India cap badge Reference Book

[ANGLE IRON]

Not got my books here but Ithink it was post war but pre 47 and vague feeling that horse version was not for all ranks? Kev

[keflin2612]

Originally Posted by ANGLE IRON

Please excuse spelling etc

1 13th Rajput's( shekhawati rgt)
2 45th rattray Sikhs
3 could be 4th Rajputs but probably a collar for one of a handfull of Rajput rgts
4 5 prob post 22 2nd punjabs? collars
6 4th bombay gren post 22
7 tricky , Royal cypher worn on pith helmet etc by various , crown may give it away, Kev

Kev, image 2, the 45th rattray's I've just found this image on a website and they have listed it as 3rd/11th Sikh Regiment (3rd Rattray’s)

[ANGLE IRON]

Could be either , The 11th Sikh's is a bit of a mine field , The design was from the earlier regiment but continued to be worn after the new regiment was formed, If the badge is small and silver? it may be the officers collar for the former or latter regiment. Kev

[Wmr-RHB]

Originally Posted by keflin2612

The post 22 4th bombay gren's did that change to the running horse post 47?

Kev.

I doubt. Guido Rossignoli in Army Badges and Insignia of World War 2 (Book 2) shows the horse for that period.

I am not sure, but I have the strong idea that I see this badge with a "4" for the first time and my identification above is based on the idea: "what else can it be". That may not be a very fix base to build upon . But in fact, what else can it be? There being no 4th Grenadiers in any of the pre 1903 lists.

I do not even know why this horse (very much like that of the Prince of Wales's Own Regiment of Yorkshire for those that wonder how it looks like) was put on the grenade.
But it is still there in the modern Indian army, thus we may take for granted that it does not realy represent a Royal connotation. All things Royal were removed from titles and badges after 1950 (India becoming a republic).

[keflin2612]

Originally Posted by ANGLE IRON

Could be either , The 11th Sikh's is a bit of a mine field , The design was from the earlier regiment but continued to be worn after the new regiment was formed, If the badge is small and silver? it may be the officers collar for the former or latter regiment. Kev

Cheers Kev, you've been a great help mate, much obliged.
And thanks to everyone else who chipped in.

Regards Kev

[ANGLE IRON]

Hello Kev and Henk, Just looked it up in . John Gaylor states that the grenade with the horse was addopted in july 45 and was not changed after partition . This is another post 22 Indian regiment where before partition battalions wore differing badges . Regards Kev

[keflin2612]

Originally Posted by ANGLE IRON

Hello Kev and Henk, Just looked it up in . John Gaylor states that the grenade with the horse was addopted in july 45 and was not changed after partition . This is another post 22 Indian regiment where before partition battalions wore differing badges . Regards Kev

Cheers Kev, much obliged.

[Wmr-RHB]

Originally Posted by ANGLE IRON

Hello Kev and Henk, Just looked it up in . John Gaylor states that the grenade with the horse was addopted in july 45 and was not changed after partition . This is another post 22 Indian regiment where before partition battalions wore differing badges . Regards Kev

That information is really useful for me. Much appreciated! Thanks a lot.
I will will add this to my lineage tables of (British) Indian regiments.

EDIT:
That change must have accompanied the change of title from 4th Bombay Grenadiers to The Indian Grenadiers.

[Lampwick]

Give us a heads up before you put them up for sale.

[Wmr-RHB]

From the Imperial War Museum: http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/30075943

History note

badge worn by VCO's and OR's of 1st Bn The Bombay Grenadiers; the rest of the regiment wore a flaming grenade with the numeral '4' on it

Physical description

badge a flaming grenade in brass with white metal horse on the grenade

Which suggest that both designs were (at least for some time) worn together by the 1st and the other battalions.

[peter monahan]

The white horse was the emblem of the House of Hanover - Kings George I through IV. So its odd to have been added just when India was going republican. But it was probably used 1903-1922 at least by the 1st/1st Madras Pioneers - "King George's Own" in that period. The 4th Bombay's 4th Battalion was the only pre-22 Bombay Pioneer unit with a subsidiary title and theirs was "102nd POW Own Grenadiers" from 1903 until 1906, then "2nd Battalion (King Edward's Own) 4th Bombay Grenadiers" until 1936 when the subsidiary title was changed to "King Edwrad VII's Own", which they carried until 1947.

Henk

Do you have a copy of Boris Mollo's The Indian Army? It traces all the lineages of indian regiments from 1803-1947. I got my copy at the NAM gift shop, I believe, in 1983, so it may well be out of print, but I can probably scan the relevant pages for you. Send me a PM at petemonahan@sympatico.c if you like. Same for anyone else, if I can get scans of the lineage lists in the book.

[Wmr-RHB]

Originally Posted by peter monahan

The white horse was the emblem of the House of Hanover - Kings George I through IV. So its odd to have been added just when India was going republican. But it was probably used 1903-1922 at least by the 1st/1st Madras Pioneers - "King George's Own" in that period. The 4th Bombay's 4th Battalion was the only pre-22 Bombay Pioneer unit with a subsidiary title and theirs was "102nd POW Own Grenadiers" from 1903 until 1906, then "2nd Battalion (King Edward's Own) 4th Bombay Grenadiers" until 1936 when the subsidiary title was changed to "King Edwrad VII's Own", which they carried until 1947.

Henk

Do you have a copy of Boris Mollo's The Indian Army? It traces all the lineages of indian regiments from 1803-1947. I got my copy at the NAM gift shop, I believe, in 1983, so it may well be out of print, but I can probably scan the relevant pages for you. Send me a PM at petemonahan@sympatico.c if you like. Same for anyone else, if I can get scans of the lineage lists in the book.

I do have the book (but thanks for pointing to it) and most of my "knowledge" about the lineages is from it. As the format of a printed book limits the way the tables in there can be shown, I recompiled them in a set of HTML pages. Tables more or less like Mollo's and links from there to indvidual pages per 1922 regiment to follow them from start to present (or finish).

I illustrated a lot of those pages with the relevant badges. Not high-ress, but to make them better readable then pure, very dry, character only tabels.

[ANGLE IRON]

Gentlemen,I have been re reading the book and found some extra snippets here is the passage from John Gaylor from Sons of John company.
"The badge prescribed in Indian Army dress regulations 1931 was a genade with the figure 4 on the body but this appears only to have been worn by the re raised and war raised battalions, The 1st and 2nd largely continued to wear the badges of the old 101st and 102nd grenadiers. However ,a brass grenade bearing the white horse of Hanover , a traditional Grenadier emblem, was brought into use in july 1945, and this did not require to be changed in january 1950 since it was not too obviously linked with the imperial past and even had its place in Hindu mythology.
Another paragraph from another section earlier in the same book states that other ranks of the first battalion (ex 101st) wore a small grenade with a white horse on the ball. The badge I have is the large one from 1945
Dress regulations Extract 1936 for 4th Bombay Grenadiers (abbreviated)
British and Indian officers only, a brass grenade with the figure 4 in white metal
Indian other ranks a brass grenade only (no number)
full dress head dress 2nd battalion (King Edwards own) the cypher of King Edward VII.
footnote , the 8th Bombay native infantry were awarded the title Bombay Grenadiers in nov 1784. and in 1788 were granted the badge of the White horse of Hanover. Further changes in numbering produced 101st and( 102nd POW )Grenadiers
Confusing old subject The Indian Army! Kev

[keflin2612]

Don't suppose anyones got any idea what badge No7 is yet have they.

Kev.

[Wmr-RHB]

Interesting reading. Thanks for copying this. More and more details are filled in now.

And yes, the Indian Army is a confusing subject. The more because the way of (re)numbering units was often done with the goal of the moment in mind and with no order of precedence thought about. Often, holes in the numbering created by a regiment disbanded for whatever reason, were often filled by a newly created regiment.