Armourer NCO uniforms

[Mike_2817]

There you go then

[LONGSHANKS]

Hi all, don't know if some of you have seen this thread; but it is about the same subject and shows the retention of corps badge as part of the 3rd Dragoons in 1914.

http://www.britishbadgeforum.com/for...ad.php?t=29956

Regards
Simon

[grumpy]

Originally Posted by Toby Purcell

Yes, I agree with your first two comments except that Perry says that RA Artificers also wore the gun (he explains the badges of rank for all arms of the Army in a comprehensive table).

However, the walking out dress for the Army until after the 2nd Anglo/Boer War was Full Dress tunic and that was universal. After the war financial pressures and the gradual issue of the 02 Patt SD led to the scarlet Home Service Frock often (but not always) being utilised in lieu of the more costly tunic and I do not think that the CofA would have been any different. Furthermore, the blue patrol jacket shown was worn by Regimental/Battalion Staff only and so would not have been permitted for an Armourer Corporal.

I enclose another image from 1907, but this time in full dress.

It is for the period before 1896 that we need more information.

I don't think financial pressures altered the scale of clothing at all, except in the area of badging, where gilding metal was, surprisingly, cheaper than worsted.
The scarlet tunic was the issue "best" garment after 1902 for Home regular infantry, right up to CR 1914. No doubt the scarlet frock lingered on, but I cannot see a unit voluntarily being frocked, as it were.
VF/TF were subject to different rules, and goodly number had one SD jacket and one scarlet frock in this period. The unit could opt for a total of two garments: 2 x SD, 1SD & 1 Frock, or 1 SD & 1 Tunic. The surprise is the number of frocks, given that. Practicality, I suppose.

[Peter]

1. Disentangling he armourer ‘units"

Ordnance Artificers transfered to the AOC in 1896 from the RA [#19]

Corps of Armourers (later Ordnance Armourers) [#25]

According to my readings (including those referenced in #11 above)

Corps of Armourers, established in 1858, was (always) separate from both the Corps of Ordnance Artificers and the Armament Artificers.

In 1882 the C of OA was established.

In 1893 the C of OA was dissolved and its personnel redesignated as Armament Artificers in the Royal Artillery.

In 1896, both the C of A and the Armament Artificers were absorbed into the AOC.

The Orders I have for the formation of the C of OA is General Order 3225;

And for the Armament Artificers: Army Order 89.

If anyone has access to these, I would very much appreciate copies.

2. Armourer Corporal

a. It is interesting that at this period there was an Armourer Corporal grade and I can only speculate that as the armourer with a cavalry regiment or infantry battalion was always a (Battalion Staff) Sergeant then perhaps Corporal was the rank held whilst under training, although that is not made clear by Perry. We know that later on armourers passed out of training as junior (Battalion Staff) Sergeants [#24]

in most units the Junior Ranks will probably have been Regimental Armourers not badged CofA at all, and CoA Corporals employed at the factories in training [#27]

I suspect that the CofA Sergeant was assisted by a company arms-storeman when necessary [#30]

The only reference I’ve come across to Armourer Corporal is Perry (p 35).

The 1858 Royal Warrant provides for their promotion from private after two months training: “he shall then be promoted to armourer serjeant”. By 1881, it was after four to six months training. That is, there is no reference to Armourer Corporal.

This appears substantiated by the Service Records I’ve examined of seven men who attested between 1860 and 1891. All were promoted to Armourer Sergeant anywhere from the minimum of two months (1860) / three months (1882) to seven and nine months. The remaining three were all after five months. (I should note that the 1891 fellow was promoted to 2nd Class Armourer Sergeant).

I suspect the Armourer Corporal is the “assistant” referred to here:

“(Armourer Sergeants were assisted) “when necessary by men carefully selected from the ranks”. [Petrie, 1864]

3. Rank Badges

Perry's Rank Badges & Dates in Her Majesty's Army & Navy:

2. Staff Armourer Sergeant - Badge of Rank: 4 Chevrons point up on lower right arm surmounted by a crossed hammer and pincers.

3. Armourer Sergeant 1st Class - Badge of Rank: 3 Chevrons point down on upper right arm surmounted by a crossed hammer and pincers and QVR Crown.

4. Armourer Sergeant - Badge of Rank: 3 Chevrons point down on upper right arm surmounted by a crossed hammer and pincers.

5. Armourer Corporal - Badge of Rank: 2 Chevrons point down on upper right arm surmounted by a crossed hammer and pincers [#24]

Above badges of rank [in #24] are the same as for RA Artificers [#25]

except that Perry says that RA Artificers also wore the gun [#26]

Can I clarify two things concerning “badges ….. same as for RA Artificers”, please.

i) Both Edwards & Langley and Perry (p 34) note Armourers wear Hammer & Pincers and (Corps of Ordnance) Artificers wear Hammer & Pincers together with a Wheel

ii) I can’t find a reference in Perry to “RA Artificers”. I recognise Mike (not Perry) used the term, so I presume Mike is referring to Ordnance Artificers.

Further:

iii) I’m not trying to be as pedantic as it might appear. My point is that there is documentation for what badges Ordnance Artificers wore.

However, I have been unable to find a reference stating what badges Armament Artificers wore between 1893 and 1896. (Perry was published 1887). I presume it would have been both badges, but

Question: Does anyone have documentation?

iv) Perry (p 34) states that for “Armourer Sergeants, Corps of Armourers”: “In the RA a gun is also worn”.

4. C of A Attachments

in most units the Junior Ranks will probably have been Regimental Armourers not badged CofA at all, and CoA Corporals employed at the factories in training [#27]

With the greatest of respect Mike I disagree that any of the regimental armourers were not CofA once that Corps was formed in 1858 (although they were indeed directly regimentally employed before that)

&

All the 'regimental' (cavalry) 'brigade' (artillery) and 'battalion' (infantry) armourers were sergeants on the regimental/battalion staff and, any corporals can only have been under instruction in the factories, as you have suggested [#28]

I think you misunderstood my reference to 'Regimental Armourer' I meant the looking after of weapons at Company & Battalion levels, not the inspection & repair of them [#29]

I suspect that the CofA Sergeant was assisted by a company arms-storeman when necessary [#30]

The Royal Warrant provides that when “an armourer serjeant is required for service in a regiment, etc ….. the man so selected shall be ….. attached to the regiment, battalion, or corps requiring his services”. Goodenough & Dalton (1893) make the same statement.

As noted above, I suspect the Corporals are men from the ranks who “assisted” Armourer Sergeants.

Notwithstanding I’m not sure I understand the “reference to 'Regimental Armourer'”, I believe (Infantry and Cavalry) Armourer Sergeants both looked after weapons and their inspection and repair.

Forbes and Petrie (1864) say they were responsible for the inspection and repair, in storage or at the factory, of small arms together with their continuing regimental role for the repair of small arms.

This appears substantiated by the 1897, 1904 and 1912 Instructions for Armourer: By 1912, Armourers were responsible for repairing, browning, and examining small arms, bayonets and sword scabbards, machine guns “parapet” carriages, bicycles and for such minor repairs to the metal work of accoutrements and equipment generally (lances, helmets and chains, busby chains, lancer cap chains, and the brass work on the lancer cap) as were within the limits of their trade or capabilities.

The 1910 Standing Orders of the 1st RWF require the Armourer Sergeant “to examine the arms of each Company once a quarter and prepare all necessary repairs ….. inspection of the machine guns once a month ….. minute inspection of the arms of that company (whenever the OIC changes)”.

[Peter]

1. Disentangling he armourer ‘units"

Ordnance Artificers transfered to the AOC in 1896 from the RA [#19]

Corps of Armourers (later Ordnance Armourers) [#25]

According to my readings (including those referenced in #11 above)

Corps of Armourers, established in 1858, was (always) separate from both the Corps of Ordnance Artificers and the Armament Artificers.

In 1882 the C of OA was established.

In 1893 the C of OA was dissolved and its personnel redesignated as Armament Artificers in the Royal Artillery.

In 1896, both the C of A and the Armament Artificers were absorbed into the AOC.

The reference I have for the formation of the C of OA is General Order 3225;

And for the Armament Artificers: Army Order 89.

If anyone has access to these, I would very much appreciate copies.

2. Armourer Corporal

a. It is interesting that at this period there was an Armourer Corporal grade and I can only speculate that as the armourer with a cavalry regiment or infantry battalion was always a (Battalion Staff) Sergeant then perhaps Corporal was the rank held whilst under training, although that is not made clear by Perry. We know that later on armourers passed out of training as junior (Battalion Staff) Sergeants [#24]

in most units the Junior Ranks will probably have been Regimental Armourers not badged CofA at all, and CoA Corporals employed at the factories in training [#27]

I suspect that the CofA Sergeant was assisted by a company arms-storeman when necessary [#30]

The only reference I’ve come across to Armourer Corporal is Perry (p 35).

The 1858 Royal Warrant provides for their promotion from private after two months training: “he shall then be promoted to armourer serjeant”. By 1881, it was after four to six months training. That is, there is no reference to Armourer Corporal.

This appears substantiated by the Service Records I’ve examined of seven men who attested between 1860 and 1891. All were promoted to Armourer Sergeant anywhere from the minimum of two months (1860) / three months (1882) to seven and nine months. The remaining three were all after five months. (I should note that the 1891 fellow was promoted to 2nd Class Armourer Sergeant).

I suspect the Armourer Corporal is the “assistant” referred to here:

“(Armourer Sergeants were assisted) “when necessary by men carefully selected from the ranks”. [Petrie, 1864]

3. Rank Badges

Perry's Rank Badges & Dates in Her Majesty's Army & Navy:

2. Staff Armourer Sergeant - Badge of Rank: 4 Chevrons point up on lower right arm surmounted by a crossed hammer and pincers.

3. Armourer Sergeant 1st Class - Badge of Rank: 3 Chevrons point down on upper right arm surmounted by a crossed hammer and pincers and QVR Crown.

4. Armourer Sergeant - Badge of Rank: 3 Chevrons point down on upper right arm surmounted by a crossed hammer and pincers.

5. Armourer Corporal - Badge of Rank: 2 Chevrons point down on upper right arm surmounted by a crossed hammer and pincers [#24]

Above badges of rank [in #24] are the same as for RA Artificers [#25]

except that Perry says that RA Artificers also wore the gun [#26]

Can I clarify two things concerning “badges ….. same as for RA Artificers”, please.

i) Both Edwards & Langley and Perry (p 34) note Armourers wear Hammer & Pincers and (Corps of Ordnance) Artificers wear Hammer & Pincers together with a Wheel

ii) I can’t find a reference in Perry to “RA Artificers”. I recognise Mike (not Perry) used the term, so I presume Mike is referring to Ordnance Artificers.

Further:

iii) I’m not trying to be as pedantic as it might appear. My point is that there is documentation for what badges Ordnance Artificers wore.

However, I have been unable to find a reference stating what badges Armament Artificers wore between 1893 and 1896. (Perry was published 1887). I presume it would have been both badges, but

Question: Does anyone have documentation?

iv) Perry (p 34) states that for “Armourer Sergeants, Corps of Armourers”: “In the RA a gun is also worn”.

4. C of A Attachments

in most units the Junior Ranks will probably have been Regimental Armourers not badged CofA at all, and CoA Corporals employed at the factories in training [#27]

With the greatest of respect Mike I disagree that any of the regimental armourers were not CofA once that Corps was formed in 1858 (although they were indeed directly regimentally employed before that)

&

All the 'regimental' (cavalry) 'brigade' (artillery) and 'battalion' (infantry) armourers were sergeants on the regimental/battalion staff and, any corporals can only have been under instruction in the factories, as you have suggested [#28]

I think you misunderstood my reference to 'Regimental Armourer' I meant the looking after of weapons at Company & Battalion levels, not the inspection & repair of them [#29]

I suspect that the CofA Sergeant was assisted by a company arms-storeman when necessary [#30]

The Royal Warrant provides that when “an armourer serjeant is required for service in a regiment, etc ….. the man so selected shall be ….. attached to the regiment, battalion, or corps requiring his services”. Goodenough & Dalton (1893) make the same statement.

As noted above, I suspect the Corporals are men from the ranks who “assisted” Armourer Sergeants.

Notwithstanding I’m not sure I understand the “reference to 'Regimental Armourer'”, I believe (Infantry and Cavalry) Armourer Sergeants both looked after weapons and their inspection and repair.

Forbes and Petrie (1864) say they were responsible for the inspection and repair, in storage or at the factory, of small arms together with their continuing regimental role for the repair of small arms.

This appears substantiated by the 1897, 1904 and 1912 Instructions for Armourer: By 1912, Armourers were responsible for repairing, browning, and examining small arms, bayonets and sword scabbards, machine guns “parapet” carriages, bicycles and for such minor repairs to the metal work of accoutrements and equipment generally (lances, helmets and chains, busby chains, lancer cap chains, and the brass work on the lancer cap) as were within the limits of their trade or capabilities.

The 1910 Standing Orders of the 1st RWF require the Armourer Sergeant “to examine the arms of each Company once a quarter and prepare all necessary repairs ….. inspection of the machine guns once a month ….. minute inspection of the arms of that company (whenever the OIC changes)”.

[Toby Purcell]

Originally Posted by grumpy

I don't think financial pressures altered the scale of clothing at all, except in the area of badging, where gilding metal was, surprisingly, cheaper than worsted.
The scarlet tunic was the issue "best" garment after 1902 for Home regular infantry, right up to CR 1914. No doubt the scarlet frock lingered on, but I cannot see a unit voluntarily being frocked, as it were.
VF/TF were subject to different rules, and goodly number had one SD jacket and one scarlet frock in this period. The unit could opt for a total of two garments: 2 x SD, 1SD & 1 Frock, or 1 SD & 1 Tunic. The surprise is the number of frocks, given that. Practicality, I suppose.

Sorry for the delay in responding to this, I have only just noticed your post.

What I said was referring to a greater degree to the VF/TF, but I also noticed that whereas before the Boer War the regular infantry always wore tunics for walking-out-dress, many of the images I have for after the war show the frock being worn instead of the tunic, albeit with all the other items such as gloves, head dress and swagger stick, as before. I also noted that the treasury made cuts to the war office estimates directly because of the unexpected cost of the war, which apparently was eye-wateringly expensive as a result of the extra efforts that had to be made after "Black Week" to reinforce the theatre of war and pay for such things as block houses, horses for mounted infantry and concentration camp administration, to mention just a few.

There were also fears about the possible effects of an interrupted South African ore supply on the 'Gold Standard', at that time the whole basis of our monetary system, and there were real concerns about Russian aspirations in the Trans Caucusus and Afghanistan/India border region. All this also came at a time when the Navy wanted to increase its expenditure to fund the Dreadnought building programme.

There is no doubt that the War Office was forced to tighten its belt over this period and one area (of many more) where a squeeze was placed was on dress, e.g. many units, Regular and VF/TF, were issued with insufficient full dress helmets to equip the whole battalion and I have read somewhere that full dress tunics started to be held in the battalion QMs store (rather than held by individuals), simply so that there were enough to equip a full dress parade. It was also the year (1902) that as a cost saving measure gold lace was removed from levee dress trousers, mess kit and much reduced from full dress. I stand by my comments on the basis of those factors, collectively.

1. http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/19232586
2. http://www.angloboerwar.com/other-in...ost-of-the-war
3. http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/p...-hobhouse/1903

[Toby Purcell]

Originally Posted by Peter

1. Disentangling he armourer ‘units"





According to my readings (including those referenced in #11 above)

Corps of Armourers, established in 1858, was (always) separate from both the Corps of Ordnance Artificers and the Armament Artificers.

In 1882 the C of OA was established.

In 1893 the C of OA was dissolved and its personnel redesignated as Armament Artificers in the Royal Artillery.

In 1896, both the C of A and the Armament Artificers were absorbed into the AOC.

The reference I have for the formation of the C of OA is General Order 3225;

And for the Armament Artificers: Army Order 89.

If anyone has access to these, I would very much appreciate copies.

2. Armourer Corporal







The only reference I’ve come across to Armourer Corporal is Perry (p 35).

The 1858 Royal Warrant provides for their promotion from private after two months training: “he shall then be promoted to armourer serjeant”. By 1881, it was after four to six months training. That is, there is no reference to Armourer Corporal.

This appears substantiated by the Service Records I’ve examined of seven men who attested between 1860 and 1891. All were promoted to Armourer Sergeant anywhere from the minimum of two months (1860) / three months (1882) to seven and nine months. The remaining three were all after five months. (I should note that the 1891 fellow was promoted to 2nd Class Armourer Sergeant).

I suspect the Armourer Corporal is the “assistant” referred to here:

“(Armourer Sergeants were assisted) “when necessary by men carefully selected from the ranks”. [Petrie, 1864]

3. Rank Badges







Can I clarify two things concerning “badges ….. same as for RA Artificers”, please.

i) Both Edwards & Langley and Perry (p 34) note Armourers wear Hammer & Pincers and (Corps of Ordnance) Artificers wear Hammer & Pincers together with a Wheel

ii) I can’t find a reference in Perry to “RA Artificers”. I recognise Mike (not Perry) used the term, so I presume Mike is referring to Ordnance Artificers.

Further:

iii) I’m not trying to be as pedantic as it might appear. My point is that there is documentation for what badges Ordnance Artificers wore.

However, I have been unable to find a reference stating what badges Armament Artificers wore between 1893 and 1896. (Perry was published 1887). I presume it would have been both badges, but

Question: Does anyone have documentation?

iv) Perry (p 34) states that for “Armourer Sergeants, Corps of Armourers”: “In the RA a gun is also worn”.

4. C of A Attachments




&






The Royal Warrant provides that when “an armourer serjeant is required for service in a regiment, etc ….. the man so selected shall be ….. attached to the regiment, battalion, or corps requiring his services”. Goodenough & Dalton (1893) make the same statement.

As noted above, I suspect the Corporals are men from the ranks who “assisted” Armourer Sergeants.

Notwithstanding I’m not sure I understand the “reference to 'Regimental Armourer'”, I believe (Infantry and Cavalry) Armourer Sergeants both looked after weapons and their inspection and repair.

Forbes and Petrie (1864) say they were responsible for the inspection and repair, in storage or at the factory, of small arms together with their continuing regimental role for the repair of small arms.

This appears substantiated by the 1897, 1904 and 1912 Instructions for Armourer: By 1912, Armourers were responsible for repairing, browning, and examining small arms, bayonets and sword scabbards, machine guns “parapet” carriages, bicycles and for such minor repairs to the metal work of accoutrements and equipment generally (lances, helmets and chains, busby chains, lancer cap chains, and the brass work on the lancer cap) as were within the limits of their trade or capabilities.

The 1910 Standing Orders of the 1st RWF require the Armourer Sergeant “to examine the arms of each Company once a quarter and prepare all necessary repairs ….. inspection of the machine guns once a month ….. minute inspection of the arms of that company (whenever the OIC changes)”.

I agree Peter that there is still some way to go before we can make full sense of the evolution of the Armourer Sergeants and their dress and insignia. I note what you say regarding the Armourer Corporal and I think you are likely correct that this individual was an assistant provided by the unit supported. It is worth noting that other specialist Corps such as the School of Musketry and the School of Gymnasia also had no Corporals and passed their members out as Sergeants once trained. A situation that remains true today.

[Toby Purcell]

Originally Posted by Peter

1. Disentangling he armourer ‘units"





According to my readings (including those referenced in #11 above)

Corps of Armourers, established in 1858, was (always) separate from both the Corps of Ordnance Artificers and the Armament Artificers.

In 1882 the C of OA was established.

In 1893 the C of OA was dissolved and its personnel redesignated as Armament Artificers in the Royal Artillery.

In 1896, both the C of A and the Armament Artificers were absorbed into the AOC.

The reference I have for the formation of the C of OA is General Order 3225;

And for the Armament Artificers: Army Order 89.

If anyone has access to these, I would very much appreciate copies.

2. Armourer Corporal







The only reference I’ve come across to Armourer Corporal is Perry (p 35).

The 1858 Royal Warrant provides for their promotion from private after two months training: “he shall then be promoted to armourer serjeant”. By 1881, it was after four to six months training. That is, there is no reference to Armourer Corporal.

This appears substantiated by the Service Records I’ve examined of seven men who attested between 1860 and 1891. All were promoted to Armourer Sergeant anywhere from the minimum of two months (1860) / three months (1882) to seven and nine months. The remaining three were all after five months. (I should note that the 1891 fellow was promoted to 2nd Class Armourer Sergeant).

I suspect the Armourer Corporal is the “assistant” referred to here:

“(Armourer Sergeants were assisted) “when necessary by men carefully selected from the ranks”. [Petrie, 1864]

3. Rank Badges







Can I clarify two things concerning “badges ….. same as for RA Artificers”, please.

i) Both Edwards & Langley and Perry (p 34) note Armourers wear Hammer & Pincers and (Corps of Ordnance) Artificers wear Hammer & Pincers together with a Wheel

ii) I can’t find a reference in Perry to “RA Artificers”. I recognise Mike (not Perry) used the term, so I presume Mike is referring to Ordnance Artificers.

Further:

iii) I’m not trying to be as pedantic as it might appear. My point is that there is documentation for what badges Ordnance Artificers wore.

However, I have been unable to find a reference stating what badges Armament Artificers wore between 1893 and 1896. (Perry was published 1887). I presume it would have been both badges, but

Question: Does anyone have documentation?

iv) Perry (p 34) states that for “Armourer Sergeants, Corps of Armourers”: “In the RA a gun is also worn”.

4. C of A Attachments




&






The Royal Warrant provides that when “an armourer serjeant is required for service in a regiment, etc ….. the man so selected shall be ….. attached to the regiment, battalion, or corps requiring his services”. Goodenough & Dalton (1893) make the same statement.

As noted above, I suspect the Corporals are men from the ranks who “assisted” Armourer Sergeants.

Notwithstanding I’m not sure I understand the “reference to 'Regimental Armourer'”, I believe (Infantry and Cavalry) Armourer Sergeants both looked after weapons and their inspection and repair.

Forbes and Petrie (1864) say they were responsible for the inspection and repair, in storage or at the factory, of small arms together with their continuing regimental role for the repair of small arms.

This appears substantiated by the 1897, 1904 and 1912 Instructions for Armourer: By 1912, Armourers were responsible for repairing, browning, and examining small arms, bayonets and sword scabbards, machine guns “parapet” carriages, bicycles and for such minor repairs to the metal work of accoutrements and equipment generally (lances, helmets and chains, busby chains, lancer cap chains, and the brass work on the lancer cap) as were within the limits of their trade or capabilities.

The 1910 Standing Orders of the 1st RWF require the Armourer Sergeant “to examine the arms of each Company once a quarter and prepare all necessary repairs ….. inspection of the machine guns once a month ….. minute inspection of the arms of that company (whenever the OIC changes)”.

Peter, I have been able to revisit this (your query) after recently obtaining Clothing Regulations 1894, that superseded those for 1887.
Interestingly the badges of rank for the Corps of Armourers is contained in a separate section together with those for the School of Musketry and the School of Gymnastics.
In the section it is made clear that there are three types of rank arrangement:

1. The first is as worn by the vast majority of units, which includes only the hammer and pincers alongside chevrons, crowns &c.
2. The second is as worn by armourer sergeants attached to the Household Cavalry, whereby they wear the same badges of rank (all Corporals etc) but with the hammer and pincer added.
3. The third is for armourer sergeants attached to the Royal Artillery, whereby they wear the gun badge in addition to the hammer and pincers alongside chevrons, crowns &c.

Notes:

a. The third category is clearly separate to the Armament Artificers of the RA.
b. There were 5 grades or steps (with special titles), at Sgt (two classes), SSgt, QMS and WO (Sgt Maj) level. The latter didn't wear the hammer and pincers.

In terms of the issue of uniforms, the Corps of Armourer Sergeants are stipulated throughout as a part of the "General and Garrison Staff", who are included under the section for the Infantry of the Line. This lays down their scaling for tunics, frocks, head dress &c, but does not make clear if they wear a special regimental pattern of uniform and one is thus forced to conclude that they appeared to have worn the uniform (and facings) of the regiment to which they were attached. As stated earlier in this thread, that fits with my perception of the policy prior to 1896, and their absorption within the OSC.

[Peter]

Thanks Toby.

A couple of points:

i) The first and second types of rank arrangement

Just so I’m clear. While I think you’re specifically addressing chevrons and the hammer and pincer badge:

Armourer sergeants attached to the Household Cavalry, specifically “Armourer Corporals”, also wore a Crown (above the badge above the chevrons). [Perry, pp 35, 30; Your # 24]

ii) Armourer Corporals

The above prompts me to correct my earlier musings in # 34:

2. Armourer Corporal
Quote:
a. It is interesting that at this period there was an Armourer Corporal grade and I can only speculate that as the armourer with a cavalry regiment or infantry battalion was always a (Battalion Staff) Sergeant then perhaps Corporal was the rank held whilst under training, although that is not made clear by Perry. We know that later on armourers passed out of training as junior (Battalion Staff) Sergeants [#24]
Quote:
in most units the Junior Ranks will probably have been Regimental Armourers not badged CofA at all, and CoA Corporals employed at the factories in training [#27]
Quote:
I suspect that the CofA Sergeant was assisted by a company arms-storeman when necessary [#30]
The only reference I’ve come across to Armourer Corporal is Perry (p 35).

The 1858 Royal Warrant provides for their promotion from private after two months training: “he shall then be promoted to armourer serjeant”. By 1881, it was after four to six months training. That is, there is no reference to Armourer Corporal.

This appears substantiated by the Service Records I’ve examined of seven men who attested between 1860 and 1891. All were promoted to Armourer Sergeant anywhere from the minimum of two months (1860) / three months (1882) to seven and nine months. The remaining three were all after five months. (I should note that the 1891 fellow was promoted to 2nd Class Armourer Sergeant).

I suspect the Armourer Corporal is the “assistant” referred to here:

“(Armourer Sergeants were assisted) “when necessary by men carefully selected from the ranks”. [Petrie, 1864]

I have looked at the service records of over 300 men in the Corps of Armourers. I am convinced that the only “Armourer Corporals” were Armourer Sergeants from the Corps of Armourer Sergeants attached to the Household Cavalry ….. who accordingly were subject to their unique rank structure.

That is, Armourer Corporal is definitely not the “assistant” referred to here:

“(Armourer Sergeants were assisted) “when necessary by men carefully selected from the ranks”. [Petrie, 1864]

These “necessary … men” are referenced in various Army Circulars and Regulations. A Royal Warrant refers to these “Assistants to Armourer Serjeants” as “labourers”.

iii) In terms of the issue of uniforms

In terms of the issue of uniforms, the Corps of Armourer Sergeants are stipulated throughout as a part of the "General and Garrison Staff", who are included under the section for the Infantry of the Line. This lays down their scaling for tunics, frocks, head dress &c, but does not make clear if they wear a special regimental pattern of uniform and one is thus forced to conclude that they appeared to have worn the uniform (and facings) of the regiment to which they were attached. As stated earlier in this thread, that fits with my perception of the policy prior to 1896, and their absorption within the OSC.

The Royal Warrant establishing the Corps provides:

An armourer serjeant while serving with a regiment ….. shall be entitled to the ….. clothing of a serjeant of such regiment, battalion, or corps. (7th)

However, the RW is silent regarding the uniform worn at Royal Small Arms Repairing Factory, Millbank / Royal Small Arms Factory, Birmingham Headquarters while awaiting posting to a Regiment ….. and I have been unable to find any information on this matter..

Regards,

Peter

[Toby Purcell]

Originally Posted by Peter

Thanks Toby.

A couple of points:

i) The first and second types of rank arrangement

Just so I’m clear. While I think you’re specifically addressing chevrons and the hammer and pincer badge:

Armourer sergeants attached to the Household Cavalry, specifically “Armourer Corporals”, also wore a Crown (above the badge above the chevrons). [Perry, pp 35, 30; Your # 24]

ii) Armourer Corporals

The above prompts me to correct my earlier musings in # 34:



I have looked at the service records of over 300 men in the Corps of Armourers. I am convinced that the only “Armourer Corporals” were Armourer Sergeants from the Corps of Armourer Sergeants attached to the Household Cavalry ….. who accordingly were subject to their unique rank structure.

That is, Armourer Corporal is definitely not the “assistant” referred to here:

“(Armourer Sergeants were assisted) “when necessary by men carefully selected from the ranks”. [Petrie, 1864]

These “necessary … men” are referenced in various Army Circulars and Regulations. A Royal Warrant refers to these “Assistants to Armourer Serjeants” as “labourers”.

iii) In terms of the issue of uniforms



The Royal Warrant establishing the Corps provides:

An armourer serjeant while serving with a regiment ….. shall be entitled to the ….. clothing of a serjeant of such regiment, battalion, or corps. (7th)

However, the RW is silent regarding the uniform worn at Royal Small Arms Repairing Factory, Millbank / Royal Small Arms Factory, Birmingham Headquarters while awaiting posting to a Regiment ….. and I have been unable to find any information on this matter..

Regards,

Peter

Thank you for the reply Peter. In answer to your three queries:

1. Yes the Household Cavalry added a crown to each badge as quoted.

2. I agree with you 100% that the Armourer Corporals referred to are those titled as such within the Household Cavalry.

3. I have long been of the view that before 1896 the dress of the regiment to which the Armourer Sergeant was appointed was worn. I personally believe that when at the CofA Depot (latterly BSA Birmingham) the undress Patrol Frock (mohair bound edges and no buttons), which was a fairly standard design within the infantry dressed Corps (a la also the Schools of Musketry and Gymnastics), was worn with the CofA cap badge and forage cap. Being infantry dressed explains also why the scarlet infantry sash was worn (again shared with SofM and SofG) except when serving attached to other, non-infantry arms of the Service.

I will reply further on this off-forum.

[Toby Purcell]

Having now managed to source the first ever comprehensive "clothing regulations" for soldiers (as opposed to officers) that was published in 1882, I can confirm that the Armourer Sergeants of the Corps of Armourers wore the uniform and insignia of whatever unit they were assigned to, whether it be cavalry, artillery, or infantry. That remained the case until they were merged into the OSC/AOC in 1896/1898. It was also at that time (1882) that the crossed hammer and pincers badge that had been worn by RA and RE metal work trades since at least 1864 (probably earlier), was extended to cavalry and infantry armourers.

Even before the formation of a discrete corps in 1858, the armourers, who had existed on infantry establishments since at least 1802 (and with evidence of years before that depending upon each commanding officers attitude), wore the dress of the regiment/corps with which they served. They were usually directly employed civilian gun smiths engaged by COs and managed by quartermasters.

Another piece of information that had nearly been lost from the record, is that the very first depot and training school for the corps was in a brick building leased as a Royal Small Arms Repairing Manufactory, at Bessborough Place, Millbank, Pimlico. It had for 5-years before been the London factory of Samuel Colt and the place where he had manufactured his short run of 'London Made' revolvers before closing and repatriating his machinery in 1856. The repairing manufactory closed between 1866 and 1868 and by 1870 that entire function and the armourer's corps depot had been completely moved to a proof house called 'The Tower', in Bagot Street, Birmingham.

[cbuehler]

This has been an interesting thread for the more esoterically minded collector. I had no idea that the hammer and calipers badge ( I think mistaken for pincers ) dated so far back.

CB

[Toby Purcell]

Originally Posted by cbuehler

This has been an interesting thread for the more esoterically minded collector. I had no idea that the hammer and calipers badge ( I think mistaken for pincers ) dated so far back.

CB

The badges are referred to as “crossed hammers and pincers” in all “clothing regulations” (published erratically) from the 1882 issue onwards. Their earliest mention in standing orders, dress regulations and trumpet calls of the Royal Artillery, published 1864 (available online), illustrates them, but merely describes them as both, a device, and a badge. They were worn by Armstrong Armourers, Armourers and Smiths. There's no mention of usage by small arms armourers, that were not established for RA/RE during that period anyway.
As this badge was used by both RA and RE, but no others at that time, it seems extremely likely that the badge’s origin lies with the Board of Ordnance, to which those two corps belonged up until after the Crimean War, when the Board’s abysmal performance led to its disbandment, and movement of the two corps to under command of Horse Guards and the CinC.

P.S. I’m glad you found it interesting, the Armourer Sergeants, who informally existed since the 1700s at least (probably before) and were formalised from 1802, have never had their story properly told. Placed in a corps of their own from 1858, they were the Cinderella’s of the Army, needed and yet virtually ignored historically. Placed in the OSC/ASC in the late 1890s and then REME in 1942, the division of their historical timeline between the archives of the contemporary Royal Logistics Corps and REME has led to much information and interest falling between the two stools and to a degree lost from sight.