|
|
Post by goldeagle1939 on Jan 16, 2010 18:36:50 GMT -8
This I think goes to further a debate I have seen quite often in reenacting. Period official documentation, VS. personal interpretation.
Did soldiers wear thier gor-blimeys with chinstraps, well I guess they did due to the photo evidence that Radford has brought forth. However, one has to ask how common it was on the whole.
We as living historians I think historians have to portray the norm as it pertains to the army we are portraying. did personal modification happen in the army? yes it did but if we allow to much personal interpretation then we run the risk of having too much farb in the era. I have seen it happen to civil war reenacting.
So while I appreciate some amount of leniancy, It is best all around if we stick to the norm, and do things as perscribed per the period regulations and period documentation.
|
|
|
|
Post by rsm2ndbtnlf on Jan 21, 2010 16:44:28 GMT -8
Getting back to 'Q-14'.... The only one of the three officers shown that I personally would follow.. is the individual on the right. He's the only one to show anywhere near the authority required, and his bearing is that inline with his impression. The following two illustrations show how a salute should be given..   It goes to show what can be achieved when the correct research is carried out and thus applied. 'Q-15' follows shortly! Seph ;D |
|
|
|
Post by rsm2ndbtnlf on Jan 22, 2010 0:18:48 GMT -8
Here we are.. eyes down, put your thinking caps on for 'Q-15.' I'll be leaving this one up over the weekend, as I'm carrying out improvements to the British sector of the trench system. So....  This will be a two parter, and the mind boggles to think of what answers will be awaiting me. Anyway, lets get on with it! 'Q-15'.1) What is the Specific Nationality illustrated? 2) What is wrong with the bayonet? Have fun! Seph ;D |
|
|
|
Post by aefstraggler on Jan 22, 2010 5:29:18 GMT -8
part 2 - the bayonet is reversed in the scabbard
|
|
|
|
Post by Larry Dunn on Jan 22, 2010 8:46:09 GMT -8
I'll be leaving this one up over the weekend, as I'm carrying out improvements to the British sector of the trench system... Don't forget your snowshoes, ice axe and crampons! ;D -Larry |
|
|
|
Post by oskar2ndchev on Jan 22, 2010 9:30:35 GMT -8
'Q-15'.
1) What is the Specific Nationality illustrated?
2) What is wrong with the bayonet? No. 2 is pretty obvious as stated above- the bayonet is reversed. As for No. 1, it appears that it's a depiction of a Commonwealth soldier but no doubt there's something subtle there I've missed. :-) |
|
|
|
Post by aefstraggler on Jan 22, 2010 9:42:09 GMT -8
The bottom / front of the coat appears to be rounded. If that is the case, if it is rounded,
then it could be what was called (I belive) a doublet style coat. That style of coat was
used by some (many?) Scottish regiments.
Not really sure of why - possibly to show of more of kilt?
On the other hand - the soldier in question doesn't seem to be wearing a kilt.
|
|
|
|
Post by goldeagle1939 on Jan 22, 2010 11:52:27 GMT -8
Yay! a question regarding scottish kit.
Yes John you are correct, Scottish troops were issued with the Highland Pattern Cut-away service dress. It was desinded due in part because in the later part of the 19th C. when the british army was wearing scarlet red tunics still, the Scottish "doublet" was very different indeed to the the regular regimental scarlet tunics.
When the Service Dress was introduced, the Highland pattern designed to vaugely resemble the Highland doublet. As you said John, it was to show the kilt, and also to fascilitate the wearing of the Sporran.
Now having said that, not all Scottish troops wore the highland pattern Service dress coat or even the kilt. The best example would be motorcycle dispatch or mounted troops were the kilt would get in the way. Also Lowland scottish regiments would wear trews or regular Service dress trousers, exp: the Cameronian rifles. I have seen many period photos of scottish troops in regular service dress. Though the Kilt was the norm.
In regards to the question, the bayonet is in backwards and as John pointed out, the soldier is wearing a highland cut-away pattern service dress coat. so I guess his nationality would be scottish.
|
|
qms
Full Member
Posts: 100
|
Post by qms on Jan 26, 2010 8:39:13 GMT -8
Gentlemen,
My apologies for butting in late to this quiz (It's the first time in quite a while that I've had access to a machine which will display the photographs).
May I make a point about the colour serjeant (or sergeant, if you prefer) in Q 12.
His error in carrying the cane is that it should be horizontal (not tucked under the arm).
When marching the cane (or pace stick) is carried horizontal, swung with the arm and kept parallel to the ground (this of course changed in the 1930s when the swing of the arms became more exaggrated (to shoulder height).
I'll try and sort out the drill with a cane (yes there is such an animal) if anyone wants - but it will take some time as I'm on a course at the moment.
Tom
|
|
|
|
Post by joesweeney on Jul 15, 2010 23:08:59 GMT -8
Just surfed into this forum following the Siege of Tsing Tao pictures.
I want to point out that in Q3 a chinstrap is very much IAW regulation for a WSD cap.
The Winter Service Dress Cap was introduced in 1914 without a chinstrap. However, A chinstrap was introduced for this cap during the summer of 1915 with the approval of pattern 8446/1915 on 26 July 1915. This was only an admin approval too use the existing pattern chinstrap fixed using hooks (hook and eye hooks like found on the collar) not buttons. The hooks would be sewn to the top of the outer sweatband.
Joe Sweeney
|
|
