Grenadier or Fusilier

[Bear]

Hello,

Anyway to determine the Regiment/Foot of this soldier. I'm not sure what I'd call the color of his facing.(willow green, lincoln green, popinjay green, gosling green, buff, pale buff)

thanks,

barry

[Bear]

maybe

I believe its a pale buff or buff. The photo looks green.

maybe

27 Enniskilling

31 Huntingdonshire

61 South Gloucestershire

71 Highland

78 Highland or Rosshire Buffs

98 Foot103 Loyal Bristol Volunteers

Edited February 26, 2009 by Bear

[leigh kitchen]

Is there any definite detail on the shoulder belt plate?

I'm "sure" that part of the design is a 4 - legged beast similar to the "Pascal Lamb", facing to the viewer's left. Possibly another animal, such as an antelope though?

In fact, having had another look, I'm going for a dragon - the 3rd Foot - The Buffs. In fact, were'nt their facings green at one stage?

I can't find my copy of Parkins to check for an illustration of their plate.

[leigh kitchen]

And the 2nd Foot wore sea green as their facing colour at one time - could that gentleman in the portrait be wearing sea green facings & the Paschal lamb of the 2nd on the SBP? I don't know whether the combination of that facing colour & the lamb on the SBP would be correct though, they may have been worn at different times, have to check.

[Stuart Bates]

The 2nd had sea green facings in 1751 even though they were The Queen's Own Royal Regiment of Foot and should have had blue which they obtained in 1768.

There was a Clothing Warrant in 1768 so maybe this had something to do with it.

I don't think the Buffs had any other facing than buff at least after 1742.

Leigh, what is the full title of the Parkins book?

Edited February 7, 2010 by Stuart Bates

[leigh kitchen]

Today is a clear the garage day, I'll try to find the book.

I'll modify my position to blue facngs being shown in this painting wth a SBP with a standing beast facing left as viewed, perhaps a few letters above? 2nd Foot?

Can anyone else see such a beast on the SBP or is it just me?

[Mervyn Mitton]

I did Hugh's press Ctrl and + and to me it looks like an elephant - with the trunk hanging to the Left ?

[Bear]

Hello,

Hard to tell with the portraits being so tiny.

Here is one that I always wondered about such as rank with the neat epaulettes.

circa 1790

[leigh kitchen]

The 2nd had sea green facings in 1751 even though they were The Queen's Own Royal Regiment of Foot and should have had blue which they obtained in 1768.

There was a Clothing Warrant in 1768 so maybe this had something to do with it.

I don't think the Buffs had any other facing than buff at least after 1742.

Leigh, what is the full title of the Parkins book?

Found the book - "(Military) Shoulder-Belt Plates and Buttons by Major HG Parkyn OBE", published by Gale & Polden, 1956.

So it's a little dated now...........

[Stuart Bates]

Leigh,

found the book but the price is high, too high at $195 - $383.

Thanks,

Stuart

[Stuart Bates]

I think I can see 4 legs but the Paschal lamb had one front leg wrapped around a flag pole. The legs here seem to be straight and forward.

Did the lamb always have the flag?

It could be a lion.

Edited February 7, 2010 by Stuart Bates

[leigh kitchen]

Parkyn's book mentions the Paschal Lamb used originally by the regiment not actually being a Paschal Lamb, having no banner, & a depiction showing it with a bushy tail (the Paschal Lamb should always have the halo & the flag).

The SBP he shows don't have the lamb as the main part of the design, but small & within a wreath or star & with head turned towards the viewer.

Could the design above the beast on our Fusiler / Grenadier's SBP actually be a swallow tailed flag?

Those prices for the book seem very steep Stuart, & Id've thought that there'd be a newer biger & better publication by now.

I agree that the beast on th SBP could be a lion, a dragon, or as Merv's suggested an elephant dressing to the left, or an antelope, but I'm running with the lamb at the moment.

Edited February 7, 2010 by leigh kitchen

[leigh kitchen]

.

[leigh kitchen]

Here's the style of Paschal Lamb used as the Queen's Regiment (West Surreys) cap badge from about the 1890's - 1920's.

I have'nt got a scan of the 1920's - version to hand, but the small lamb in the centre of the Queen's Surreys cap badge shows it, albeit in miniature - firm jawed, high stepping with the right instead of left front leg, barrel bodied, altogether more sturdy than its predecessor, the flag no longer swallow tailed.

[Stuart Bates]

No. 82 is the one shown in Franklin's book and he dates it circa 1810. Now if this style and its variant made it to 1830 then the regiment can't be the 2nd if there is a 4 legged animal on the SBP.

[leigh kitchen]

I know, the dates & designs don't fit, but just looking at post no. 1 again I still go for the lamb complete with flag ("held" by front right leg & possibly swallow tailed) & with a scroll or lettering or something above.......it's just a bit inconvenient that nothng other than what I think I can see supports my opinion.

[Stuart Bates]

An inconvenient set of truths! Although looking at post #1 again I could also agree with the Paschal Lamb but I can't see a flag.

[leigh kitchen]

This is about what I'm thinking.........or maybe the lambs head is turnng to face the viewer

Edited February 8, 2010 by leigh kitchen

[Stuart Bates]

Leigh,

you are tenacious to an extreme! I don't think the lamb's head is turned to the viewer - assuming that it is a lamb.

But the problem will always be the contrary information.

Would an enquiry to the regimental museum or NAM be worth the trouble?

Stuart

[leigh kitchen]

Could be.

Being an artists representation of what could be seen as minor detail perhaps license was employed, painting a central portion of a design rather than the whole of wreath etc.

I've had a search through Parkyns & none of the lambs, lions, antelopes, tigers, elephants wth & without howdahs appear "on their own" like this.

Wonder if that long horizontal rectangularish blob above the lamb is actually the flag, to the rght of the triangular halo................?

Good job Sphinx's don't have legs otherwise they'd be included amongst the suspects.

ATime for me to let it go I think.

[Stuart Bates]

Yep! Time to let it go and hope somebody else can take over.

I will persist with the other one when my next lot of Army Lists arrive.

Stuart

[peter monahan]

Bear wrote:

"Hard to tell with the portraits being so tiny. Here is one that I always wondered about such as rank with the neat epaulettes. circa 1790"

For the Napoleonic period, British officers wore one epaulette if Ensigns, Lieutenants or Captains and two if Majors or above. I don't believe the 'decorations' on these lovely epaulettes are part of any official ranking system, as one was just supposed to 'know' the rank of the officer - narrowed down to the 2 'ranges' I mentioned - but not differentiated within them. I'd guess that the gentleman is a highly ranked officer but the actual devices may be a unit custom or just something the wearer thought looked martial and magnificent.

Similarly, in theory one might glean some hints from the style and arrangement of the lacing as well as the facings on the tunic: square ends vs pointed, arranged singly [as this case], in pairs, trios or even fours. Sadly, as officers had their own uniforms made by private tailors, they tended to wear what they liked and most higher ups didn't quibble. I own, for example, a tunic made after a contemporary portrait and while the square ended lace should be aranged in ten singles for the regiment portrayed[ Royal Newfoundland Regiment] it is in fact in 5 pairs. Maddening!

So, the gent in the first portrait should be an Ensign, Lt. or Captain, which fits with his apparent age, but he has buttoned his double breasted tunic so the facing colour on the lapels is not visible and the lacing you can see is decoration around the buttonholes and can't be linked to any unit or units!

Sorry!

Peter

Edited February 10, 2010 by peter monahan