Jump to content
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Uniform identification??


TK1967

Recommended Posts

  • Admin
1 hour ago, CorporalPunishment said:

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

I agree with you here Pete,

I can't get the 8th Kings Irish Hussars to fit, nor the North Irish Horse, both of which have the angular scroll on the badge.

His collar badges match with ACC in my eyes.

He looks to be wearing the rank insignia of a captain ie three pips on each shoulder.

Now is he wearing an arm band on his left arm?

image.png

Regards,

Bob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bob Davies said:

Now is he wearing an arm band on his left arm?

Yes it’s an armlet of the Army HQ Staff and given his cap badge he’s probably responsible for the employment of cyclists as part of the divisional effort.  They were categorised as ‘Army Troops’ and usually covered the lines of communication as a relatively mobile force.  The Army level armlet was red-navy-red in equal dimension bands. 

IMG_5589.jpeg

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
1 hour ago, FROGSMILE said:

Yes it’s an armlet of the Army HQ Staff and given his cap badge he’s probably responsible for the employment of cyclists as part of the divisional effort.  They were categorised as ‘Army Troops’ and usually covered the lines of communication as a relatively mobile force.  The Army level armlet was red-navy-red in equal dimension bands. 

IMG_5589.jpeg

Thank you FROGSMILE, my eyes were not deceiving me!

This is I believe to be one of the pictures.

Second rank fourth from the right is the officer in the OP 3rd picture.

image.png

image.png

Screenshot courtesy of https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/unknown-warrior-mystery-solved

Regards,

Bob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Bob Davies said:

Thank you FROGSMILE, my eyes were not deceiving me!

This is I believe to be one of the pictures.

Second rank fourth from the right is the officer in the OP 3rd picture.

image.png

image.png

Screenshot courtesy of https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/unknown-warrior-mystery-solved

Regards,

Bob.

Yes after scanning across the photo and examining the uniforms and what can be made out of the insignia I think that you are right, Bob. 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bob Davies said:

Thank you FROGSMILE, my eyes were not deceiving me!

This is I believe to be one of the pictures.

Second rank fourth from the right is the officer in the OP 3rd picture.

image.png

image.png

Screenshot courtesy of https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/unknown-warrior-mystery-solved

Regards,

Bob.

You're spot on Bob, same man and same photo.          Pete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bob Davies said:

Second rank fourth from the right is the officer in the OP 3rd picture.

Don't know if it will help but have added some dreaded numbers:) Starting from the top left makes him 28 out of 40.

ManyofthepersonnelinvolvedintheselectionoftheUnknownWarrior1920CourtesyoftheFitz-SimonArchivecroppedandnumbered.png.393280302c89c2201282389ae67c1504.png

No new IP is claimed for the above, and all image rights, if any, remain with the current owners.

On that basis the other two officers from the OP with "white shirts and gold coloured ties" and with softer pattern hats could potentially be 7 and 8.

Fundamentally nothing to do with a unit based at St. Pol but everything to do with the Unknown Warrior.

Can't help but think there is probably something on Archive org that will detail members of this committee but unfortunately still currently down following the attack.

Cheers,
Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
1 hour ago, PRC said:

Don't know if it will help but have added some dreaded numbers:) Starting from the top left makes him 28 out of 40.

ManyofthepersonnelinvolvedintheselectionoftheUnknownWarrior1920CourtesyoftheFitz-SimonArchivecroppedandnumbered.png.393280302c89c2201282389ae67c1504.png

No new IP is claimed for the above, and all image rights, if any, remain with the current owners.

On that basis the other two officers from the OP with "white shirts and gold coloured ties" and with softer pattern hats could potentially be 7 and 8.

Fundamentally nothing to do with a unit based at St. Pol but everything to do with the Unknown Warrior.

Can't help but think there is probably something on Archive org that will detail members of this committee but unfortunately still currently down following the attack.

Cheers,
Peter

Thank you Peter,

one thing I must mention with laughter and joy,

Dee fer Dog, leaning on number 36s right leg!  :D

With my heart felt regards to your commitment and thought towards the GWF,

regards,

Bob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

This picture from the OP contains officers numbered by @PRC

7, 8, 17 and 28.

Number 17 being the broad shouldered officer middle of shot.

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CWGC don’t really mention the role of the Army in the post war exhumation of F&F, the concentration of bodies from smaller cemeteries into the current War Cemeteries and beginning to garden them. Accepting IWGC was almost wholly staffed by the same personnel, their role from 1920 onwards was more the Concrete infrastructure of the cemeteries, including the Gravestones and continuing upkeep.
 

IWGC took on where the Army left off but much of the big work was done by the Army by the middle of 1921. The Army and DGRE staff was gradually run down throughout 1921 and they left France in October. During 1921 they were under General James Dick Cunyngham.

There was a large mixture of Regiments represented in the DGRE and Labour Corps during that period. Staff often had personal reason’s to be involved, having lost friends, siblings and other relative's.
 

At the head of the cortège at Boulogne 10/11/20 was General’s Macdonagh and Wyatt. As well as the 8 Coffin Bearers and their CSM, there was also a select group of a dozen Officers under Wyatt, representing the British Army in F&F.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

It is worth reading this thread by the OP to save duplicating efforts in searching for some of these Officers.

Regards,

Bob.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, PRC said:

Don't know if it will help but have added some dreaded numbers:) Starting from the top left makes him 28 out of 40.

ManyofthepersonnelinvolvedintheselectionoftheUnknownWarrior1920CourtesyoftheFitz-SimonArchivecroppedandnumbered.png.393280302c89c2201282389ae67c1504.png

No new IP is claimed for the above, and all image rights, if any, remain with the current owners.

On that basis the other two officers from the OP with "white shirts and gold coloured ties" and with softer pattern hats could potentially be 7 and 8.

Fundamentally nothing to do with a unit based at St. Pol but everything to do with the Unknown Warrior.

Can't help but think there is probably something on Archive org that will detail members of this committee but unfortunately still currently down following the attack.

Cheers,
Peter

Very useful- it is the DGRE dept at St Pol- 70 staff total about half here. I can confirm only a few of these were involved in actual UW op as Mark Scott identified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

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.

IMG_6881.jpeg

Pete and FS- thank you great work identified as Lt Dewi A Williams Cyclist Corp

2 hours ago, Bob Davies said:

This picture from the OP contains officers numbered by @PRC

7, 8, 17 and 28.

Number 17 being the broad shouldered officer middle of shot.

image.png

28 now identified thanks Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

Yes it’s an armlet of the Army HQ Staff and given his cap badge he’s probably responsible for the employment of cyclists as part of the divisional effort.  They were categorised as ‘Army Troops’ and usually covered the lines of communication as a relatively mobile force.  The Army level armlet was red-navy-red in equal dimension bands. 

IMG_5589.jpeg

Pic 1920 so Staff at St Pol then. Thanks for your wisdom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, TK1967 said:

Pic 1920 so Staff at St Pol then. Thanks for your wisdom.

I’m puzzled that he’s not wearing staff gorget tabs given the armlet, but there’s presumably an explanation for that lost in the mists of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point. He’s not wearing the Staff band in the group pic either. It seems from photos that the atmosphere in F&F 1920-21 was a mixture of relief with relaxation. Despite the gruesome nature of their work then, I think actually became a more healthy decompression period for them all compared to being thrown straight back to home after the war. So perhaps he wasn’t so bothered asserting his rank all the time. He was one of two General Staff Captains 1920-21.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TK1967 said:

Good point. He’s not wearing the Staff band in the group pic either. It seems from photos that the atmosphere in F&F 1920-21 was a mixture of relief with relaxation. Despite the gruesome nature of their work then, I think actually became a more healthy decompression period for them all compared to being thrown straight back to home after the war. So perhaps he wasn’t so bothered asserting his rank all the time. He was one of two General Staff Captains 1920-21.

At St Pol GHQ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
2 hours ago, TK1967 said:

Good point. He’s not wearing the Staff band in the group pic either

Do you mean in the now numbered picture?

If you do, which number is ' Lt Dewi A Williams Cyclist Corp'?

Because that is who we are talking about.

Regards,

Bob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Bob Davies said:

Do you mean in the now numbered picture?

If you do, which number is ' Lt Dewi A Williams Cyclist Corp'?

Because that is who we are talking about.

Regards,

Bob.

I’m talking about 17 yes. Dewi. Staff cyclist, no gorgets though. Now just 7,8,28 regiment. I also agree that the pic of full length standing officer in original 4 is prob 7, less 28.

Edited by TK1967
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bob Davies said:

This picture from the OP contains officers numbered by @PRC

7, 8, 17 and 28.

Number 17 being the broad shouldered officer middle of shot.

image.png

Going to suggest 7,8,28 are South Lancs Reg?

Edited by TK1967
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
3 minutes ago, TK1967 said:

I’m talking about 17 yes. Dewi. Staff cyclist, no gorgets though. Now just 7,8,28 regiment. I also agree that the pic of full length standing officer in original 4 is 28.

I cannot see that number 17 is the officer that has been identified as Lt Dewi A Williams  Army Cyclist Corp.

Number 17 is wearing gorget tabs but no arm band.

His face is different.

I do not think that they are the same man.

Regards,

Bob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
8 hours ago, TK1967 said:

28 now identified thanks Bob

You say that you have identified him, then what is his name?

From that we can work out his unit.

Regards,

Bob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bob Davies said:

I cannot see that number 17 is the officer that has been identified as Lt Dewi A Williams  Army Cyclist Corp.

Number 17 is wearing gorget tabs but no arm band.

His face is different.

I do not think that they are the same man.

Regards,

Bob.

17 D A Williams

IMG_2936.jpeg

IMG_2937.jpeg

IMG_2938.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Bob Davies said:

You say that you have identified him, then what is his name?

From that we can work out his unit.

Regards,

Bob.

Sorry I confused you- 17 identified , as D A Williams not 28!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...