Gordon F.S. helmet hackle

[Nick]

:off topic:

Although I joined some time ago the rules have been changed and I can no longer see photos. That is unlike any other forum I belong to and has annoyed me considerably, as I find it petty and divisive. I would have enjoyed adding to the sum total of knowledge in this 'club', but now rarely visit here because of the change.

When you join GMIC you are automatically given 'Restricted Membership' which allows you to view topics but initially precludes you from viewing attachments. By taking out a subscription or paying a one off small admin fee members can gain immediate access to all attachments and have an upload ability to post images. The alternative is to become an active member of the forum and over time you will be given Full Membership."

"Guests also do not have permission to view attachments."

It is because you rarely visit here or contribute that you lost the ability to see photos. The petty and divisive rules were established to stop freeloaders like yourself joining, taking information and not contributing. Funny how that when you lost the ability to see photos you suddenly decided to post. If you can't find the sum total of £2.75 for lifetime image upload and download, well it says it all. ? But thanks for pointing out the rules I will amend them to make it clearer.

~Dr Phil you do have the ability to see images in posts in all forum, the reason you cannot see the image in question is that it was never posted by anyone.

[jf42]

I also cannot see the photograph, but from a similar question on another forum I would hazard the guess that it is of three officers in highland full dress looking to their right. They are wearing typical highland officer's dress with white universal pattern helmets.

I have seen this photograph entitled 'officers of the South Australian Scottish Regiment 1906', and gives their names. Except that the badge on the helmet does not accord with regulations at the time, everything else about their uniform does suggest the title is correct, including the badges on the belt plates. This unit was affiliated with the Seaforth Highlanders.

Having said that, I have been researching the subject for several years now but can't find out why they are wearing a white over red hackle. Did the Highlanders have different coloured hackles for each company? Perhaps the affiliation was with one of the companies and not with the regiment?

This is an interesting addition to a discussion that has been taking place over on the Victorian Wars Forum- where a low resolution copy of the photo can be seen in a thread entitled "Cameron Highlander pith helmet hackle." Certainly these officers have been identified as Gordon Highlanders and the photo features in the Bydand website- although the Gordon Highlanders Museum has been unable to cast any light on the red-over-white hackles. The red gauntlet cuffs coupled with the Foreign Service helmet decked out for Winter Full Dress would seem to date the photograph between 1878 and 1880 just before the 92nd returned to Britain and were paired with the 75th to form the Gordon Highlanders. However, your reference to the South Australia Regiment in 1906 with the three officers being named throws the game open.

It does seem odd, though, that the Gordons have claimed the officers as theirs. I am not a master of the minutiae of accoutrements, someone else might be able to deal with that. However, if you look at the photograph I mentioned, although the kilt detail is very poor there is some detail visible on the left hand officer's right hand thigh area, which looks more like Black Watch than anything else, but the dark stripe forming a cross in the lighter square is likely to be the yellow of the Gordon sett as yellow showed black on photographs of the 1870s ( witness the black stripes on US cavalry uniforms of the same period). I would expect the white stripe of the Mackenzie sett to show up as white either in 1878-80 or 1906.

Another thought: was the Foreign Service Helmet still being worn in Australian regiments when British regiments had started wearing the Wolseley? However, it now dawns on me that the shape of the red-and-white hackles on those FS helmets does resemble the shape of the feather flashes sometimes worn above the badge/clasp on the turned up brim of Australian bush hats, which might be significant. All in all, an intriguing twist in the story.

While I'm typing, I think to describe Toby Purcell as a freeloader is harsh, however much his impatient comments might rankle. He is a knowledgeable and generous- nay, prolific- contributor elsewhere. My twopence halfpenny.

[Mervyn Mitton]

jf - my apologies for breaking into your thread - however, such gratuitous insults to our Forum required an answer. A simple enquiry from him would have cleared the matter. Unfortunately, I felt it necessary to draw Nick's attention and he obviously felt the same !

I have heard stories about incidents of routine insults amongst members of other forums, that I find hard to believe - all the more reason that we keep GMIC on a responsible and friendly path.

The incident is now finished and I hope members will continue to respond to this historically interesting thread. Mervyn

[Mervyn Mitton]

Toby - with your long military career you know - as do I - that a personal approach is always better. You have IM'd me and I am pleased to hear from you and also to see you posting. We do not want to lose you as a member - especially not over a small matter . Please continue to post and do tell us about your background - your knowledge and expertise will be valued. Mervyn