British & Commonwealth Military Badge Forum

Recent Books by Forum Members

   

Go Back   British & Commonwealth Military Badge Forum > Common Forums > It's a Mystery -Unknown Insignia for Identification

 Other Pages: Galleries, Links etc.
Glossary  Books by Forum Members     Canadian Pre 1914    CEF    CEF Badge Inscriptions   Canadian post 1920     Canadian post 1953     British Cavalry Badges     Makers' Marks    Pipers' Badges  Canadian Cloth Titles  Books  SEARCH
 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46  
Old 16-09-08, 07:12 AM
David Douglas
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Any ideas etc.

Following a week's ban for being a naughty boy and upsetting people, I thought I would honour my undertaking to publish any replies I received from my enquiries. Well, here goes :
From Mr. Chris Cooper, Curator of Uniforms, Badges & Medals, National Army Museum :-
"I can find no evidence to suggest that the 72nd, 78th or post 1881 Seaforth Highlanders wore, as a glengarry or other head-dress badge, the stag with motto 'Cabar Feidh' below. The Seaforth Highlanders used the motto 'Cuidich'n Righ' (Help the King), whilst the 72nd and the 78th did not ue the stag."
I have also double-checked King and Kipling (for those of you who hold it in high esteem) and no reference exists.
No doubt those persons of contrary view will wish to respond and, perhaps, challenge the archive of the National Army Museum.
For my part, I will not be replying to any further comment on the subject, for fear of 'upsetting' anyone else.
In fact, this my final post - please accept the information provided in the interest of research, which some of us take very seriously indeed and to those of like mind I offer my very best wishes. David Douglas
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 16-09-08, 12:50 PM
Jeff Mc William's Avatar
Jeff Mc William Jeff Mc William is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wakefield West Yorks
Posts: 1,061
Default

DR 1874 (1).jpg DR 1874 (2).jpg QOH Mus (2).jpg

David. Thank you for returning to this "thread" as you promised. You are obviously a man of your word and I appreciate this.
However, the "saga" continues doesn't it ? and I guess you must be getting rather tired of this argument by now,(as indeed am I) !
Have you got a reply from the QOH Museum yet ? I wonder what they will say. Still, I must say I am both surprised and dismayed by Mr Chris Cooper's (NAM) "in-depth" research, particularly when faced with the abundance of facts already presented to him. May I ask what evidence he provided to support such a remarkable conclusion ? Do you know, if by any chance he bothered to look at the progress of this thread ? He certainly does not appear to have consulted the 1874 "Dress Regs" (see above)..or perhaps worse, has disregarded them ! Also I wonder if he examined the contemporary photos in the NAM archives re the 72nd and 78th c.1878-9. I cannot think that he did, otherwise how could he say that the stag's head was not used by either !? (As a matter of interest, did he describe or illustrate the badges he thinks were worn by officers of the 72nd & 78th ? ).
As for K&K ; excellent as it is...no one has suggested that it is either fully comprehensive or infallible, eg : in this particular case, we know that officer's glengarry badges are not dealt with, so what significance is there in the fact that this badge is not covered ?
You may consider now that your case has been finished and proved, but lets wait and see what the QOH Museum have to say. I wonder, did Ian send his photos to them as I suggested, and, if so what was he told ? Also there is the little matter of my correspondence with them in May 1999 (see above).
You say you will not be responding to any further input on this subject David..so be it..but I would urge Ian to "rejoin the fray" and tell us the verdict of the QOH Museum.
It does irk me somewhat to realise that, so far, I seem to be the only one who has provided any tangible evidence to support my case, while those who oppose it can only give a misguided opinion. I guess that is about all I have to say on the matter here, but rest assured I shall be following up on this research elsewhere. Regards to all. Jeff

Last edited by Jeff Mc William; 16-09-08 at 01:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 16-09-08, 01:33 PM
David Douglas
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Any ideas etc.

Jeff - I have already made my final posting on this pathetic site but you force me to respond to your further questioning. Be very careful or the moderators will ban you for annoying me ! Or maybe not ! If you insist on continuing this discussion then do it with someone else as my patience with you and others is running out and usually I am a very calm and reasonable man. Get your own information from the QOH Museum instead of relying on someone else to disprove your argument. The knowledge I have acquired over 40 plus years is of value to me although I will gladly share it with those of like mind. Do your own digging - explore your own avenues. If you want the view of the QOH Museum then get it yourself. Oh dear, am I being belligerant ? That's me off to Devil's Island c/o our moderator friends. In total despair. David Douglas
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 16-09-08, 01:57 PM
Jeff Mc William's Avatar
Jeff Mc William Jeff Mc William is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wakefield West Yorks
Posts: 1,061
Default

David. I already have done. Look at the icon on my last posting. Jeff
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 16-09-08, 04:15 PM
Peter Brydon's Avatar
Peter Brydon Peter Brydon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Chester
Posts: 10,357
Default

I am very sorry that David D has decided to leave the Forum, whilst not agreeing with everything he has said ( I dont thinks this is a pathetic site ),I have read his posts with interest.

It is always a pity when anyone decides to leave, and we have lost too many members in the past ( in my opinion ) .Everyone should be allowed to give his opinion,it is up to individuals to decide the if they agree or not.

It has made me reflect that I have actually been collecting militaria on and off ( more on than off ) for the best part of 50 years and if I have learnt one thing, it is is never to say never. I have let items go when I thought they could not possibly be genuine,only to discover later that they probably where "right".

This is the reason I dont comment on individual items,some of the insignia worn by serving soldiers in the past,might to todays collectors seem rubbish, but in the heat of battle who would be concerned if they were wearing the "standard" insignia,they wore whatever they could get hold of. In one of the threads recently it was stated the soldiers in Scottish regiments often wore their relatives badges which were handed down from father to son.So please never let anything go until you are 110% sure of what you are letting go.

P.B.
__________________
Interested in all aspects of militaria/military history but especially insignia and history of non regular units with a Liverpool connection

Members welcome in my private Facebook group “The Kings Liverpool Regiment ( 1685-1958 )”
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 16-09-08, 05:07 PM
revdougal revdougal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 313
Default

Just a couple of comments on this fascinating and tortuous topic.
1.Regimental Secretaries/Curators can become as opinionated as the rest of us; they are often held in awe by the public as the fount of all knowledge and wisdom about their Regiment, which they love dearly; it is someone who has served long, and therefore often holds rank, who are awarded the job for as much the serving regiment, as the old comrades and the general public: but even they must be accountable for their opinions and be able to substantiate them.
2. I served with the QOH - The Queen's Own Hussars!
The SD abbreviation for The Queen's Own Highlanders was QOHLDRS, and anyway they amalgamated with the Gordons to form The Highlanders (HLDRS), now part of the Royal Regiment of Scotland.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 17-09-08, 07:46 AM
Jeff Mc William's Avatar
Jeff Mc William Jeff Mc William is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wakefield West Yorks
Posts: 1,061
Default

P.B. Yes, I too am sorry if David is leaving the forum. I merely thought he was leaving this thread..as indeed I am now, before I upset anyone else !
However, despite our sometimes heated disagreements, I somehow "warmed" to him and admired his "bull-dog" spirit. If you are out there David..come back..the forum needs you ! Regards Jeff

PS: revdougal. Fair comment. Thanks for your input

Last edited by Jeff Mc William; 17-09-08 at 09:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 06-10-08, 09:44 PM
4966Ian 4966Ian is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 489
Default

My apologies for not replying earlier I have been on holiday.
I am afraid that this doesn't really give a definitive view one way or the other on the badge, but will hopefully draw a conclsuion to the discussion. As suggested in the thread, I contacted the Queens Own Highlanders Museum in case they could throw any light on the subject. I have put their reply below:

Dear Ian,
Thank you for your email about your Cabar Feidh badge. The 72nd Highlanders did use The Stag's Head caboshed with the title Cabar Feidh, whereas the 78th used the same, Mackenzie, Stag's Head, with the title Cuidich'n Righ. While I cannot be sure, it seems likely that the badge may have been a 72nd Bonnet Badge, before 1881. After 1881 when the 72nd and the 78th were amalgamated, the script on Regimental badges was always "Cuidich'n Righ".

Lieutenant Colonel George Latham, Hon Researcher, for Director
.

My thanks to all of you who contributed and made this a very lively, if a little heated at times, discussion.

Ian
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 29-10-08, 08:33 PM
ncc ncc is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 393
Default pic of said badge in military context

old photo of museum collection .possibly scottish united services museum.
label states. officers feather bonnet badge 78th regt. 1840- 1850.
i know museum labels may not be 100% accurate but it certainly puts it in a military context.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg GOSS 3739.jpg (34.8 KB, 35 views)
File Type: jpg GOSS 3740.jpg (31.7 KB, 42 views)
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 30-10-08, 06:13 PM
Peter Brydon's Avatar
Peter Brydon Peter Brydon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Chester
Posts: 10,357
Default

This seems to confirm my basic principle, that is, it is far easier to what was worn rather than to say with 100% certainty that something was never worn.

P.B.
__________________
Interested in all aspects of militaria/military history but especially insignia and history of non regular units with a Liverpool connection

Members welcome in my private Facebook group “The Kings Liverpool Regiment ( 1685-1958 )”
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 10-08-11, 12:32 AM
BCONLEY BCONLEY is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 141
Default

I may be adding wood to a fire long burned out here but I just purchased this pipers crossbelt from Australia of all places. The buyer informs me that it came from an estate sale as items from an original immigrant. I have no idea the date ( there is a lot of verdigris from the leather) but the Stag is the same as well as the design of the Croll which holds the motto "CABAR FEIDH"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

mhs link

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:17 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.