My British Headdress Collection **RECOMMENDED**

[pjac]

Hi Stuart

I found the same photo on the web http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Royal_Naval_Division_trench.jpg , which shows more men. I think you're right -I noticed particularly the helmet of the man on the left, scrambling out of the trench (rifle horizontal), and the man further to the right on the larger photo, who is pushing off with his right leg from the back wall of the trench . I tried blowing it up with Photoshop but this actually makes the detail less clear. Interesting that this photo is described in the link both as photo of the RND training, and of an actual charge.

Cheers

Patrick

[Stuart Bates]

Hi Patrick,

this photo is all over the web and I not only got a hardcopy of it but also bought a CD set of the The War Illustrated which contains it.

I scanned the photo and tried to improve it in Photoshop but not much joy. Like you, I encountered loss of detail when enlarging it so settled for cropping the two soldiers most likely.

I suspect that it is a training charge as The War Illustrated was rather sensationalistic and patriotic.

It is a pity that I didn't find it where you did as I notice it is not subject to copyright. Oh well!

Stuart

[leigh kitchen]

I think I have a large, sepia copy of this, about 10" x 8", mounted on thick card with handwritten detail, I think printed off by the IWM some decades ago - time to search the garage again.

[Stuart Bates]

Good luck!

[coldstream]

Stuart

Just been through your entire collection again and as always blown away by the range and quality of your collection. Just wondered if you 've had any luck identifying the Yeomanry cap in post 105?

Simon

[Luke]

Amazing collection!

[Stuart Bates]

Simon,

the closest I ever came was the Royal Gloucestershire Hussars but it differs slightly from the one in Carman's book on Yeomanry headgear. This was confirmed recently by David Mcalpine through Les Martin, the UK dealer. Either it is a variation or has been tampered with. Regardless Les is prepared to pay handsomely for it if I ever want to sell so I am not unhappy.

I will try to do some more research.

Stuart

Edited May 24, 2010 by Stuart Bates

[Stuart Bates]

Luke,

glad you like my collection.

Stuart

[Stuart Bates]

Simon,

well you prompted me to investigate the Cavalry Shako and whilst I have plenty of general information I cannot pin it down to a particular unit.

1. It is an 1846 pattern shako - black beaver skin, 7" at the front, 8" at the rear and should be 8" diameter at the top but is just over 7"

2. It has the correct cap-lines which were terminated by olives (acorns) and with the bell-top shako festoon discontinued. The lines wrapped twice around the body of the shako

3. It had rose pattern ornaments for the chin-chain whereas this one has the lion-pattern

4. The lace is of the 4th Hussars (see 1900 DRs) who converted from Light Dragoons in 1861

5. The lace specified in the 1846, 1855 and 1857 DRs state oak-leaf design which it is not. The 1864 DRs specify lace of regimental design.

6. The plume was of white swan feathers but changed to scarlet in 1855

7. The cartwheel braid to the front has the braid loop descending to the centre of the cartwheel and with a button of regimental pattern (1846 DRs). This was seen on the bell top shako which preceded this pattern

8. The 1846 pattern had a Maltese cross shako plate

OK, I do not think it is related in any way to the Royal Gloucestershire Hussars, nor do I think it is a regular cavalry shako.

Unless the lace design adopted by the 4th Hussars was available before 1864, which I think highly likely, then we must date the shako from around 1864! Shakos were still being worn by some Yeomanry Cavalry at this time, e.g. Pembrokeshire but that one of the 1855/7 pattern.

From all this I can only surmise that it belonged to an, as yet, unidentified Yeomanry/Light Horse or Mounted Rifles unit. I have to say that it looks and feels right.

Any assistance welcomed.

Stuart

Edited May 25, 2010 by Stuart Bates

[leigh kitchen]

Found it, an original of the photo shown in posts no. 145 & 150:

Edited May 25, 2010 by leigh kitchen

[leigh kitchen]

A few close ups:

[leigh kitchen]

.

[leigh kitchen]

.

[leigh kitchen]

.

[leigh kitchen]

.

[coldstream]

Stuart

Thanks for the update. An intriguing piece indeed. I'm away from home at the moment but will go through my Yeomanry sources when I return and see what I can turn up.

Excellent photos as always Leigh.

Simon

[pjac]

Stuart, Leigh

Leigh's version(s) of the photo we've all looked at leave no doubt -same design. A good piece of work ! However, back to the question -why is this model so rare? Also, it doesn't seem to be standard issue to RND, given the helmets shown on my photo of the Hood at Gallipoi, although the men appear to be officers , who perhaps had a different model from seamen. Intriguing!

Patrick

[leigh kitchen]

Some helmets with pugarees, some without - post no. 165 ( also 163) seems to be the best in terms of the pugaree variation as per Stuart's helmet?

The photo I have is 10" x !2" & mounted on thck card with the inked title "Charge by the Royal Naval Division: Dardanelles".

[Stuart Bates]

Leigh,

brilliant! #s 162, 163 and 165 show it clearly. Now, we have all seen plenty of Wolseleys in our time but I don't think anyone here has seen one like my RND. My reading indicates that the RND, at least in the early stages, were proudly and fiercely Navy so would probably adopt measures to distinguish themselves from Army units. We could jump from that to saying it was peculiar to the RND but, really, where to from here? Pity there isn't an RND museum. I will check again on the net and see if there is any organisation that I can contact.

Patrick, we could also simply say that officers did not have this feature but that is going too far on the basis of one photograph.

I'll see what I can dig up, but don't let that stop any of you from trying

Stuart

PS: love the avatar Patrick.

Edited May 25, 2010 by Stuart Bates

[Stuart Bates]

Simon,

I hope you turn up something as I have now hit a brick wall

Stuart

[Stuart Bates]

Right, I have emailed the Royal Navy museum. I hope they can/will help.

Stuart

[Stuart Bates]

So far not a sausage from the RN museum. Should I offer money ?

Anyway have just added another ORs' blue cloth to the collection - King's Liverpool -

[Mike Dwyer]

So far not a sausage from the RN museum. Should I offer money ?

Anyway have just added another ORs' blue cloth to the collection - King's Liverpool -

Stuart,

If you keep this up, I'm going to pass out! You have such beautiful, beautiful helmets they take my breath away each time you post one!! :speechless1:

[Stuart Bates]

Mike,

for god's sake stay vertical

I had to get another ORs blue cloth, i.e. a good one, since I cocked-up badly on another thread because I assumed that ORs' helmets would be the same as officers'. Not so

There is a "nice" officers' BC locally available but it has an ORs' helmet plate, damn it. I have cast around for a replacement plate but they are almost as expensive as a proper helmet. Besides I don't muck around with my stuff. That is excepting the first ORs BC I recently bought with a RMLI plate. The marines discontinued the BC in 1905 and the helmet has a WD stamp of 1907, but I knew this before buying. I needed to get an example to know what I was talking about.

Apart from Wilkinson-Latham's booklet on the Blue Cloth I am not aware of any other publication on the subject and that publication is light on, to say the least, when it comes to the ORs version.

Stuart

[Stuart Bates]

This is my first Other Ranks blue cloth. As said earlier, and on the thread Home Service Helmet, I bought this one because I knew it would go cheaply on eBay and I wanted one to know what I was talking about.

I pointed out to the seller that the helmet plate was an RMLI one and that they had discontinued the BC in 1905 whereas this helmet has a WD stamp of 1907. He obligingly updated his description.

I have exchanged the plate for a Hampshire one, but am not at all sure why, as I would never pass it off as other than what it was when I found it. Nevertheless it is in my collection.

Stuart

Edited June 8, 2010 by Stuart Bates