This shot from the recent N&D Memorial unveiling shows two reenactors standing at attention with slung rifles. Was this ever permissible in WW1 or after?

Certainly doesn't look right and I would have thought the correct position of being at "attention" at a memorial would have been employed with the sling tightened, heels together and the rifle brought in straight to the right leg, with butt resting on the floor at the side of the right boot and the left arm down the seam of the trouser.

They look as though they're off to take part in a route march with the rifle slung

Have a look here;
http://new.livinghistory.ie/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1152

Regards.
Tom.

There's a business opportunity out there for retired NCOs to teach re-enactors to drill and carry themselves like soldiers.

Good effort there, Tom. Full marks to the lads for trying hard. We can`t expect them to look slick but I`d guess they probably want to look as slick as possible. I`m sure the local TA would be happy to provide a bit of instruction in the finer points if they haven`t got men with the know how.

Little query - one officer at Killarney looked as if he might be wearing WW2+ medal ribbons - do reenactors approve of that?

This may be another instance of American Cultural Imperialism, as in the US Army and Marine Corps Attention with Slung Arms is a valid posture. It is not common except during parades, but it is in the Drill and Ceremonies manual. I have seen it used by guards and honor guards in the US. I have no idea about UK drill and ceremonies. Doc

If someone entitled to WW2+ medals attends a semi-state occasion in period uniform, why should he not wear them? The objectionable thing, surely, is for reenactors to wear period medals/ribbons, unless they are specifically portraying a real person who was entitled to them.

I`m not saying they shouldn`t wear them - just wondering what the reenactors` attitude is. It just detracts somewhat from the period image if the Tommy wears a modern ribbon or medal.

I'd like to see Taff Gillingham's take on this: for all I know it might be entirely permissible.

I certainly wouldn't get a current TA soldier to teach them Drill: quite a lot of differences in 90+ years, I suspect.

SA80 drill with a SMLE - an interesting thought!

Are they not Irish Army Medals?Most of the lads here involved in re-enactment are ex army.
Regards.
Tom.

The soldiers are shown with rifles at the slope, at the present and in one pic, arms reversed. None are actually at attention.

My take on modern medals that if at a memorial parade my members are entitled to that medal, they will wear them.
It is not 1914 - 1918 its 2009, and the guys earned them hard way, so in salute to their service and that of their comrades wear your modern medal's with pride. its not 1914!

As for wearing period campaign medals or ribbons at shows, it is no different to an actor wearing medals on TV. Clive Dunn was not entitled to wear the chestful of medals he had up, his fictitious character was or wasn't as he never existed.

It is no more disrespectful to wear a period medal on a period uniform than having a medal in a draw to which you are not entitled, but paid for and get out to show you fellow collectors. Once the original recipient has passed on it only scrap or a family memento. Of course we could wear re-strikes, and as they are not medals, but facsimiles we are only giving the illusion of wearing a medal.

I cannot even understand the argument that some put forward, that if I wear a Boer War pair, or an Indian General Service I am somehow deluding myself with grandeur. Please at the end of the show I'm going to get in my car and drive home, not mount my pony and trot off into a high veldt sunset.

Gareth

Modern medals on a re-enactor!

Total farce, might just as well wear a red nose and carpet slippers.

Someone has lost the plot here.

Your pukka re-enactor is punctilious about getting every period detail right, including some items the public never see.

I think modern medals underline the danger, ever present [and vigilantly opposed by many re-enactors] of the whole thing becoming a strutting exercise. Bulled boots next, anybody? Mobile phone in the breast pocket?

My opinion, of course.

In my opinion, these two aren't reenactors per se - the way their kit looks and is worn suggests it's been rented for the occasion and put on by people who don't know exactly how it should appear. Probably done to add a bit of period colour...

Hi Grumpy

I do think a red nose and carpet slippers would be a tad dishonouring.

A memorial service is not a living history activity, but an act of commemoration to the past and the present. If the member did the time, got the gong, and wishes to, its the honourable thing to wear the medal. A memorial service can never be a re-enactment or a living history opportunity. The period uniform serves as a reminder of the past, but it does not create the past.

If allowing an ex serviceman to wear a modern medal if he wishes at an act of commemoration makes me a poor reenactor that's fine I can live with the shame because I'm proud to honour his service.

As in all things there are times when it is both appropriate, and inappropriate.

Have the detail correct to the enth degree by all means, but it is still 2009.

Gareth

Rifle drill is one thing, but that Colour Serjeant needs a little work on his Stick drill.

Since the event was presumably organised by what was the N&D Regt, one assumes they took a bit of care about the selection of quite prominent players in the ceremony.

If a fellow shows up wearing the Victoria Cross and it's his, which one of you is going to tell him he can't play? So why say no to other awards that have been earned? They're not toys or fashion accents, they have real meaning and their recipients should be greeted with pleasure. It's also a tribute to the group that a REAL soldier is willing to participate.

Museum Tom.
Fascinating photographs. How things have changed from when my Grandfather returned to Dublin in 1920 following 26 years service. to see re enactors parade with UN Irish Army Veterans is very significant to me. Wonderful images. I have a Great uncle on a memorial in Dublin'
Tony P

They are a great bunch of guys and re-enact ww2 also I sometmes join in with them as a member of the Tipperary Flying column when they do the Irish Civil War, black and tans and the rebellion. They are all from around Waterford, Cork and Clare and even have some English lads in there also. There are about four clubs here doing ww1 and we all get together at the big shows. If you look at the forum you will see different periods and shows with more pictures.
Regads.
Tom

I can`t see much wrong with bulled boots. Are we saying WW1 soldiers didn`t bull boots?

Boots were polished not bulled in the period under discussion - I reckon some may have taken things to the "nth" degree though.

orrible looking pair, look at them puttees would'nt have my grandma seen in em, cant be bloody infantrymen, more than likely bleeding Engineers thinking there out fer a f'ing sunday stroll

contemporary photos of the Guards [even!] turn up extremely unbulled boots on some very senior soldiers. I have tried, without success, to try to pin down when bull broke out, as it were. It was certainly rife by 1930, and included amazingly tailored trousers and puttees.

I too have been trying, without success, to find a WW1 soldier with bulled boots. What about that one of a group of Guards RSMs? I think it was on:-
http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...mp;hl=stevenson

The Great War boot was made with the rough side of the leather on the outside, smooth inwards. A bull like shine would be near impossible, especially as you only have Dubbin. LRB Standing Orders also tell the recruit to rub his new brown boots with a cut raw potato half to make them go black.

So for bulled boots, I suspect when the leather was reversed to its modern use, and wax polishes appeared.

G

Nugget and Kiwi shoe/boot polishes, and no doubt other brands such as Cherry Blossom were available pre WW1.
A Google check of the brands shows them available in UK; 1910 for Kiwi and Nugget, 1912 for Cherry Blossom.
So their introduction to the market place was relatively close to WW1 and from what little is said about the early days on the websites, they do mention them being much in demand by soldiers in WW1.

Yes, but it doesn't mean (if correct) they made the right assumption . Modern soldiers wearing the kit for the first time tend to use it in a modern fashion - carrying Lee-Enfields in the manner of SMG's, drilling with lots of stamping and the like. That's why they don't always make the greatest extras in film productions, as they fall back on what is familiar to them, which might not be correct for ninety years ago.



That's not strictly true T8 - as Joe Sweeney says, all forms of leather were allowed during the war, including pebbled leather. I have seen pictures of an original pair of B5's in brown pebbled leather, and they are strange things to see when compared to their better known rough-out brothers...

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...959&hl=boot

How about this for a WW1 soldier with bulled boots?

Indeed - well polished boots on OR's aren't that rare really, especially when a soldier was going to have his picture taken professionally and wanted to look very smart. It's actually possible to get something of a shine from ordinary Dubbin on rough-out leather if you know how - it just doesn't last very long under field conditions, wearing off almost straight away.

Blinking right........
I have not read all the posts yet but to be honest I am getting a bit fed up of all these re-enactors,
a curse on all your houses !
If you want to put a uniform on then join up and have done with it and stop being so infantile.
I await the counter bombardment.
Bob

I have not read all the posts yet but to be honest I am getting a bit fed up of all these re-enactors,
a curse on all your houses !

I wasn't aware you were being forced to read them, old boy!

G

True - it took me a lot of time to "break" extras from the Australian Army of some bad habits when I was "co-opted" into Gallipoli and Breaker Morant - I was the only one who had a knowledge of the accurate way to do it at the time ! Funny how assisting with research for Fort Glanville (Adelaide) came in handy - had to read a number of period drill manuals.

What are the main differences between modern and WW1 drill? I imagined WW1 drill to be close to the drill at the end of the SMLE era, say 1960 and that subsequent differences would be mainly due to weapon size.

One thing that has been reintroduced is the "slope arms". This was done away with with the introduction of the SLR which used "shoulder arms" using the weapons pistol grip to hold it close to the body.

As I touched on in my last post, current drill involves a lot more exageration in body movement than was used during the war. This takes the form of foot stamping, raising the arms higher on the swing whilst marching and similar. This actually started somewhere late-interwar period, becoming more prevalent during the war, before becoming the norm from the 50's onwards (anyone who's seen "Carrington VC" will recall the scene with the senior NCO being asked to stop his excessive stamping in the courtroom!). WW1 drill is much looser, softer even. My own theory is that as soldiers had to rely on marching less and less to get from A to B, what marching and drill they had to do took on a more symbolic/dress role, and thus became increasingy exagerated and more crisply done.

Foot stamping was the order of the day in the 50s. It helped in a way, in that it ensured the trousers were sitting properly over the gaters and not riding up. Is it possible that stamping caused puttees to come down, so it wasn`t done? Incidentally, where did you get the info on WW1 drill being looser/softer, Andrew?

If we look at the 1951 Drill book, the first section in chapter 1, under the explanation To bend the.....knee

'The leg that is on the ground is kept braced back with the foot firm and flat on the ground. The opposite knee is bent by raising it in front of the body so that the toe hangs directly below the knee and the foot is at a natural angle at least six inches from the ground. The leg is then straightened sharply so that when the foot reaches the ground the knee is braced back and the flat of the foot is firmly on the ground in the required position'. A stamp in all but name.

If we move to the order 'Stand at - ease' it reads 'Keeping the right foot still and the leg braced back "bend the left knee" and carry the left foot to the left so the feet are about 12 inches apart'.

Turning to the Infantry drill book of 1914, same order Stand at - Ease 'Keeping the leg straight, carry the left foot about twelve inches to the left so that the weight of the body rests equally on both feet'. No stamp or Bend the
left knee.

Just for fun we will look at the same order from the 1860 drill book

"On the words Stand at Ease, bring the left foot about six inches to the front, the greater part of the weight of the body on the right leg, the left knee bent; at the same time strike the palms of the hands together, [clap] and pass the right hand over the back of the left, letting them hang together in front of the body; the whole position should be easy". So when did they drop the clap, which I think is shown in the film "Young Winston."

I did read somewhere that on the introduction of the 1951 drill book, anything up to 1000 men could be off with minor knee and ankle injuries, and few would have to be discharged with more serious injury. To disable a battalion of your own men is a triumph of stupidity, it isn't very smart and it ain't clever. Which is part of the subtle comment being made in the film 'Carrington VC'.

G

Some of these drill changes were to accomodate the need to train large numbers of recruits quickly. In the US, the Marine Corps dropped the pre WWII "Squads Drill" for a simpler form that concentrated on movement of troops rather than the more complicated patterns that were pleasing to look at but difficult to perform.

In the mid 50s they tried to reinstitute the old drill and had lots of problems. Squads wheeling and crashing into each other with rifles smacking unwary heads caused some tension in the ranks. It got to the point where they put a hold on the change for further study. I left around that time so I have no idea how it was resolved.

I never knew anybody who damaged an ankle or knee doing foot drill in the 50s. Plenty on assault courses and route marches.

I never knew anybody who damaged an ankle or knee doing foot drill in the 50s. Plenty on assault courses and route marches

As I said t'is only what I have read somewhere, if it wasn't necessary for Wellington through to WW1 it probably isn't needed.


G

Agreed it`s not necessary but I think the Guards will take a lot of convincing not to stamp in the Trooping The Colour. Can we assume that Edwardian & WW1 Guards didn`t stamp?

That reminds me of the old saw

"The Rifle - given to the Guards Brigade to drill with, and the Rifle Brigade to kill with".

G

Click to view attachment csm toher irish guards , receives the m m , st pats day 1917. now thats a nugget shine!!.
mike.

I suspect you're right, Andrew. I always look on Drill as being a formalised version of what should happen naturally: the swing of the arms, the foot movements, and so on. Modern Drill seems to be all about (dare I say) "Look at us, we're better than the others". I do remember our SPSI (Gordons - great bloke) commenting that the Guards looked smart because they did it slower than everyone else. Not sure how true that might be.

Mind, I watched some film of Greek Evzones the other day. They just looked ridiculous, so I guess national opinion counts, too!

The CSM`s trousers come well down over his puttees - much further than usual?
I assume that`s John French.

Good job 'the little Field Marshal' didn't have to pin the medal on the CSM's cap ...

phil, yes thats lord french. he had just succeded kitchener as colonel. and yes the pants seem to be worn low over the puttees, could he be trying not to look so tall in the legs!! he`s a fine big lad, could you imagine him coming at you with the bayonet in a trench!!

mike.

He wouldn`t need a bayonet to frighten me. His pacing stick would be quite enough.