Uniform identification??

[TK1967]

Any suggestions for these 3 pics of same regiment and rank please?
 

Also reg/rank of the other pic of Staff Officer? Medal ribbon?

The 3 pics of white shirt Officers have soft caps. Higher rank wears collar badge as well.

 

thanks!

 

 

Edited Saturday at 09:51 by TK1967

[charlie2]

1 hour ago, TK1967 said:

Any suggestions for these 3 pics

Yes, post some better scans! 

[TK1967]

It’s all I’ve got Charlie!

[Michelle Young]

The first two are impossible to make anything out. The last photo, the shape of the collar badges could  be Bedfordshire, but the quality is so poor I’m not sure. 

[TK1967]

Thanks- for clarity the first three photos are all the same regiment - just don’t know which ?!

4th pic of officer seated you think might be beds-possible.

[TK1967]

Thanks- for clarity the first three photos are all the same regiment - just don’t know which ?!

4th pic of officer seated you think might be beds-possible.

This pic shows 3 officers same reg around the 4th from different possible Beds?

[Michelle Young]

The first image is just pixelated,  the second image is a horrible blur. The third I can just make out a longer scroll under the badge. Therefore , Worcestershire or Cheshire Regiments might be a possibility.
The latest image you have posted isn’t much better. Unless you can get better quality images, it’s going to be very hard I’m afraid. 

[TK1967]

I know the pics are poor of the white shirted reg- it’s more the combination of the bright white shirts, ties are beige/off white/gold? combined with shape of the caps, which are distinctly softer curved top - not sharp.

The other 4th Officer in the centre of the pic and wearing a staff band in the seated pic for example is wearing an off white/beige shirt and off white or gold tie.

Edited Saturday at 12:10 by TK1967

[TK1967]

Clearly if I had better photos I would probably be able to identify myself. They are distant photos from 100 years ago zoomed in. Appreciate any efforts. 

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

What is the original image you are trying to enlarge?

Is it an original photo, a badly banded copy printed on an ink jet printer, or a phone grab from a computer screen?

Unless you have a decent original photo or a good quality digital copy, your quest is pointless.

[TK1967]

Pointless is a bit strong Dai- The bright white shirt Officers, if you know the regiment well, would stand out as the uniform is one of the more distinctive, regardless of the poorer quality.

I just don’t have orginal which is a distant group pic.

i would also add the Reg clearly wear white dress gloves for formal outdoor occasions when all other officers I can see at the occasion are wearing dark gloves.

[Michelle Young]

You obviously have better eyesight than me.

[FROGSMILE]

1 hour ago, TK1967 said:

Pointless is a bit strong Dai- The bright white shirt Officers, if you know the regiment well, would stand out as the uniform is one of the more distinctive, regardless of the poorer quality.

I just don’t have orginal which is a distant group pic.

i would also add the Reg clearly wear white dress gloves for formal outdoor occasions when all other officers I can see at the occasion are wearing dark gloves.

I’m sorry, but none of those features are regimental distinctions sufficiently different from the numerous other regiments (just consider a moment how many different infantry and cavalry regiments there were alone) to make identification possible.  Dai’s comment regarding it being ‘pointless’ is entirely apposite in this case.  White shirts were only ever worn with black silk ties under khaki for a quite short period before 1913.  Ties were never ‘gold’.  Seeing the entire photo with some proper context (where, when, etc.) might help a little.  If you don’t know any of these things at all then your inquiry is likely to be fruitless.

The only thing I can say with any certainty is that the best image, the “fourth” one with the seated officer with the more clear insignia, is from a regiment styled as hussars, either regular, or Yeomanry, as he wears the distinctive ball buttons favoured by such regiments, along with the RHA (he is clearly not wearing RA insignia though).  With that in mind, all the other officers also have the look of cavalry too, although it’s unclear how many others of them might also have ball buttons.  

Edited Saturday at 15:00 by FROGSMILE

[TK1967]

I agree it’s difficult that’s why I’m asking the experts!

Apologise I should have given you all more info- I know they are in France at St Pol HQ 1920. I have found one further photo and it’s clear they have very white shirts.

[TK1967]

I do have a list of the Officers Regiments, of which it was very varied, based there at the time which is limited to maybe 20 regiments at most-so even a hunch and it’s one of those 20 could give an answer.

[FROGSMILE]

1 minute ago, TK1967 said:

and it’s clear they have very white shirts.

Very pale khaki rather than white per se.  The soft unstructured caps, pale shirts and ties and the ball buttons already mentioned are all commensurate with cavalry regiments, but which regiments is impossible to say from what imagery you have provided.

[TK1967]

The rounded caps at the back are distinctive

That’s some help already Sir!

[FROGSMILE]

4 minutes ago, TK1967 said:

The rounded caps at the back are distinctive

Nonsense.  They are merely SD caps made without structural wiring, a style that was popular in the second half of the war.  They are not in any way a regimental distinction.  The only way to identify the unit, beyond the fact that they appear to be cavalry for the reasons I’ve outlined, is to obtain decent imagery of the cap and collar insignia.

Edited Saturday at 14:54 by FROGSMILE

[TK1967]

That’s useful to know thanks

[Muerrisch]

30 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

Very pale khaki rather than white per se.  The soft unstructured caps, pale shirts and ties and the ball buttons already mentioned are all commensurate with cavalry regiments, but which regiments is impossible to say from what imagery you have provided.

And if the shirts are white [which they are not] so are the breeches/ trousers. As near hopeless as one could imagine.

[CorporalPunishment]

6 hours ago, TK1967 said:

Any suggestions for these 3 pics of same regiment and rank please?
 

Also reg/rank of the other pic of Staff Officer? Medal ribbon?

The 3 pics of white shirt Officers have soft caps. Higher rank wears collar badge as well.

 

thanks!

 

 

I believe the gent in the last photo is Army Cyclist Corps.         Pete.

[FROGSMILE]

12 minutes ago, CorporalPunishment said:

I believe the gent in the last photo is Army Cyclist Corps.         Pete.

The badge looks right from what we can see of it, I agree.  That’s a good spot given the quality of the image.  I don’t know if the Cyclist corps wore ball buttons, or if the officer was simply in a 2nd or 3rd line yeomanry unit converted to cyclists, which I recall happened to a number of them.  I suspect that is the case.  It was only those cavalry units styled as hussars that favoured the ball button (plus the RHA and some Rifles).

Afternote:  the ACC had its own button with embossed badge so the officer in the photo is almost certainly a transferee.

images via websearch.

Edited Saturday at 16:37 by FROGSMILE

[Muerrisch]

I am confused. There are at least two officers and someone in mufti in the most recent very poor image.

As an aside, what a loss when posts ceased to carry an # ident number.

[FROGSMILE]

Just now, Muerrisch said:

I am confused. There are at least two officers and someone in mufti in the most recent very poor image.

As an aside, what a loss when posts ceased to carry an # ident number.

The photo concerned is the fourth down in the opening post.

I concur with your comment regarding post numbering.

[PRC]

1 hour ago, TK1967 said:

I know they are in France at St Pol HQ 1920.

1 hour ago, TK1967 said:

I do have a list of the Officers Regiments, of which it was very varied, based there at the time which is limited to maybe 20 regiments at most-so even a hunch and it’s one of those 20 could give an answer.

I'm surprised there were still fighting units like infantry, cavalry and artillery in France at that time - aware of engineers, labour and service to help with reconstruction and clear the battlefield, and medical to support them. Fairly sure we also had a thread in the last years about the work of the Imperial War Graves Commission, and how the B.E.F. Headquarters was dissolved in 1919. But I may be mis-remembering and there may have been other administrative centres remaining.

So I tried another tact - checking the British Newspaper Archive and The Times Digital Archive for references to St.Pol in combination with words like British / Cavalry / Infantry -  and found nothing about any specific units being stationed there.

I then tried the Commonwealth War Graves Commission database for the two British Military Cemeterys associated with St.Pol to see if any if those interred there died in 1920. There were no matches for the Communal Cemetery Extension, and in the St Pol British Cemetery the only match was a worker with Queen Mary's Army Auxilary Corps, who died on the 29th July 1920. The CWGC webpage for that Cemetery records thats the final WW1 interments were in July 1920. As there commemoration period goes up to August 1921 either the troops stationed there were very lucky, or any deaths were repatriated for burial, or there just weren't any units formally stationed there.

I then went back to the British Newspaper Archive and The Times Digital Archive and just looked for references to St.Pol in 1920. The Times didn't add anything - shame as I can see whole articles there whereas with the British Newspaper Archive as a non-subscriber I can only see a smidgeon of garbled transcription.

But what there was in the latter were a lot of articles relating to the choosing of the unknown warrior at St.Pol, and on the following day the large crowds that had gathered to see the start of the journey for the coffin to the coast and England. Could be a complete red herring but might such a crowd not have included a sizable British military contingent, either spontaneous from those stationed in the UK or sent over as a formal delegation with a mix of regiments and corps represented, perhaps to form some sort of honour guard. Seems to be lots of imagery online for the final part of the journey, but I'm obviously using the wrong search criteria as there appears to be nothing for the start.

Perhaps seeing those whole image might give some context. is there any reason why that can't be posted?

Cheers,
Peter