Great Britain Post-war No 1 Dress: Green Tunics for Light Infantry Regiments

[Dan M]

I've lately become very interested in the No 1 Dress introduced to the Army after the Second World War, but I can't seem to find too much information on this. One of the questions I have and can't seem to find a reason for is: "Why did the Light Infantry regiments adopt green rather than blue tunics?" Up to 1914, light infantry regiments wore red tunics like the remainder of the non-rifle infantry. They were distinguished by wearing green rather than blue home service helmets. So why, forty years later, was there felt the need to distinguish the light infantry from the line infantry to such a degree? Light infantry continued to wear a green rather than a blue coloured field service cap with No 1 Dress, which would conform to their previous practice.

But I can't find anything on the tunics. Any thoughts?

Cheers,

Dan.

[peter monahan]

Two factors come to mind, Dan. One, the Light Bobs wanted to be as distinct as possible from the 'straight legs' / 'grunts' / 'PBI'. Two, the Lights coveted, even if they rarely wore, rifle green. The Canadian Glengarry Light Infantry wore green and I bel;ieve a number of the British Victorian LI volunteer units did as well. So, they likely made could make the 'historic tradition' argument, one which often carries substantial weight even in these penny-pinching times.

My two cents worth.

Peter

[jf42]

We might also ask why the regiments of the Highland brigade adopted doublets of Piper green. I think the answer may lie in the fact that, although the Blue patrol frock of the pre- 1914 period was very smart, when worn en masse by troops it had a very sombre effect. It was not entirley popular. Apparently when the blue Coronation dress was ordered for the Coronation of George VI in 1937, there were comments that it made troops look like postmen.

I think quite simply, the light infantry brigade adopted green tunics because it had been the light infantry distinguishing colour since the late C18th and the opportunity was there.

[Dan M]

One, the Light Bobs wanted to be as distinct as possible...

Two, the Lights coveted, even if they rarely wore, rifle green. The Canadian Glengarry Light Infantry wore green and I believe a number of the British Victorian LI volunteer units did as well.

Thanks Peter. Two good points. I wasn't aware of the previous use of green uniforms by some LI regiments in Canada or Britain. Although, and I stand to be corrected on this, the No 1 Dress LI green tunics were not rifle green. The LI tunics were a lighter shade and trimmed with white piping.

I completely agree that the adoption of the green tunic was to distinguish the LI from the remaining line regiments, but it must have been a tremendous effort to get the five English Light Infantry regimental councils to agree to a common design. I recall reading that when 'The Light Infantry' was created, one of the first things the regiment had to do was to create a common form of drill, as all of the battalions practiced their own version which was different from the rest. Tribal customs, I mean regimental affectations, always being difficult to overcome.

We might also ask why the regiments of the Highland brigade adopted doublets of Piper green.

I think quite simply, the light infantry brigade adopted green tunics because it had been the light infantry distinguishing colour since the late C18th and the opportunity was there.

I also was thinking about why the Highland regiments chose green. It created a situation in Canada with the Canadian Black Watch. When the Regular Army units of the Canadian BW (usually shortened to RHC for Royal Highlanders of Canada) adopted their dress uniform after being created in 1953 it also adopted the piper green doublet. The Militia battalion of the regiment, having been in existence since the 19th century, had been wearing the red doublet pre and post the Great War. I believe the Militia battalion eventually adopted piper green, however the remainder of the Army's highland Militia battalions (who were all affiliated with an Imperial regiment) retained the red doublet. I stand to be corrected however.

Had the distinguishing colour of the Light Infantry been green since the late 18th century? Anything that you could provide on this would be most appreciated.

Cheers,

Dan.

[jf42]

I don't imagine fixing on a green tunic ( but, indeed, not Rifle green) would have been that difficult for the various Light Infantry regiments, given the clear distinguishing effect and its history as a distinguishing colour.

British Light Infantry companies in America informally adopted a green hat feather as a distinguishing emblem when detached from their parent regiments to fight in 'Flank Battalions during the War of Independence. This custom was brought back from America and, despite being non-regulation, was adopted fairly widely among troops at home. although green was not always the distinguishing colour used. The distinctive Light Infantry cap was only worn on special occasions while the hat was worn for every day service. Similarly, grenadiers had adopted a white hat feather in America, with their bearskin caps usually kept in store. The distinguishing feathers served to identify the flank coys in everyday service. The ostrich feather of the AWI period was soon superceded by an upright hackle plume, with a worsted 'tuft' sometimes used as a substitute.

Finally, in an attempt to bring the un-official use of regimental hat feathers in the infantry, by both flank companies and battalion companies, an order was issued in 1797 specifying a white-over- red feather for battalion companies and staff, a white feather for grenadier coys and a green feather for light infantry companies. This met with limited success. When the shako was adopted in 1800 the same system was ordered more emphatically with severe consequences for commanding officers who did not comply or allowed deviations from the norm. With a few exceptions- for instance, the Fifth (Northumberland) Regiment and the 42nd Royal Highland Regiment, this was successful. With the shako, a hackle feather plume was worn by officers and a worsted 'tuft' by other ranks.

A green 'feather' was ordered for both Light Infantry and Rifles. In 1829 this changed to a green 'ball tuft.' which changed briefly in 1855 to a hanging horsehair plume for Light Infantry Regiments. In 1858 flank companies began to be phased out in Line Infantry regiments. With the adoption of the cloth-covered home service helmet in 1878, cap distinctions became obsolete. Light infantry were thenceforth identified in full dress by green helmets, as you have pointed out. During the Boer War, I believe, certain Light Infantry regiments used green flashes on the khaki covers of their Foreign Service helmets. With the introduction of Khaki Service Dress, and the suspension of Full Dress in 1914, the situation became more diffuse. We can only start generalising again after 1945.

Edited January 4, 2015 by jf42

[Dan M]

Thanks for the reply jf42. Very informative. Back in the mists of time I recall reading about the light and grenadier companies created during the 18th century but, with increasing interests taking up more of my limited brain space, it must have slipped away. Knowledgeable as you are, maybe you could help me with another question I have from the post-war period.

When the administrative Green Jacket Brigade was formed in 1948 why was it the Oxs & Bucks LI were chosen as one of its regiments? The OBLI wasn't the most senior or junior of the LI regiments, nor was it more closely linked to the rifle regiments than the others. Would you have any thoughts on this? Thanks.

Cheers,

Dan.

[jf42]

Dan, it's an interesting question and one that puzzled me when as a boy I lived just down the road from the Rifle/ RGJ depot in Winchester.

I can't quote you chapter and verse from the post-war period but clearly the historic relationship between the 43rd and 52nd and the riflemen of the 95th and 60th was a factor. The 43rd and 52nd were the first infantry regiments officially designated as light infantry and to train at Shorncliffe under John Moore. Whether they thought that set them apart from the 53rd and 68th LI as well as the johnnie-come-lately 13th and 32nd LI- (both awarded as their titles as an honorific for service in India in the years following the Napoleonic Wars), I couldn't say for sure.

Similarly, when the 43rd and 52nd were joined to form the Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Light Infantry in 1881, the new regiment may have regarded itself as a cut above the other Light Infantry regiments created by the Childers Reforms, having a 'purer' pedigree than the DCLI, KOYLI & DLI, each of which- apart from the 13th who already had two battalions- had been joined either with non-LI or very junior LI regiments that had been part of Honourable East India Company's Army until the Great Mutiny.

Being effectively a Home Counties regiment, the 'Ox & Bucks' LI was a regiment with greater social cachet than the other LI and doubtless felt they had more in common with the socially elite RIfle Brigade and King's Royal Rifle Corps. So it would have been a natural move for them initially to be brigaded with the two rifle regiments in 1948 and, when the time came for amalgamation, to become the 1st Battalion, the Royal Green Jackets would have been seen as the lesser of two evils.

That is me thinking aloud. If you would like a slightly sanitised (with reference to regimental snobbery) but more authoritative version, I reccommend you contact the very helpful Green Jackets Museum still housed at Sir John Moore Barracks in Winchester.

Hope that's of some use.

Edited January 5, 2015 by jf42

[jf42]

Correction, that should read "Green Jackets Museum, Peninsula Barracks, Winchester." Sir John Moore Bks is the johnny-come-lately establishment just outside town.

[Dan M]

I can't quote you chapter and verse from the post-war period but clearly the historic relationship between the 43rd and 52nd and the riflemen of the 95th and 60th was a factor. The 43rd and 52nd were the first infantry regiments officially designated as light infantry and to train at Shorncliffe under John Moore.

Being effectively a Home Counties regiment, the 'Ox & Bucks' LI was a regiment with greater social cachet than the other LI and doubtless felt they had more in common with the socially elite RIfle Brigade and King's Royal Rifle Corps. So it would have been a natural move for them initially to be brigaded with the two rifle regiments in 1948 and, when the time came for amalgamation, to become the 1st Battalion, the Royal Green Jackets would have been seen as the lesser of two evils.

jf42, I think that this is about as much of answer as I will ever get on the subject. Thanks for taking the time to respond. I would tend to agree that it was probably the Shorncliffe-Light Infantry-Sir John Moore connection that led to the Green Jackets Brigade taking the form it did.

Now, if you can explain to me please, why all of the different LI regiments had such diverse rifle drill movements, and what these drill movements were, I would again be most grateful.

Cheers,

Dan.

[jf42]

I'm afraid I can't. I wasn't aware they did. I only knew Rifles drill.

Simple answer? The regimental system!

[peter monahan]

Dan

 

You will need to be more specific in your request.  In the Napoleonic period there were a number of drill manuals for both line and light infantry, and in 1807 one was finally adopted as the 'official' version.  However, especially among volunteer units, others continued to be used and in some regiments there were undoubtedly local interpretations of some movements.  For Lights, there was A practical guide for the light infantry officer  by Thomas Henry Cooper, published in 1806.  I'm not certain when and if the 'Shorncliffe method' was superceded by a later model, as lights tended to fade away as distinct bodies, thought retaining the title, when the rifle became standard issue in the mid 19th century.  

 

 

Here is a link to Cooper's book, however, for the Napoleonic period light drill: http://books.google.ca/books?id=AgcHAAAAQAAJ&printsec=titlepage&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Peter

[Dan M]

Peter,

 

Thanks for the response and the link.  Always interested to learn something I hadn't been aware of prior.

 

The period I'm interested in is the time of the organization of The Light Infantry in 1968.  I'd mentioned it earlier in post #4, but I can see now how I could have made my post clearer.  Supposedly there were four different versions of drill, particularly rifle drill, utilized by the four regiments.  Creating a common drill for the new regiment was one of the issues to be resolved along with the items of dress, badges, etc.

 

 

I recall reading that when 'The Light Infantry' was created, one of the first things the regiment had to do was to create a common form of drill, as all of the battalions practiced their own version which was different from the rest.  Tribal customs, I mean regimental affectations, always being difficult to overcome.

 

For the life of me I can't think of how different the individual drill was.  I think the differences may have been exxagerated, but I've never been able to find any information on it.

 

Again, thanks for the link.

 

Cheers,

Dan.

[jf42]

If you haven't done so already, you might try posting an enquiry here :

http://www.lightinfantry.co.uk/

[Dan M]

If you haven't done so already, you might try posting an enquiry here :

http://www.lightinfantry.co.uk/

 

Thanks for the link.  The site doesn't have a forum that I could see.  It's a very interesting site however.  Again, thanks.

 

Cheers,

Dan.