jocktamson

Very nice uniform group, thanks for sharing.

I agree with jf42, the officers look to engrossed in conversation for the photo to be staged.

Its a piece of made up tat....its not in the style of an H.L.I. Shako, the badge is a post 1902 other ranks, the dicing has been cut from a glengarry and is red/white/blue, the H.L.I. is red/white/green, the black diamond at the back is where the two tails have been cut off, and you can even see where they have badly stitched the whole thing on...its then been sent to the blind school to have the lace stitched on at the top, where they havent even bothered putting the joint of the lace at the rear and stitched the joint on the side. All in all i would say pay someone to take it off your hands or use it as a tea cosy.

Mervyn...I think that is a very rocky road to go down suggesting something that has a high price attached to it gives it more credence to being genuine or substantiating its age. If anything I would be more suspicious when something of that age and rarity suddenly appears with no trace of provenance other than a dealer selling it 20 years before. Dealers get it wrong as well.... Provenance is King when dealing with something this old or subjective, as they usually 'aquire' an interesting story along the way that can be unearthed with a little research, thus giving the item even more credibility. I am with Brian, I would happily walk away from it and believe i had dodged a bullet. as no one can say for sure where it came from more than 20 years prior and that for me would be the overriding factor in buying it.

Mervyn .... 1. I was not questioning Blunderbuss Antiques reputabilty, It was said tongue in cheek, i was merely commenting on the fact that the Auction house are supplying them as Provenance, when the drum supposedly originates from the 1720s. I dont know what your idea of provenance is, but something from 1720 needs a little more substantial provenance than a dealer from 1994 saying its original. 2. I would agree Kev is entitled to post requests for information whenever he feels like it. However, he obviously had much more information than he was originally prepared to share. If he would like honest opinions on something, put any information he has at hand on the object and let everyone have a starting point to at least form an opinion on and decide if they want to contribute. I am not suggesting he put the auction site, or where its for sale. 'very early drum info needed' is fairly vague when you already have some information on the object to hand. 3. I agree with Brian, the level of membership should have no bearing on whether someone feels obligated to respond to a request for information. I thought we shared Information for a common good, not because someone has paid more for a membership than someone else. 4. I'll finish by simply agreeing it's up to individual members how much information they feel they should or should not provide, in my case. I am more than happy to contribute information if i can, but providing valuations if requested is something that i personally am not prepared to do.

LOL....Blunderbuss Antiques as Provenance, didnt realise they had been around since 1720

Appears to be post 1939 The Royal Army Medical Corps The 1929 Regulations give a 'cloth patch 3" x 2". blue ground, plum edges with a yellow stripe through centre'. This is altered in the 1939 edition to read 'Silk ribbon 3" x 2" in the Corps colours, arranged vertically on stiff background, colours each 2/3" wide; dull cherry worn to the front', the other colours being dark blue and old gold. According to the Corps Museum the patch was worn with the old gold stripe to the front .

Saw this on ogallerie.com looks as if the the peak may have come loose and been stitched back on

Answered my own question...discovered what it is....apparently an 1888 Mauser Pouch.

Hello All, picked this up recently at a car boot, I have no idea what type of ammo pouch or what weapon its for. I am presuming German WW1 period as it has a Berlin Makers mark on the pouch and ive seen similar markings on pickelhaubes....any help appreciated. Cheers.

That was quick...cheers Peter, thats a great help. I am not good with WW1 equipment, I tried to find a decent photo showing yeomanry or cavalry wearing the 50 round, but to no avail. Thanks again, your input is much appreciated. Benny

Hello all, Ive been asked this question by a relative and not being well up on ww1 equipment, i thought someone here may know. Would Cavalry and Yeomanry have used the 90 round bandolier exclusively or did they also wear the standard 50 round bandolier as well. Thanks for any help.

Yes its a Scottish Rifles OR's pattern Shako Mervyn....so many of them are missing the plume, someone has just put an officers plume as a replacement. The officers pattern have lace arond the bottom and top edges of the shako as in my own shako...here http://gmic.co.uk/index.php/topic/45483-scottish-uniforms-accoutrements/

Just a slight correction Mervyn, the plume on the Scottish Rifles Shako is actually an officers plume, The Other ranks wore a Brush style plume the same as the Shako on the left in the post below at post #34 http://gmic.co.uk/index.php/topic/43871-tam-oshanteror-what-is-it/page__st__20

Thankyou Mike & Jonas, I think i might have found the answer to mervyn's question....it seems it may not be any individual in particular...just a play on words....between light and heavy dragoons.. http://www.sotherans.co.uk/Search.php?stk=2052948&sText=%20&type[]=prints Thought I would share one more i have with everyone.