Sam Browne belt

[macwilkin]

No I read your link and Wiki may have it's faults but it is less graphical and it's format sometimes make it easier to read and to find the information one is looking for. I use Wiki as a starting point but if it's a subject I'm interested in I do indeed search further and find (buy) books on that subject. Todd you slight Wikipedia yet you also mention (in this case) it cites the same scource as you .

As they say here in the Ozarks, "even a bling hog finds an acorn now and then."

Sorry, but given my line of work, I see how bad of a source Wikipedia is almost everyday. You may find a good entry now and again, but in general, I wouldn't use it in my research.

T.

[ccga3359]

As they say here in the Ozarks, "even a bling hog finds an acorn now and then."

Sorry, but given my line of work, I see how bad of a source Wikipedia is almost everyday. You may find a good entry now and again, but in general, I wouldn't use it in my research.

T.

In your line of work just don't quote it !

[woodard]

Interesting. Is that US military nomenclature and if so is that universal or is it branch of service specific? Or British and commonwealth forces nomenclature?

Actually, law enforcement/security was my line at the time I wore a Garrison.
The point I was reaching for, and apparently missed, is that without the shoulder strap, under belt, holster, sword, etc, it's simply a belt.

[macwilkin]

In your line of work just don't quote it !

T.

[ccga3359]

Actually, law enforcement/security was my line at the time I wore a Garrison.
The point I was reaching for, and apparently missed, is that without the shoulder strap, under belt, holster, sword, etc, it's simply a belt.

Exactly. Even if, supposing, Sam Browne was the sole originator of the belt then it is the attachment of the shoulder strap to an existing uniform belt. Therefore only a belt and shoulder strap combination should be considere a Sam Brown belt.