RHD Posted 27 March , 2012 Share Posted 27 March , 2012 Hi, Attached is a picture of my Great Grandfather, other than the Scottish Horse uniform what else does this picture tell you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 27 March , 2012 Share Posted 27 March , 2012 Hi, Attached is a picture of my Great Grandfather, other than the Scottish Horse uniform what else does this picture tell you? It tells us that he is a 'Farrier' Sergeant (via the horse shoe badge above his chevrons) and therefore fulfilled a key role within his mounted unit. It is also unusual that he wears 2 lanyards, which makes one speculate that he perhaps had a clasp knife, as normal on one, and perhaps a farriers tool on the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pioneecorps Posted 27 March , 2012 Share Posted 27 March , 2012 Hi RHD To me the Tradesmens Badge, Farrier Shoe, worn by your Grandfather is made from worsted, this would suggest to me it was taken some time in 1941, or later, as this is the year that it chainged from Gilding Metal ( brass ) to Worsted. Regards. Gerwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 27 March , 2012 Share Posted 27 March , 2012 Hi RHD To me the Tradesmens Badge, Farrier Shoe, worn by your Grandfather is made from worsted, this would suggest to me it was taken some time in 1941, or later, as this is the year that it chainged from Gilding Metal ( brass ) to Worsted. Regards. Gerwyn Duff information again I am afraid, the badges were made in khaki worsted from 1905 onwards for wear with service dress. Gilding metal badges were also worn and, as well as issued, were often purchased by soldiers from a variety of sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pioneecorps Posted 28 March , 2012 Share Posted 28 March , 2012 Hi RDH and FROGSMILE As he would have been a Artilleryman with a Trade Badge "Farrier", I would say he would have served with the Stottish Horse Artillery during WW2, Regards. Gerwyn This photo was taken in 1936, as you can see, the GM ( Gilding Metal )( brass ) Farrier Shoe, is worn above the Corporal's chevrons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 March , 2012 Share Posted 28 March , 2012 Hi RDH and FROGSMILE As he would have been a Artilleryman with a Trade Badge "Farrier", I would say he would have served with the Stottish Horse Artillery during WW2, Regards. Gerwyn This photo was taken in 1936, as you can see, the GM ( Gilding Metal )( brass ) Farrier Shoe, is worn above the Corporal's chevrons. If that Scottish Horse photo is 1940's then I'll eat hay with a cuddy, considering all WWI transport sections contained farriers or cold shoe'rs, and this included the infantry, as well as Corps/Cavarly. You didn't even have to belong to a Corps to become one, as the trade was open to all. As for cloth badges then I'm afraid Frogsmile is correct, as cloth rank/trade/profficiency badges were worn long before metal badges of the same were taken into wear. The photo itself has the appeareance of post-WWI, but not WWII in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 28 March , 2012 Share Posted 28 March , 2012 RHD it would save a lot of argument if you could tell us something about the man, his age for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 28 March , 2012 Share Posted 28 March , 2012 The photo itself has the appeareance of post-WWI, but not WWII in my opinion. You can actually see the two "darts" on the collar, which is one of the classic tells of a pre-1921/22 made SD jacket. Given such kit could be issued long after its manufacture it's a bit of a mute point, but I would have thought it is a good indicator that if the photo is post-war then it is not likely to be by too many years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pioneecorps Posted 28 March , 2012 Share Posted 28 March , 2012 If that Scottish Horse photo is 1940's then I'll eat hay with a cuddy, considering all WWI transport sections contained farriers or cold shoe'rs, and this included the infantry, as well as Corps/Cavarly. You didn't even have to belong to a Corps to become one, as the trade was open to all. As for cloth badges then I'm afraid Frogsmile is correct, as cloth rank/trade/profficiency badges were worn long before metal badges of the same were taken into wear. The photo itself has the appeareance of post-WWI, but not WWII in my opinion. Hi Graham I'm not saying cloth trade badges were not worn prior to WW2, ( trademen's badges prior to WW2, were, with only few noted exceptions, produced in gilding metal ) what I'm saying, the details I have say the Farrier Shoe in gilding metal, chainged in 1941 to worsted, I posted a photo to show RDH, the gilding metal Farrier Shoe, which was taken in 1936. I can't find a ACI to confirm this, but I have no reason to beleave, the information I have is not correct. Regards. Gerwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 28 March , 2012 Share Posted 28 March , 2012 Gentlemen, gentlemen! In the beginning was the badge, and the badge was in bullion or coloured worsted on cloth of the facing colour of tunic or frock. During the late 1860s the backing changed to the tunic/frock colour for economy [with a few exceptions such as Household troops, who used facing colour backing throughout]. The first major systematic change was in 1901/2, when SD was to be the universal dress except for parade and hot climates, tunic and KD jacket respectively except for India. Leaving aside hot climates [to which I will be happy to return if requested], the early badges for SD appear to have been approved as worsted threads on SD backing [away from my RACD specs. until weekend] but by mid 1905 there was a systematic move away from expensive worsted to much cheaper GM [surprising to modern eyes, but PVCNs confirm this]. This encompassed all Trade badges and all Appointment badges worn upper right arm, and excluded all Skill at Arms ...... the former were worn more or less continuously, the latter were competeted for annually and those not qualifying [in theory] handing them in for re-issue. There were always unit and individual exceptions, the commonest being the beautiful enamelled blue/white signaller badges, never an Ordnance issue [no chance!]. This takes us to the Great War, a massive expansion of the army, and a massive opportunity for badge makers to sell privately to units and individuals, such that GM skill-at-arms, and worsted trade and appointment, became very common and diagnostic of nothing. As an aside, GM versions looked flash on clean wear at Home, but had catchy edges in the trenches, thus snagging at bad moments, damaging SD and sometimes inhibiting survival. A special case was MG, it has been suggested that GM versions were preferred as easily removable if about to be captured. As I said, I am away from my sources but a mix of GM and sometimes very fancy worsted [with crossed lances including some scarlet on the pennon]obtained between the wars. I tend to lose interest after 1939, so will defer to others about systematic changes thereafter, but understand that GM was phased out ....... pictorial evidence suggests this. A magnum opus covering the last period is in preparation, and I for one await it with great anticipation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 29 March , 2012 Share Posted 29 March , 2012 Yes, I have checked PVCN 1907, and almost every badge, including the shoe, is in changeover to GM from worsted, and the worsted ones are "while stocks last" except for the skill-at-arms. The exception is Scout, which was never ever other than "brass". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pioneecorps Posted 29 March , 2012 Share Posted 29 March , 2012 Hi GRUMPY Hope you don't mind, I did a search on your PVCN 1907, to tell you the truth I never heard of it, and came up with your "Grumpy's Guide to rank badges Posted 24 March 2010 at 04.22pm" , excellent and very informative Mate. Cheers. Gerwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 29 March , 2012 Share Posted 29 March , 2012 Hope you don't mind but elderly gents such as I don't do 'mate' with good grace. We tend to wear ties, and open doors for ladies, totally out of touch. Is your mind easier now on the likelihood of experts Frogsmile and Graham Stewart being right, as usual, and as I believe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pioneecorps Posted 29 March , 2012 Share Posted 29 March , 2012 If we go back to RDH question Attached is a picture of my Great Grandfather, other than the Scottish Horse uniform what else does this picture tell you? Have I or have I not, the right has a Member of this Forum, to give my opinion as to what I see in RDH Great Grandfathers photo, without being told by another Member that quote "Duff information again" and other remarks in another post, is this a Forum where it is open to disccussion or not. And I open doors and let ladies get on the bus first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 30 March , 2012 Share Posted 30 March , 2012 Have I or have I not, the right has a Member of this Forum, to give my opinion as to what I see in RDH Great Grandfathers photo, without being told by another Member that quote "Duff information again" and other remarks in another post, is this a Forum where it is open to disccussion or not. And I open doors and let ladies get on the bus first Don't take it too personally, as more than one of us here have been poked with a sharp stick on occassion. Overall people here on the GWF are generally friendly and helpful, as many tend to specialise in various aspects of WWI. Some, like myself, Grumpy and Frogsmile are collectors/researchers of uniforms, insignia, regulations, instructions, orders & photograph's, covering a wide period in the history of the British Army and as such tend to home-in on photo's and use our knowledge/collections to decypher what we see. Hopefully you'll be with us a long time, adding to the GWF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 30 March , 2012 Share Posted 30 March , 2012 I was a bit over the top with the sharp stick, but can I just say that "Mate" is as offensive to me from a stranger as "nogger" would be to a black man? As in very. This may seem foolish, it may seem wrong, but it is true, and there it lies. One other point ...... this forum is a treasure house of truths about the Great War, and there are those of us who ALWAYS dispute what we see as misconceptions because, if we do not, in some time in the future a newcomer or a googler will quote the undisputed untruth. As in "so and so said such and such about the badge, and nobody said it was wrong. So, apologies, but please see my point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pioneecorps Posted 30 March , 2012 Share Posted 30 March , 2012 Don't take it too personally, as more than one of us here have been poked with a sharp stick on occassion. Overall people here on the GWF are generally friendly and helpful, as many tend to specialise in various aspects of WWI. Some, like myself, Grumpy and Frogsmile are collectors/researchers of uniforms, insignia, regulations, instructions, orders & photograph's, covering a wide period in the history of the British Army and as such tend to home-in on photo's and use our knowledge/collections to decypher what we see. Hopefully you'll be with us a long time, adding to the GWF. Hi Graham I appreciate your for your kind remarks. Regards. Gerwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pioneecorps Posted 30 March , 2012 Share Posted 30 March , 2012 I was a bit over the top with the sharp stick, but can I just say that "Mate" is as offensive to me from a stranger as "******" would be to a black man? As in very. This may seem foolish, it may seem wrong, but it is true, and there it lies. One other point ...... this forum is a treasure house of truths about the Great War, and there are those of us who ALWAYS dispute what we see as misconceptions because, if we do not, in some time in the future a newcomer or a googler will quote the undisputed untruth. As in "so and so said such and such about the badge, and nobody said it was wrong. So, apologies, but please see my point of view. Hi GRUMPY I did not mean to be offend you, when using the word Mate in my posts to you, as a Rhondda boy, ( older ones ) we still say Butt, if I used the word Butt on this Forum, some would think I was saying but, spelling it with another t, "we do use names as well", using the word Butt or Butty is a word from my mining days, when I was payed trumps whilst learning my trade as a miner, I use Mate, its just my way, and not ment to offend anyone. If I'm wrong in my opinion of RDH photo, I'm wrong. Life will still go on. I hope . Regards. Gerwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RHD Posted 4 April , 2012 Author Share Posted 4 April , 2012 Not sure when it was taken exactly but he did not serve in the second world war. He was born in 1896. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loganshort Posted 5 April , 2012 Share Posted 5 April , 2012 good to have conflicting opinions. Makes us think of alternatives and to look more closely at something instead of a simple acceptance of the "norm". In war the "norm" was constantly being deviated from. Would be nice though to have some more personal info on this man to help point us in the right direction. I always learn something from the contributor's posts - oh, and i also open doors for ladies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthergw Posted 5 April , 2012 Share Posted 5 April , 2012 good to have conflicting opinions. Makes us think of alternatives and to look more closely at something instead of a simple acceptance of the "norm". In war the "norm" was constantly being deviated from. Would be nice though to have some more personal info on this man to help point us in the right direction. I always learn something from the contributor's posts - oh, and i also open doors for ladies! It is not always good to have a conflicting opinion especially on a matter of fact. That is not a conflicting opinion, it is plain wrong. If Grumpy says sergeants had 3 stripes and I say that I think they had two, that is not a good contribution and as Mr G says, demands correction. We have acknowledged experts in various fields. If they are contradicted, I for one would like to see the evidence, chapter and verse. In matters of opinion of course, we all of us have the right to express our own but need not expect an equally ready acceptance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tn.drummond Posted 5 April , 2012 Share Posted 5 April , 2012 Hi, Attached is a picture of my Great Grandfather, other than the Scottish Horse uniform what else does this picture tell you? Hi RHD Thought you may appreciate this as a point of comparison. It is an attested WW1 photo of a Scottish Horse Private of the 2/3 battalion at Cupar - probably early 1918. Regards Suddery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now