Uniform identification please

[Gill Norgan]

20 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

I’m not 100% sure as they’re not wearing the black buttons that are usually a feature of their uniform but I think it might be the London Rifle Brigade.  They’re definitely Territorial Force and some of the men are wearing the Imperial Service Tablet awarded to individuals who volunteered to serve overseas should they be called.  It indicates a date between 1911 and 1913.   I’d be interested to learn what @CorporalPunishmentthinks the cap badge is.  

I have taken some detail with my phone used the editing feature on my iphone to brighten it a little, which gives a clearer idea of the cuff decoration. 

[FROGSMILE]

On 21/12/2022 at 18:02, Gill Norgan said:

I have taken some detail with my phone used the editing feature on my iphone to brighten it a little, which gives a clearer idea of the cuff decoration. 

What you show is the mitred cuff that was introduced in 1902 Gill.  Broadly speaking there tended to be two versions for rifles, one with a line of black piping and one with a line of green piping.  As most of the London Regiment units had previously been Volunteer Battalions (VB) of either, the King’s Royal Rifle Corps (red piping), or the Rifle Brigade (black piping), they for practical reasons mostly retained one or the other.

I enclose examples on respective full dress tunics for you to compare.  Also note the B&W photo, which shows the Foreign Service variant of the same frock.  It had a simple piped loop as cuff decoration, whereas the Home Service frock has the mitre.  Notice also 7-buttons for the tunic, but just 5-buttons for the frock.

Edited 25 December , 2022 by FROGSMILE

[Gill Norgan]

Some thoughts on the identity of the subject of the first photograph, having read all replies. 

I titled the photograph "unknown, possibly Thomas". I have photographs of Edward Norgan b1886 and William Norgan b1895, but none of Thomas Norgan b1890. I don't think that the young man in the photograph looks like Edward but there is an address on the back  (22 Lyon Street, which was off Caledonian Road) and Edward Norgan did live in the house at one point. My Dad's family seem to have rented rooms in various houses off Caledonian Road, never having a whole house to themselves; Thomas lived at no.16 Lyon Street in 1901. Edward lived in no.7 in 1904, and lived in no.22 for about ten years from 1925 (the 1939 Register has him still there). 

Here are the photographs I have for comparison. In the group photo my grandad Edward is bottom right corner holding a horseshoe (he was a Driver and Shoeing Smith, Royal Field ARtillery); he looks so much like my brother that I have no doubt of the i.d! I'm including a photo of William in hospital uniform from 1915, though he lived in Hackney with Elizabeth and Owen Johnson. Their father died when he was 42, and their mother two years before him, which I think accounts for William living with a different branch of the family. 

 

Your thoughts?

Edited 21 December , 2022 by Gill Norgan

[FROGSMILE]

1 hour ago, Gill Norgan said:

Some thoughts on the identity of the subject of the first photograph, having read all replies. 

I titled the photograph "unknown, possibly Thomas". I have photographs of Edward Norgan b1886 and William Norgan b1895, but none of Thomas Norgan b1890. I don't think that the young man in the photograph looks like Edward but there is an address on the back  (22 Lyon Street, which was off Caledonian Road) and Edward Norgan did live in the house at one point. My Dad's family seem to have rented rooms in various houses off Caledonian Road, never having a whole house to themselves; Thomas lived at no.16 Lyon Street in 1901. Edward lived in no.7 in 1904, and lived in no.22 for about ten years from 1925 (the 1939 Register has him still there). 

Here are the photographs I have for comparison. In the group photo my grandad Edward is bottom right corner holding a horseshoe (he was a Driver and Shoeing Smith, Royal Field ARtillery); he looks so much like my brother that I have no doubt of the i.d! I'm including a photo of William in hospital uniform from 1915, though he lived in Hackney with Elizabeth and Owen Johnson. Their father died when he was 42, and their mother two years before him, which I think accounts for William living with a different branch of the family. 

 

Your thoughts?

I can’t help with addresses and suchlike Gill, that’s much more in Peter’s genealogical purview.  I can just make some basic comments about the photographs:

1.  In the uppermost photo the gunner shown wears a 1916 pattern soft cap that was designed to be easily stuffed into equipment, or even a pocket, but capable of being easily pulled back into shape.

2.  The second photo of a group of gunners shows them wearing the short lived 1915 pattern trench cap with folding ear flap.  Processed at Warminster it probably relates to the artillery camps in and around Larkhill and that part of Salisbury Plain.

3.  The man in the rifles pattern frock is more likely to have been born in 1886 going by his overall appearance, so I think it does seem possible that it’s Edward Norgan, but I don’t know how that matches with the unit concerned.

4.  The fourth photo, of William, shows a typical hospital blue uniform except that he seems to have chosen to wear his own tie.  The issue pattern was generally made of plain scarlet wool.

Edited 21 December , 2022 by FROGSMILE

[PRC]

6 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

What you show is the mitred cuff that was introduced in 1902 Gill.  Broadly speaking there tended to be two versions for rifles, one with a line of black piping and one with a line of green piping.  As most of the London Regiment units had previously been Volunteer Battalions (VB) of either, the King’s Royal Rifle Corps (red piping), or the Rifle Brigade (black piping), they for practical reasons mostly retained one or the other.

So cuff style introduced in 1902, when Edward would have had his 16th birthday,  Thomas his 12th and William Henry would have had his 7th birthday.

Even assuming an age 16 enlistment and assuming that is the age of the young man pictured here, then you’d still be looking at 1906 at the earliest for Thomas and 1911 for William Henry.

Obviously every year older for each individual means a year later – would an 18 year old William Henry have been wearing this for the 1913 camp for example?

@Gill NorganThe downside of going for Edward as the candidate is that the only service identified so far is as an artilleryman. If there anything in his Great War era service records to indicate earlier infantry service with a Volunteer Battalion?

Cheers,
Peter

[FROGSMILE]

10 hours ago, PRC said:

So cuff style introduced in 1902, when Edward would have had his 16th birthday,  Thomas his 12th and William Henry would have had his 7th birthday.

Even assuming an age 16 enlistment and assuming that is the age of the young man pictured here, then you’d still be looking at 1906 at the earliest for Thomas and 1911 for William Henry.

Obviously every year older for each individual means a year later – would an 18 year old William Henry have been wearing this for the 1913 camp for example?

@Gill NorganThe downside of going for Edward as the candidate is that the only service identified so far is as an artilleryman. If there anything in his Great War era service records to indicate earlier infantry service with a Volunteer Battalion?

Cheers,
Peter

It’s very hard to pin down a date, as you’ve implied Peter.  The frocks and tunics were still being worn for walking out in 1913, but in the case of the original 10th London’s only up until 1912, and I don’t know if they had a camp that year before being disbanded.  I’m quite intrigued as to what happened to those few keen members that they did have, who must have migrated either, into the new 10th (Hackney), or the 3rd London’s with one of its drill stations in Paddington.  If I were pushed, and scraping the barrel for clues, I’d say that the centrally parted hair suggests Edward VII rather than George V and that if it was after 1905 I’d have expected the new peaked universal service cap to be in eyeshot, even if not being worn.  Previously the men had only folding field service caps. 

Edited 22 December , 2022 by FROGSMILE

[Gill Norgan]

18 hours ago, PRC said:

So cuff style introduced in 1902, when Edward would have had his 16th birthday,  Thomas his 12th and William Henry would have had his 7th birthday.

Even assuming an age 16 enlistment and assuming that is the age of the young man pictured here, then you’d still be looking at 1906 at the earliest for Thomas and 1911 for William Henry.

Obviously every year older for each individual means a year later – would an 18 year old William Henry have been wearing this for the 1913 camp for example?

@Gill NorganThe downside of going for Edward as the candidate is that the only service identified so far is as an artilleryman. If there anything in his Great War era service records to indicate earlier infantry service with a Volunteer Battalion?

Cheers,
Peter

Edward is really the only candidate because of the address on the back of the photo, even though you wouldn’t think that the first three photos all feature the same man. Last night I re-examined all the records that I found on Ancestry and searched again. I have looked again at his enlistment papers, he gave that address when he enlisted in May 1915. I thought he enlisted in September 1914 but that was his brother Thomas. (I haven’t found any enlistment papers for William.) 

 

 

[FROGSMILE]

25 minutes ago, Gill Norgan said:

Edward is really the only candidate because of the address on the back of the photo, even though you wouldn’t think that the first three photos all feature the same man. Last night I re-examined all the records that I found on Ancestry and searched again. I have looked again at his enlistment papers, he gave that address when he enlisted in May 1915. I thought he enlisted in September 1914 but that was his brother Thomas. (I haven’t found any enlistment papers for William.) 

 

 

Gill I don’t think that the young man in the photo wearing a rifle green, undress frock, appears in any of the other photos.  The only one where I can see just a slight family resemblance, is with William in hospital blue.

Edited 22 December , 2022 by FROGSMILE

[PRC]

While I agree the resemblance with William is stronger, I do wonder if that may be an age thing for the Norgan brothers. I know it's only an assumption on my part that the unknown soldier is probably no more than a teenager, but if we follow that through then the 1886 born Edward would fit the age profile in circa 1902-1905. If he then doesn't join the Royal Field Artillery until 1915, and we assume that chronologically because of the clothing worn the Warminster group shot comes next, followed by the studio portrait, then you could be looking at Edward a minimum of 10 years older.

No new IP was created in producing the above and all image rights remain with the current owners.

Lots of assumptions and more than happy to be shot down, particularly as there appears to be no confirmation from Edwards RFA attestation of any previous military service.

Cheers,
Peter

Edited 22 December , 2022 by PRC
Typo

[Gill Norgan]

1 hour ago, PRC said:

While I agree the resemblance with William is stronger, I do wonder if that may be an age thing for the Norgan brothers. I know it's only an assumption on my part that the unknown soldier is probably no more than a teenager, but if we follow that through then the 1886 born Edward would fit the age profile in circa 1902-1905. If he then doesn't join the Royal Field Artillery until 1915, and we assume that chronologically because of the clothing worn the Warminster group shot comes next, followed by the studio portrait, then you could be looking at Edward a minimum of 10 years older.

No new IP was created in producing the above and all image rights remain with the current owners.

Lots of assumptions and more than happy to be shot down, particularly as there appears to be no confirmation from Edwards RFA attestation of any previous military service.

Cheers,
Peter

Peter, thanks for the lineup, very useful 😃. I completely agree that the unknown young man is probably a teenager. I’m thinking out loud here, I agree with @FROGSMILEthat he doesn’t really look like Edward: there’s a bit of similarity at the mouth but the shape of the nose is quite different. Zooming in to the portraits of Edward and William I can see the resemblance, (and the resemblance to both my Dad and brother). And that’s my lot, I have ground to a halt! 
 

My heartiest thanks to all who have contributed to this thread, it has been a very interesting conversation 😘. I will be back.

[PRC]

Gill, one last question, (for now)

Are any of the Norgan brothers believed to be present in the picture of the signalling section you posted?

Cheers,
Peter

[Gill Norgan]

11 minutes ago, PRC said:

Gill, one last question, (for now)

Are any of the Norgan brothers believed to be present in the picture of the signalling section you posted?

Cheers,
Peter

On the reverse of that photo it says “Mrs Norgan” and the group has been identified as the 10th Battalion London Regiment (Hackney) by @CorporalPunishment, @Bob Davies and @Hackney Gurkha. I believe this battalion was William’s first placing. 
I nominate this young man as bearing a resemblance to him:

[PRC]

15 minutes ago, Gill Norgan said:

I nominate this young man as bearing a resemblance to him:

I'd gone for someone different, but then I've not looked at these pictures as often as you
You're nomination on the left, mine on the right, and of course the known picture of William in the middle.

No new IP was created in producing the above and all image rights remain with the current owners.

Cheers,
Peter

[FROGSMILE]

After a careful look I’m inclined to agree with Gill on this occasion.  I can see a strong resemblance between the two images. 

[Bob Davies]

2 hours ago, PRC said:

No new IP was created in producing the above and all image rights remain with the current owners.

Lots of assumptions and more than happy to be shot down, particularly as there appears to be no confirmation from Edwards RFA attestation of any previous military service.

Cheers,
Peter

I will say that these are the same person, left hand picture is the OP, a very young man, barely 14 or 15 years old. Hospital blues man is the same person.

 

23 minutes ago, PRC said:

No new IP was created in producing the above and all image rights remain with the current owners.

Cheers,
Peter

Right hand soldier is not the middle soldier. Left hand soldier could well be the middle soldier.

[PRC]

Would this side by side comparison help?

Hopefully in the correct chronological order if the middle one is believed to have been taken on a pre-war camp.  Bear in mind that if they are all of William Norgan, he was only born in 1895, so there aren't many years between them. He was killed in action in May 1917.

Peter.
 

No new IP was created in producing the above and all image rights remain with the current owners.

 

[FROGSMILE]

8 hours ago, PRC said:

Would this side by side comparison help?

Hopefully in the correct chronological order if the middle one is believed to have been taken on a pre-war camp.  Bear in mind that if they are all of William Norgan, he was only born in 1895, so there aren't many years between them. He was killed in action in May 1917.

Peter.
 

No new IP was created in producing the above and all image rights remain with the current owners.

 

The line up is indeed helpful.  The centre and right hand man look very similar and might be the same man a year or two apart, but I think the left hand man is someone else.

[Bob Davies]

On 21/12/2022 at 13:40, PRC said:

So unless those records reference any pre-war TF infantry service then likely your first picture isn’t Edward Norgan either.

Nothing on there Peter and all. He enlisted 1-5-'15 at Handel Street, Bloomsbury, listed as a 'shoeing smith' A Bty  290th Brigade RFA.  Born 1886. Edward has to be the man pictured on his own with the Artillery cap badge and on the group picture holding the horseshoe. William is listed on fold 3 courtesy of ancestry.co.uk and his service medals; Nothing more than you already have on Thomas. Other than he signed up as a 1st London Regt Royal Fus TF on 4 Sept 1914 apparent age 24 years 2 months, from his attestation papers. He was not serving previously. Wife is Mary Norgan. I think that the OP soldier is not William, Edward or Thomas.