Plumes and Knot (?)

[danlyon]

I'm probably being quite thick, but can anyone identify the regiment of the attached officer, please ? The badge on his helmet matches the first badge on his collar, ie thee plumes of equal length. Can't quite make out the other badge on his collar, but I'm thinking a Staffordshire knot. Military Cross and Great War trio followed by an IGSM - the width of the stripes on the ribon suggests it was the 1936-1939 version, which would date the photo as shortly before WW2. Has he really lost his sixth medal but decided to wear its ribbon anyway ?! I'm not sure what that might be either - having a bad day here ....

[Old Owl]

Possibly 2nd Gurkha Rifles--but not sure?

The IGS is the 1908 with North West Frontier 1919 clasp, I think. The final ribbon without the medal is probably a GSM, 1918-62, clasp ?? anybody's guess!!

Hope this helps.

Robert

[Steven Broomfield]

It's possibly a Sikh regiment - the circle round the badge is often seen in Sikh units. I should know what it's called but the old grey cells are creaking. If no-one gets in before I get home I'll check it out.

[Steven Broomfield]

Aha - 51st Sikhs were Prince of Wales's Own (thanks, Wiki). As I said, I'll check it out later.

The ribbon might represent an award that was pending, so to speak - he was waiting for the actual gong and put the ribbon up for some ceremonial "do". I've seen it before.

[Andrew Upton]

It's possible with medals for entitlement (with a preliminary issue of ribband to show entitlement) to be confirmed well before the actual issue of the medal itself (eg the ribband for the 1914 Star being worn from early 1918 onwards despite the actual medal not appearing at all for another year). With his actual medals being court mounted, I suspect this might be the case here.

[danlyon]

I think 2 Gurkhas is probably the better bet : having scrolled down a huge number of images until the old eyes crossed, that was the only one to present the three plumes in that way. But I'm still wondering what the second badge on the collar might be ...

If he was a Gurkha Officer that would tie in well with the IGSM. The last medal could be a GSM earned at around the same time for service not a million miles from the NW Frontier, but the ribbon "colours" don't look quite right, if that isn't too much to draw from a photo in black and white.

The ceremonial "do" thought was a good one : this is cropped from a wedding group.

Thanks everyone.

[Stoppage Drill]

37th Dogras, which became 1st Bn (Prince of Wales Own), 17th Dogra Regiment when the old single battalion regiments were combined..

The other badge is the "37" number.

Look at the 7th item on this link:

http://www.antique-militaria.co.uk/Militaria/Badges/

[FROGSMILE]

I think it is probable that they are the 1st/11 Sikh Regiment (1st K. G.O.), who were formed from a merger of 6 antecedent regiments, as part of the major Indian Army reorganisation in 1922: http://en.wikipedia....h_Sikh_Regiment

The regimental badge is enclosed and it might be that the version shown on the helmet in the OP is the pagri badge.

The Roundels used by the Sikh Regiment's Battalions are the Chakra used by the Khalsa Armies in battle.

[Andrew Upton]

Military Cross and Great War trio followed by an IGSM - the width of the stripes on the ribon suggests it was the 1936-1939 version, which would date the photo as shortly before WW2.

I only just spotted this, but from the photo it looks like the classic version of the IGSM with George V in his coronation robes, not the later version with George VI. I suspect the last "unoccupied" ribband is for the General Service Medal 1918-62. This has a purple ribband with a green central band, but orthochromatic photography as used here would render the purple very light but keep the green reasonably dark, and invert the overall appearance somewhat.

Is it possible to see the rest of the photo, as my gut feeling from this snippet would put this photo much closer to the 1920's or early 1930's than 1939.

[Old Owl]

I only just spotted this, but from the photo it looks like the classic version of the IGSM with George V in his coronation robes, not the later version with George VI. I suspect the last "unoccupied" ribband is for the General Service Medal 1918-62. This has a purple ribband with a green central band, but orthochromatic photography as used here would render the purple very light but keep the green reasonably dark, and invert the overall appearance somewhat.

Is it possible to see the rest of the photo, as my gut feeling from this snippet would put this photo much closer to the 1920's or early 1930's than 1939.

Check my post 2

[Steven Broomfield]

Definitely 14th (King George's Own) Ferozepore Sikhs (see Reg Cox, page 267, badge 2400). As Froggy says, they became the 1st Battalion, 11th Sikh Regiment (King George's Own)(Ferozepore Sikhs) in 1922.

However, don't assume the badge and amalgamation make this a pre-1922 photo. have seen photos (thanks, Squirrel) of the 40th Pathans (later 5th/14th Punjab Regiment) using the pre-1922 badges in Malaya in 1941.

Thanks, too, for the reminder of the name of the Chakra.

[Old Owl]

Great piece of detective work

Can you confirm what the second collar badge next to the P of W feathers signifies? It is very indistinct.

[FROGSMILE]

Great piece of detective work

Can you confirm what the second collar badge next to the P of W feathers signifies? It is very indistinct.

It's King George V's imperial cypher - GRI, with crown over. Here is some further detail on the 14th before they merged in 1922: http://www.britishem...y/14thsikhs.htm

[spof]

So you experts really need a name? And if its a wedding, a date?

[Old Owl]

It's King George V's imperial cypher - GRI, with crown over. Here is some further detail on the 14th before they merged in 1922: http://www.britishem...y/14thsikhs.htm

Thanks for clearing that little mystery. Is it common for Sikh regiments to wear double collar badges? because I have never noticed this before.

[Stoppage Drill]

I'm noot convinced. The "GR cipher ain't - you can clearly see the number 37 - and that, with the PoW feathers convinces me it is 37th Dogras, or after 1922 1st Bn 17th.

If the chap in the photo were 14th Sikhs wouldn't his puggaree be red ?

[FROGSMILE]

I'm noot convinced. The "GR cipher ain't - you can clearly see the number 37 - and that, with the PoW feathers convinces me it is 37th Dogras, or after 1922 1st Bn 17th.

If the chap in the photo were 14th Sikhs wouldn't his puggaree be red ?

Compare the badge I posted in my last post (also seen at the link for the 14th) with the eminently clear badge on his wolseley helmet.

[FROGSMILE]

Thanks for clearing that little mystery. Is it common for Sikh regiments to wear double collar badges? because I have never noticed this before.

I don't know about for Sikhs Old Owl, but it was a common practice of British amalgamated regiments to adopt collar badges that represented two of their forebears. The Seaforths, A&SH, RIFus and York and Lancs being good examples.

[FROGSMILE]

The ribbon might represent an award that was pending, so to speak - he was waiting for the actual gong and put the ribbon up for some ceremonial "do". I've seen it before.

I agree. That is standard British military practice, although less often seen nowadays.

See enclosed for the crest of the 14th.

[Old Owl]

I don't know about for Sikhs Old Owl, but it was a common practice of British amalgamated regiments to adopt collar badges that represented two of their forebears. The Gordons, A&SH, RIFus and York and Lancs being good examples.

I think that this particular wearing of two seperate collar badges though is quiet unusual, because usually the two badges have been amalgamated into one badge rather than two seperate badges side by side. I am sure that there is a perfectly good explanation why this should be--but I cannot think that I have come across this before.

[FROGSMILE]

I think that this particular wearing of two seperate collar badges though is quiet unusual, because usually the two badges have been amalgamated into one badge rather than two seperate badges side by side. I am sure that there is a perfectly good explanation why this should be--but I cannot think that I have come across this before.

Both Royal Irish Fusiliers and Seaforth Highlanders had two entirely separate collar badges, 'side-by-side'.

In the case of the 14th Sikhs it represents the honour title of 1906 as the Prince of Wales's Own and then 1910 as King George's Own. The two badges commemorated and reflected these honours in a regiment where the Royal association was taken especially seriously.

Their uniform was scarlet, faced yellow, which appears darker in old black and white film.

[Old Owl]

Both Royal Irish Fusiliers and Seaforth Highlanders had two entirely separate collar badges, 'side-by-side'.

In the case of the 14th Sikhs it represents the honour title of 1906 as the Prince of Wales's Own and then 1910 as King George's Own. The two badges commemorated and reflected these honours in a regiment where the Royal association was taken especially seriously.

Their uniform was scarlet, faced yellow, which appears darker in old black and white film.

I was meaning that it is unusual that the two badges are worn sided by side, rather than one above the other as in the RIF and SH, which gives the effect of them being parts of the same badge rather than two seperate badges side by side. If you see what I mean?

[FROGSMILE]

I was meaning that it is unusual that the two badges are worn sided by side, rather than one above the other as in the RIF and SH, which gives the effect of them being parts of the same badge rather than two seperate badges side by side. If you see what I mean?

No, because on a 'patrol collar' (upright as per the OP image) the badges of the RIF and Seaforths are worn exactly as you see the 14th Sikhs (albeit that a grenade is invariably worn on its side for that type of collar). It is only on an angled open rever with collar and tie, or on a folded over collar (as for ORs SD) that the badges were worn differently.

[Old Owl]

Ah, right, thanks for clarifying this

Great pictures by the way.

[danlyon]

Strewth ! They say you should be careul what you wish for ... I realise it is frustrating for the experts to have to work from a clip from a photo rather than the full photo itself, but it was the best I could do : the original is about A4 size, and the GWF machine had a hissy fit every time I tried to upload it as is. I think I have now managed to add another clip, of the second Officer in the photo, homing in on his collar ... But if anyone is still interested in pushing it further I would be happy to email a scan of the full thing : just drop me a line at danlyon@globalnet.co.uk . A couple of comments on what has gone before :-

A name and a date for the wedding would have made things too easy ! The family has absolutely no idea who it is, where or when. There is a very small photographer's imprint (that's a very small imprint, not a very small photographer) embossed in the corner, and it won't show up on any scan : "Clifton & Co, Bombay". Not sure that really helps in any reliable way : the photographer could have travelled to a distant wedding from Bombay, or the Officers could have travelled from a distant outpost to have the wedding in Bombay.

The collar badge really did look a perfect match for 2 Gurkhas, so I duly offered to donate the photo to the Gurka Museum but they have just replied to the effect that he is not one of theirs, although they haven't gone into any reasons why not. Again, it is a black and white photograph so probably dangerous to infer colours, but it looks to me like a classic red tunic, and on reflection I would have thought that a Gurkha Officer would have been wearing green rather than red.

So, subject to anyone's further comments on the new photo of the collar, I now think Frogsmile has got it : his 14 Sikhs image above is a perfect match for the badge on the helmet. (I wonder if Stoppage Drill's puggaree anxiety is a little off target : I thought 14 Sikhs were granted the right to wear red pagris ie turbans rather than red puggarees ie helmet bands, but their Officers would presumably have worn Wolseley helmets anyway)