Raindancer411 Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 Hi, can anyone help me with what this uniform is please? I am not sure if it’s the 1st or 2nd WW, but suspect 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner 87 Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 (edited) Hello Raindancer411. The soldier is wearing a leather jerkin which started to be issued in 1915. The Brodie helmet he is wearing were issued from the summer of 1916. The soldier does not appear to have spurs and as such is likely a unit that operates on foot such as the infantry. It maybe the case that he is a local regiment to Brighton as per the studio location bottom right. Maybe the Royal Sussex Regiment. The badge on the front of the helmet 'could' be that regiment but it's very blurred shape is too distorted to say for definite.he webbing appears to be 1908 Pattern. The soldier is also wearing Puttees which were used from 1902 to 1938. I would say the photograph is of a Great War soldier. Maybe one of our more experience members can spot a clue or offer a different opinion. @FROGSMILE Edited 23 April , 2023 by Gunner 87 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Gunner 87 said: Hello Raindancer411. The soldier is wearing a leather jerkin which started to be issued in 1915. The Brodie helmet he is wearing were issued from the summer of 1916. The soldier does not appear to have spurs and as such is likely a unit that operates on foot such as the infantry. It maybe the case that he is a local regiment to Brighton as per the studio location bottom right. Maybe the Royal Sussex Regiment. The badge on the front of the helmet 'could' be that regiment but it's very blurred shape is too distorted to say for definite.he webbing appears to be 1908 Pattern. The soldier is also wearing Puttees which were used from 1902 to 1938. I would say the photograph is of a Great War soldier. Maybe one of our more experience members can spot a clue or offer a different opinion. @FROGSMILE I totally agree with the assessment of Gunner 87. It’s a poor scan though and a better one focusing in on the helmet to show the badge should identify the regiment. It’s quite a large badge and therefore not I think Royal Sussex Regiment. Badges on helmets became increasingly more popular between 1916 and 1918 so I’d date the photo to the second half of WW1. His helmet also has a fitted cover that chimes with that time frame. Edited 23 April , 2023 by FROGSMILE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raindancer411 Posted 23 April , 2023 Author Share Posted 23 April , 2023 Thank you both, I shall see if I can get my scanner working later and show a clearer photo. I know one family member in WW1, but that was Navy, so shall have a look to see if he has any brothers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Raindancer411 said: Thank you both, I shall see if I can get my scanner working later and show a clearer photo. I know one family member in WW1, but that was Navy, so shall have a look to see if he has any brothers. If he was Royal Naval Division (a formation formed from surplus naval reservists to fight on land with the Army) then it’s not impossible it’s him. A good, ‘high dpi’ scan focused on the helmet and badge should confirm. Edited 23 April , 2023 by FROGSMILE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raindancer411 Posted 23 April , 2023 Author Share Posted 23 April , 2023 There could be a possible 3rd brother and I have no details on him, so another possibility. I shall sort out scanning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Raindancer411 said: There could be a possible 3rd brother and I have no details on him, so another possibility. I shall sort out scanning It’s a fine, evocative, and relatively unusual photo, in that it shows him in frontline equipment, but in portrait format. Photos are more commonly either, taken at home in walking-out dress, or barracks working dress, or overseas with groups of comrades in field dress. The Brighton setting suggests that he had it taken whilst on leave, quite late in the war, and still wearing his frontline uniform. Wearing the helmet for such a portrait is quite unusual. A deliberate portrayal of himself as a fighting man. Edited 23 April , 2023 by FROGSMILE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raindancer411 Posted 23 April , 2023 Author Share Posted 23 April , 2023 So I have had a quick look at the three photos I have from my Great Aunt. One is in the Navy and in uniform (Name on back so confirmed), then I have another brother who is in an army looking uniform and if I can read what the back says, it does say a number and something like 3rd Buffs (unreadable bit) Barracks Dover Road with his name. I then went onto my ancestry and there are a further two brothers who fought but I am unable to access their records as my ancestry has run out, so it could be them, IF the other army photo I have isn't another of this lovely gent with a moustache and different uniform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner 87 Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 1 minute ago, Raindancer411 said: So I have had a quick look at the three photos I have from my Great Aunt. One is in the Navy and in uniform (Name on back so confirmed), then I have another brother who is in an army looking uniform and if I can read what the back says, it does say a number and something like 3rd Buffs (unreadable bit) Barracks Dover Road with his name. I then went onto my ancestry and there are a further two brothers who fought but I am unable to access their records as my ancestry has run out, so it could be them, IF the other army photo I have isn't another of this lovely gent with a moustache and different uniform. HI Raindancer411. If you let us know the number or names we can check for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 3 minutes ago, Raindancer411 said: So I have had a quick look at the three photos I have from my Great Aunt. One is in the Navy and in uniform (Name on back so confirmed), then I have another brother who is in an army looking uniform and if I can read what the back says, it does say a number and something like 3rd Buffs (unreadable bit) Barracks Dover Road with his name. I then went onto my ancestry and there are a further two brothers who fought but I am unable to access their records as my ancestry has run out, so it could be them, IF the other army photo I have isn't another of this lovely gent with a moustache and different uniform. The badge on the helmet has an approximate shape that fits with the Buffs, but the better scan will prove it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raindancer411 Posted 23 April , 2023 Author Share Posted 23 April , 2023 Ok so details I have are: George David Harriott (Navy - Born 1891) Albert (Bertie) William Harriott (Private No 7776 - Born 1887 - Text looks like B Boy 3rd Buffs (unreadable word) Barracks Dover Road) Frederick Walter Harriott (Born 1885) John Harriott (Born 1883) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner 87 Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Raindancer411 said: Ok so details I have are: George David Harriott (Navy - Born 1891) Albert (Bertie) William Harriott (Private No 7776 - Born 1887 - Text looks like B Boy 3rd Buffs (unreadable word) Barracks Dover Road) Frederick Walter Harriott (Born 1885) John Harriott (Born 1883) Albert William Harriott served in the Royal East Kent Regiment (The Buffs) before transferring to the Labour Corps under number 436607. It doesn't appear the two other brothers served in 'The Buffs' so the photograph could well be Albert looking at the cap badge as @FROGSMILE concurs. Edited 23 April , 2023 by Gunner 87 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Raindancer411 said: Ok so details I have are: George David Harriott (Navy - Born 1891) Albert (Bertie) William Harriott (Private No 7776 - Born 1887 - Text looks like B Boy 3rd Buffs (unreadable word) Barracks Dover Road) Frederick Walter Harriott (Born 1885) John Harriott (Born 1883) I think that Gunner 87’s findings suggest that the Buffs fits well with your photo. B Boy stands for Band Boy and means that he was an enlisted boy entrant in accordance with the statutory minimum school leaving age and probably joined up at around 14-years of age, although it could be even a little younger. The Army preferred the upper age as it was easier to assess whether a lad would grow sufficiently to meet the minimum physical requirements by the time he reached 18-years old. The photo below shows a father and his band boy son. NB. The regiment was not granted the ‘Royal’ appellation until 1935. Edited 23 April , 2023 by FROGSMILE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clk Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 Hi, 45 minutes ago, Raindancer411 said: Albert (Bertie) William Harriott (Private No 7776 - Born 1887 - Text looks like B Boy 3rd Buffs (unreadable word) Barracks Dover Road) 38 minutes ago, Gunner 87 said: Albert William Harriott served in the Royal East Kent Regiment (The Buffs) before transferring to the Labour Corps under number 436607 Albert has a set of service papers on Findmypast which should also be available on Ancestry. IF the transcribed 'year' date of 1915 is when he attested, he would have been about age 32. I wonder whether if what you're reading as 'Boy' is actually 'Coy' - i.e. Company IF the photo is of Albert, hopefully the service record would show when he was in the UK with the 3rd Bn, and may help to narrow down a date for it. Regards Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 1 hour ago, clk said: Hi, Albert has a set of service papers on Findmypast which should also be available on Ancestry. IF the transcribed 'year' date of 1915 is when he attested, he would have been about age 32. I wonder whether if what you're reading as 'Boy' is actually 'Coy' - i.e. Company Chris I think you’re right, that context seems more likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raindancer411 Posted 23 April , 2023 Author Share Posted 23 April , 2023 This is the clearest we can get as the photo itself is rather grainy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner 87 Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 Thank you Raindancer. This is much clearer and definitely 'The Buffs' cap badge.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raindancer411 Posted 23 April , 2023 Author Share Posted 23 April , 2023 Thank you all. So if the other two brothers were not in the Buffs, that must mean that photo is of Albert. Just the other one I have is in a different uniform and he has a moustache, so didnt look the same person. I shall correct my Great Aunt when I take the photos and papers back. You have all be so helpful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner 87 Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 1 minute ago, Raindancer411 said: Thank you all. So if the other two brothers were not in the Buffs, that must mean that photo is of Albert. Just the other one I have is in a different uniform and he has a moustache, so didnt look the same person. I shall correct my Great Aunt when I take the photos and papers back. You have all be so helpful I have searched for both Frederick Walter and John Harriott, including examining family trees which give ambiguous results name and date of birth wise, and can be pretty sure they didn't serve in 'The Buffs' therefore your photograph is almost certainly Albert. Best of luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 23 April , 2023 Share Posted 23 April , 2023 (edited) Great conclusion. I entirely concur with Gunner 87. The latest image is confirmatory as anticipated. Edited 23 April , 2023 by FROGSMILE 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