pictures. I would be very grateful for any help identifying the units in which these two chaps served. I think one photo is the Royal Norfolk Regiment (the cap badge loks like a Britannia) but the coloured photo is a bit of a mystery. Could it be thye Royal Artillery Volunteer Reserve (it looks like he has RAVR on his shoulder). The problem is that he also seems to have possibly put his lanyard on the wrong shoulder - I thought they were worn on the right shoulder...

Anyway, these two are a bit of a mystery, especially the Royal Norfolk one (if that's what it is), since my family are all from the North East (Middlesbrough) and those that I have found so far all served in The Green Howards.

Thanks in advance, any information greatly appreciated.

Best regards

MoleCatcher

[FROGSMILE]

Hi All,

I'm researching members of my family that served in the forces and I have a bit of a conundrum with a couple of pictures. I would be very grateful for any help identifying the units in which these two chaps served. I think one photo is the Royal Norfolk Regiment (the cap badge loks like a Britannia) but the coloured photo is a bit of a mystery. Could it be thye Royal Artillery Volunteer Reserve (it looks like he has RAVR on his shoulder). The problem is that he also seems to have possibly put his lanyard on the wrong shoulder - I thought they were worn on the right shoulder...

Anyway, these two are a bit of a mystery, especially the Royal Norfolk one (if that's what it is), since my family are all from the North East (Middlesbrough) and those that I have found so far all served in The Green Howards.

Thanks in advance, any information greatly appreciated.

Best regards

MoleCatcher

The first photo is indeed the badge for the Norfolk Regiment worn in WW1 and the colour image shows a soldier in the Royal Army Veterinary Corps (RAVC). The RAVC were responsible for the care and high level management of the many animals, especially Horses, that supported the British Army in its day-to-day business.

[FROGSMILE]

And Norfolks.

[MoleCatcher]

Thank you so much, that's absolutely marvellous. The plot thickens now... I suppose it could be that neither of these chaps are anything to do with my family at all, but I'll plough on and see what I can find out. .

Thanks you once again.

Molecatcher

[FROGSMILE]

Thank you so much, that's absolutely marvellous. The plot thickens now... I suppose it could be that neither of these chaps are anything to do with my family at all, but I'll plough on and see what I can find out. .

Thanks you once again.

Molecatcher

I am glad to help. One final point is that the RAVC did not become a Royal Corps until after WW1, in recognition of the key part they they played. The painting is interesting in that the 'old' cap badge (AVC) is shown (depicted) being worn together with the 'new' shoulder title - RAVC. This would indicate that the painting was made after the war, in the 1920s.

[wainfleet]

Hello Molecatcher

The first photo is post WW1. The cap with large peak and broader chinstrap is of a quite different shape to that worn 1914-1918. Also, your man is wearing collar badges. That's not impossible for WW1 but it is unusual, whereas it is the norm for the 1930s, the period I would date this photo to.

Regards,

W.

[MoleCatcher]

I am glad to help. One final point is the the RAVC did not become a Royal Corps until after WW1, in recognition of the key part they they played. The painting is interesting in that the 'old' cap badge (AVC) is shown (depicted) being worn together with the 'new' shoulder title - RAVC. This would indicate that the painting was made after the war, in the 1920s.

Thanks for that. I'll stop searching the ww1 service records :-). Being 1920s, that could well mean that it is my Great Uncle John. He was born in 1900, so may have joined up late in ww1, but still be in service in the early 1920s, maybe.

[MoleCatcher]

Hello Molecatcher

The first photo is post WW1. The cap with large peak and broader chinstrap is of a quite different shape to that worn 1914-1918. Also, your man is wearing collar badges. That's not impossible for WW1 but it is unusual, whereas it is the norm for the 1930s, the period I would date this photo to.

Regards,

W.

Ahhh... Now we're getting somewhere. Thank you very much for the information. I'll stop searching the ww1 records on ancestry.co.uk :-). The mystery deepens... Can you tell if he's a Private from the photo and would he have been conscripted or volunteer? I'm going to have a look on he regimental museum web site and see if there is anything there that might give me some more clues...

Many thanks again

Molecatcher.

[FROGSMILE]

Ahhh... Now we're getting somewhere. Thank you very much for the information. I'll stop searching the ww1 records on ancestry.co.uk :-). The mystery deepens... Can you tell if he's a Private from the photo and would he have been conscripted or volunteer? I'm going to have a look on he regimental museum web site and see if there is anything there that might give me some more clues...

Many thanks again

Molecatcher.

Mc, the Norfolks did not become a Royal Regiment and change their cap badge until 1935, so we know that the first photo was before that date. Although it is true that the vast bulk of units did not wear collar badges until after WW1 (as it was not regulation to do so), there were a surprising number of units who did so, almost all of which were not Regulars. You can run a search at the top of this page and find a thread about this that shows a large number of images of soldiers in WW1 with collar badges worn. That is not to say that your Norfolks photo was in WW1, but you should not completely rule it out.

I wholly disagree that the SD cap issued to rank and file in the 1930s was different to that worn in 1914. Indeed the same pattern of cap is still issued today to mounted units within London District and, although some of the internal parts are made of a different (man made) material, the external appearance is identical to WW1 examples I have been able to examine in the National Army, Imperial and Regimental museums. Putting aside the various patterns of trench cap worn during WW1 and which were discontinued after the war, the standard 1905 pattern of SD cap continued and the only change that I have noted is that warrant officers began to wear the officers pattern of cap, with a more squat appearance and wider peak, both with Service Dress and barracks undress.

Today the SD cap is changed from its traditional as issued shape (as seen in your Norfolks photo) using so-called "setting up" techniques long practised by mounted troops of the Household Division.

[wainfleet]

I wholly disagree that the SD cap issued to rank and file in the 1930s was different to that worn in 1914. Indeed the same pattern of cap is still issued today to mounted units within London District and, although some of the internal parts are made of a different (man made) material, the external appearance is identical to WW1 examples I have been able to examine in the National Army, Imperial and Regimental museums. Putting aside the various patterns of trench cap worn during WW1 and which were discontinued after the war, the standard 1905 pattern of SD cap continued and the only change that I have noted is that warrant officers began to wear the officers pattern of cap, with a more squat appearance and wider peak, both with Service Dress and barracks undress.

Today the SD cap is changed from its traditional as issued shape (as seen in your Norfolks photo) using so-called "setting up" techniques long practised by mounted troops of the Household Division.

And I wholly disagree with the above assertion. In the 1960s, and possibly later for all I know, stiff caps were produced that are externally similar in appearance to those worn in 1914-1918. However those worn in the 1920s and 1930s are different in the manner I have described, which is the first thing any collector learns in telling them apart. The cap in the photograph clearly shows these interwar features, which are never present in issue stiff peaked caps of the Great War. I base this opinion on 30+ years of collecting, during which time I have handled literally hundreds of such caps, spent many hours perusing photographic evidence from the Great War and the period following it, and discussed the subject with many other collectors, some very knowledgable indeed and every one of whom has reached the same conclusion. For that reason, it is my considered judgement that this photograph does not date from the Great War, but from some time between the wars, and that this is the period in which any related research should be conducted.

[FROGSMILE]

And I wholly disagree with the above assertion. In the 1960s, and possibly later for all I know, stiff caps were produced that are externally similar in appearance to those worn in 1914-1918. However those worn in the 1920s and 1930s are different in the manner I have described, which is the first thing any collector learns in telling them apart. The cap in the photograph clearly shows these interwar features, which are never present in issue stiff peaked caps of the Great War. I base this opinion on 30+ years of collecting, during which time I have handled literally hundreds of such caps, spent many hours perusing photographic evidence from the Great War and the period following it, and discussed the subject with many other collectors, some very knowledgable indeed and every one of whom has reached the same conclusion. For that reason, it is my considered judgement that this photograph does not date from the Great War, but from some time between the wars, and that this is the period in which any related research should be conducted.

You are entitled to your own opinion. We will just have to agree to disagree. I too have handled rather a lot of caps, although for me it has been over 38-years, if you are going to make a point of quoting time periods. In my case, however, I have returned the caps to where they came from, given that I had enough of my own equipment to cart around with me.

The cap badge shown changed in 1935 as I have said and that together with the collar badges gives a window within which the owner of the image can work. With further research he can no doubt form his own opinion about the pattern of cap.

[Blackblue]

Diplomatic as always. Give it a rest for once....

[wainfleet]

You are entitled to your own opinion. We will just have to agree to disagree. I too have handled rather a lot of caps, although for me it has been over 38-years, if you are going to make a point of quoting time periods. In my case, however, I have returned the caps to where they came from, given that I had enough of my own equipment to cart around with me.

The cap badge shown changed in 1935 as I have said and that together with the collar badges gives a window within which the owner of the image can work. With further research he can no doubt form his own opinion about the pattern of cap.

Actually no, this is not just my opinion. For an informed and objective piece on cap patterns, see this. Or you may wish to remind yourself of this topic, where your post 11 contradicts your post 9 here. Nor is it a case of "agreeing to disagree". It is a case of you dispensing duff information with an air of glib authority and aggressively defending it when someone else has the temerity to come out with the facts. And what on earth has "returning the caps to where they came from", or some unspecified equipment you had to cart about, got to do with anything?

You seem to know something about badges, so why not restrict your more Olympian pronouncements to that subject area and take a more tentative line elsewhere.

Regards,

W.

[FROGSMILE]

Actually no, this is not just my opinion. For an informed and objective piece on cap patterns, see this. Or you may wish to remind yourself of this topic, where your post 11 contradicts your post 9 here. Nor is it a case of "agreeing to disagree". It is a case of you dispensing duff information with an air of glib authority and aggressively defending it when someone else has the temerity to come out with the facts. And what on earth has "returning the caps to where they came from", or some unspecified equipment you had to cart about, got to do with anything?

You seem to know something about badges, so why not restrict your more Olympian pronouncements to that subject area and take a more tentative line elsewhere.

Regards,

W.

I am familiar with the article at your first link and the photos shown there are all as I would expect, with the cap marked 1918 showing an 'as issued' appearance that I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread. With regards to your second link, my post 11 does not contradict post 9 at all. The SD uniform was modified in its tailoring to render a smarter fit and the officers adopted a plus 4 style of trouser. The caps were shaped regimentally from their as issued state by a combination of wire and local tailoring of peaks and not to my knowledge by a formal change in pattern. Any changes in pattern were formally recorded via a regularly issued 'list of changes'.

Battalions were established for a tailor and in overseas stations local tailors were also inrevariably employed to supplement the work. A great deal of local modification to uniforms and head dress was carried out, which was a consistent part of the regimental culture. The cutting out of peaks, trimming down and re-insertion was a common practice to achieve a smarter appearance in Regular units especially. Tailoring was invariably carried out immaculately and a collector would not necessarily realise this.

As regards your other comments, I will not dignify them with any reply beyond stating that what knowledge I have is given with an intention to help enquirers and is based upon an intimate personal and family association with the British Army (and its uniforms and insignia) going back in an unbroken line for four generations, almost all of which has been spent in barracks and around military colleges and museums. Much of this work has for several generations involved clothing stores and supply chains. Whether I know anything beyond badges can be judged by those to whom I direct my efforts at assistance, as an examination of my posts will bear out.

[Blackblue]

A shame this 'knowledge' is often detracted by the delivery.

[FROGSMILE]

A shame this 'knowledge' is often detracted by the delivery.

At first I thought you just had a frustrated ambition to be a moderator, but I have just realised that your interference is invariably partisan in connection with a specific individual. I hope that you will both be very happy together.

I seem to get along alright with the vast majority of others here - so that must say something.

[wainfleet]

"The cap marked 1918" - that would be the one with "the classic postwar characteristics", then, ie. a larger peak than the wartime examples and where the 1918 date is suspect?

There is now enough information to hand for anyone who actually wants to know to make an informed judgement. I'll continue to point out misleading errors should they occur in a field I know something about, irrespective of who makes them.

[Blackblue]

At first I thought you just had a frustrated ambition to be a moderator, but I have just realised that your interference is invariably partisan in connection with a specific individual. I hope that you will both be very happy together.

I seem to get along alright with the vast majority of others here - so that must say something.

Wrong I am afraid..and I'm afraid I haven't got the time to moderate...if I did you would probably find yourself in receipt of some timely advice regards common courtesy to fellow forum members. As a forum member I have long been concerned with your ridiculing of various contributors. If you look back I have actually commented on quite a number of occasions...the last two just happen to be Wainfleet. I have had PMs from a number of members expressing bewilderment at what your problem seems to be. I am similarly perplexed.

[FROGSMILE]

"The cap marked 1918" - that would be the one with "the classic postwar characteristics", then, ie. a larger peak than the wartime examples and where the 1918 date is suspect?

There is now enough information to hand for anyone who actually wants to know to make an informed judgement. I'll continue to point out misleading errors should they occur in a field I know something about, irrespective of who makes them.

I cannot comment on the veracity of the 1918 date, but the caps external shape is, as far as I can see from the image concerned, normal for an as issued cap and peaks were usually shaped under regimental arrangements subsequently. If that is not so then there will be lists of changes describing the change to the peaks depth and / or construction. To date I have not been able to find such an Lof C and the many contemporary examples that I have seen and handled are little different from those issued via Army stores ever since, other than in the materials used internally. I will be happy to concede your assertion if you can produce such an LofC, but so far, and that is over many years, I have never found one, so hence my "considered opinion".

You are very welcome to comment / post what you like and I too will comment in reply if I feel it appropriate to do so, "irrespective of¨who makes them". This is a free forum for everyone's opinion after all. I cannot think of any research area, or subject, where its proponents do not disagree and debate, sometimes vehemently, contrary opinion from time to time. You seem to have lost sight of that and your comments and palpable sense of pique, smack of pot and kettle as a result..

[wainfleet]

This is getting extremely tedious. You are arguing that caps haven't changed in style since the Great War, which is palpably incorrect. Two distinct variants are clearly illustrated in Joe Sweeney’s article. One type appears in dateable Great War photos. The other doesn’t. If you think the large peak type is Great War vintage, you need to look at some photos. You will not find a single clear wartime photograph of the large, spadeshaped peak and wide chinstrap worn by other ranks, except perhaps occasionally WOs wearing private purchase caps. You will however find plenty of such photos from the 20s and 30s.

Pique? No, as I have explained very clearly, what annoys me is duff information being passed off as authoritative and the lofty dismissal of opinions that clash with your own. Pot and kettle? I have no idea what you’re talking about.

I have well and truly had enough of this now and will not be contributing further.

[Chris P]

Frogsmile; Thankyou for noting that everyone here is entitled to their opinion, so from someone who usually sits on the sidelines - one of many, I might add - I'd like to make the following points,;

Firstly, It'd be nice to open a post where no one was bickering; Secondly, it'd be nice if it wasn't frogsmile, thirdly, it'd be nice if I could open any post that frogsmile hadn't put his tuppence worth in, as in my opinion, much of it doesn't bear close scrutiny. (Now you can tell me I don't know what I'm talking about either, probably rudely). But Frogsmile - if you are right, or wrong - please have the decency to respect other peoples opinions, & let the original posters make their own minds up, & try not to be so downright rude. If you find that impossible, then my advice is don't join in if a particular post/er upsets you. Members I know & speak to are not logging on, or joining in with useful posts as they are getting fed up with getting bawled out, & like it or not old chap, you are at the top of their 'fed up with list' on these threads. - 'Oh no, it's frogsmile at it again'. No - you don't get along with the majority on here - they just go away & don't bother. Sad, but true.

By the way, you are totally, unequivocally, unquestionably wrong about the cap. The evidence has been presented clearly. Partially move towards redemption, & have the good grace to admit it.

ChrisP

[Joe Sweeney]

I cannot comment on the veracity of the 1918 date, but the caps external shape is, as far as I can see from the image concerned, normal for an as issued cap and peaks were usually shaped under regimental arrangements subsequently. If that is not so then there will be lists of changes describing the change to the peaks depth and / or construction. To date I have not been able to find such an Lof C and the many contemporary examples that I have seen and handled are little different from those issued via Army stores ever since, other than in the materials used internally. I will be happy to concede your assertion if you can produce such an LofC, but so far, and that is over many years, I have never found one, so hence my "considered opinion".

You are very welcome to comment / post what you like and I too will comment in reply if I feel it appropriate to do so, "irrespective of¨who makes them". This is a free forum for everyones opinion after all. I cannot think of any research area, or subject, where its proponents do not disagree and debate, sometimes vehemently, contrary opinion from time to time. You seem to have lost sight of that and your comments and palpable sense of pique, smack of pot and kettle as a result..

Frogsmile,

That article I wrote is nearly 15 years old. The 1918 date was put in to deceive and the cap actually could date to the 1960's or later, but no earlier than the 20's.

it is usually easy to tell Great War SD caps from post war in most photos and the first photo in post 1. is most definatly post Great War.

Also you will never find any references to Caps in the LoC. The LoC did not record clothing.

The Directorate of Equipment and Ordnance Stores (D.E.O.S) was broken down into branches with the main branches being the Quartermaster General (Q.M.G.) 7 and Q.M.G. 9. The Q.M.G. 7 branch’s main concern dealt with clothing and necessaries. The Q.M.G.9 branch’s main concern was with stores and was alternately known as A.Q.M.G Stores.

With-in the Q.M.G. 7 branch the work of provision, storage and supply was the responsibility of the Chief Ordnance Officer Royal Army Clothing Department whose central depot was at Pimlico. The items this department was responsible for are found in a publication called the "Priced Vocabulary of Clothing and Necessaries (including Materials)". Pattern introductions and changes were tracked and recorded in the Royal Army Clothing Department clothing ledgers or “Registry of Changes”. Clothing ledger is a bit of a misnomer as it covered more than clothing. Procurement was funded through Vote 7 of Parliaments annual budget estimates.

Q.M.G. 9 (stores) undertook the procurement of materiel entitled “stores”. The “History of the Army Ordnance Services” states, “it had to provide through the Director of Army Contracts, all non technical stores whose purchase fell within the province of the Quartermaster General, and to deal with questions of their pattern and inspection, and to supervise arrangements for the storage and supply to the army of every species of equipment whether technical or non-technical”. The main Ordnance depot was at Woolwich with small arms under the Chief Ordnance Officer at Weedon. The items this department was responsible for are found in a publication called the "Priced Vocabulary of Stores used in His Majesty's Service. Land Service Stores, and Stores Common to Land and Naval Services". Pattern changes were tracked and recorded in the "List of Changes in War Materiel and of Patterns of Military Stores". Procurement was funded through Votes 8 and 9 of Parliament’s annual budget estimates.

After the Great war some uniform items were mentioned in the LoC as seen below, but the LoC were not used/meant to track changes in clothing.

With-in the RACD ledgers the evolution of the SD cap is easily tracked:

RACD Pattern Number Date of Approval Nomenclature Nature of Change Obsolete

6281/1905 16-Mar-05 Cap, Forage, Serge---Drab mixture, Service Dress Stiff band No.1 Approval of First Pattern

6282/1905 16-Mar-05 Cap Forage Serge---Drab mixture, Service Dress Soft band No.2 Approval of First Pattern 27-Nov-05

6360/1905 18-Aug-05 Cap Forage Serge---Drab mixture, Service Dress Soft band No.2 Modification of Pattern, substituted a longer chinstrap for the original shorter version.

27-Nov-05

6281a/1905 28-Nov-05 Cap, Forage, Serge---Drab mixture, Service Dress Stiff band No.1 Modification of Pattern, substituted a longer chinstrap for the original shorter version.

6281b/1906 31-Oct-06 Cap, Forage, Serge---Drab mixture, Service Dress Modification of Pattern; the band manufactured in one piece and the peak machine-sewn.

10-Sep-08 Chinstrap design changed as a result of complaints in June 1908

7420/1911 28-Jul-11 Cap, Service Dress Renewal of pattern 6281b

7659/1912 29-Nov-12 Cap, Service Dress Improved Pattern; The entire lining, including the headband, was changed to a black lacquered cloth (American Cloth)

3086/1918 28-Jan-19 Cap, Service Dress Renewal of Pattern 7659 "Committee approved"

3553/1921 10-Aug-21 Cap, Service Dress Modification of Pattern; the band constructed with a buckram reinforcement free of the rubber solution.

3593/1921 30-Nov-21 Cap, Service Dress New Pattern, Also reflected in LoC 24802 March 1922 all others obsolete

The Visor significantly changed with pattern 3593 to the large ones a seen in the first post's first photo.

In addition the modification of Caps was very much a post war exercise by slashing and shortening the visor (mostly to mimic the pre-war design as far as I can tell).

Even the Guards did not slash the visor in the Great War period and only after the introduction of the new pattern SD cap. Pre-war and during the war the practice of "setting-up" involved inserting a metal plate to force the crown-up with no cutting of the visor. On 1 Aug 1914 these plates (B pattern) were supplied to the Guards at 6s 6d per gross by Mr F. Narborough, 42 Lombard Street Birmingham. These were Extra Regimental necessaries were paid for out of Regimental funds.

Hope this is of interest

Joe sweeney

[Chris P]

Oh - & another thing. You weren't looking in the right place frogsmile - lack of experience I guess!

Pattern no 3593/1921 sealed pattern date of 30/11/1921, Cap, service dress, new model, replacing all older models. Larger, flatter peak...

From the sealed patterns. Primary source information - not considered opinion.

LoC's are an unreliable guide, & you can never accurately date an item by it's intro in the LoC's alone. Many things were only entered into the LoC's many years after the pattern date, many never at all. But you must have known that, surely?

ChrisP.

[FROGSMILE]

Frogsmile,

That article I wrote is nearly 15 years old. The 1918 date was put in to deceive and the cap actually could date to the 1960's or later, but no earlier than the 20's.

it is usually easy to tell Great War SD caps from post war in most photos and the first photo in post 1. is most definatly post Great War.

Also you will never find any references to Caps in the LoC. The LoC did not record clothing.

The Directorate of Equipment and Ordnance Stores (D.E.O.S) was broken down into branches with the main branches being the Quartermaster General (Q.M.G.) 7 and Q.M.G. 9. The Q.M.G. 7 branch's main concern dealt with clothing and necessaries. The Q.M.G.9 branch's main concern was with stores and was alternately known as A.Q.M.G Stores.

With-in the Q.M.G. 7 branch the work of provision, storage and supply was the responsibility of the Chief Ordnance Officer Royal Army Clothing Department whose central depot was at Pimlico. The items this department was responsible for are found in a publication called the "Priced Vocabulary of Clothing and Necessaries (including Materials)". Pattern introductions and changes were tracked and recorded in the Royal Army Clothing Department clothing ledgers or "Registry of Changes". Clothing ledger is a bit of a misnomer as it covered more than clothing. Procurement was funded through Vote 7 of Parliaments annual budget estimates.

Q.M.G. 9 (stores) undertook the procurement of materiel entitled "stores". The "History of the Army Ordnance Services" states, "it had to provide through the Director of Army Contracts, all non technical stores whose purchase fell within the province of the Quartermaster General, and to deal with questions of their pattern and inspection, and to supervise arrangements for the storage and supply to the army of every species of equipment whether technical or non-technical". The main Ordnance depot was at Woolwich with small arms under the Chief Ordnance Officer at Weedon. The items this department was responsible for are found in a publication called the "Priced Vocabulary of Stores used in His Majesty's Service. Land Service Stores, and Stores Common to Land and Naval Services". Pattern changes were tracked and recorded in the "List of Changes in War Materiel and of Patterns of Military Stores". Procurement was funded through Votes 8 and 9 of Parliament's annual budget estimates.

After the Great war some uniform items were mentioned in the LoC as seen below, but the LoC were not used/meant to track changes in clothing.

With-in the RACD ledgers the evolution of the SD cap is easily tracked:

RACD Pattern Number Date of Approval Nomenclature Nature of Change Obsolete

6281/1905 16-Mar-05 Cap, Forage, Serge---Drab mixture, Service Dress Stiff band No.1 Approval of First Pattern

6282/1905 16-Mar-05 Cap Forage Serge---Drab mixture, Service Dress Soft band No.2 Approval of First Pattern 27-Nov-05

6360/1905 18-Aug-05 Cap Forage Serge---Drab mixture, Service Dress Soft band No.2 Modification of Pattern, substituted a longer chinstrap for the original shorter version.

27-Nov-05

6281a/1905 28-Nov-05 Cap, Forage, Serge---Drab mixture, Service Dress Stiff band No.1 Modification of Pattern, substituted a longer chinstrap for the original shorter version.

6281b/1906 31-Oct-06 Cap, Forage, Serge---Drab mixture, Service Dress Modification of Pattern; the band manufactured in one piece and the peak machine-sewn.

10-Sep-08 Chinstrap design changed as a result of complaints in June 1908

7420/1911 28-Jul-11 Cap, Service Dress Renewal of pattern 6281b

7659/1912 29-Nov-12 Cap, Service Dress Improved Pattern; The entire lining, including the headband, was changed to a black lacquered cloth (American Cloth)

3086/1918 28-Jan-19 Cap, Service Dress Renewal of Pattern 7659 "Committee approved"

3553/1921 10-Aug-21 Cap, Service Dress Modification of Pattern; the band constructed with a buckram reinforcement free of the rubber solution.

3593/1921 30-Nov-21 Cap, Service Dress New Pattern, Also reflected in LoC 24802 March 1922 all others obsolete

The Visor significantly changed with pattern 3593 to the large ones a seen in the first post's first photo.

In addition the modification of Caps was very much a post war exercise by slashing and shortening the visor (mostly to mimic the pre-war design as far as I can tell).

Even the Guards did not slash the visor in the Great War period and only after the introduction of the new pattern SD cap. Pre-war and during the war the practice of "setting-up" involved inserting a metal plate to force the crown-up with no cutting of the visor. On 1 Aug 1914 these plates (B pattern) were supplied to the Guards at 6s 6d per gross by Mr F. Narborough, 42 Lombard Street Birmingham. These were Extra Regimental necessaries were paid for out of Regimental funds.

Hope this is of interest

Joe sweeney

Joe, yes it is of great interest and thank you for posting such a comprehensive list of information. I have searched a long time for the information you have made clear about the 1922 cap and I can see that I was wrong about the caps shape, especially in relation to the peak. I had seen the detail about the setting up plates before but not the list of pattern references, which is extremely useful. Do you know at what point the cap changed to its current shape?

I will reply to all the other posts later.

[Joe Sweeney]

Joe, yes it is of great interest and thank you for posting such a comprehensive list of information. I have searched a long time for the information you have made clear about the 1922 cap and I can see that I was wrong about the caps shape, especially in relation to the peak. I had seen the detail about the setting up plates before but not the list of pattern references, which is extremely useful. Do you know at what point the cap changed to its current shape?

I will reply to all the other posts later.

Frogsmile,

The cap changed to its current shape with--3593/1921 30-Nov-21 Cap, Service Dress New Pattern, Also reflected in LoC 24802 March 1922 all others obsolete

Joe S