Yet Another Balmoral Question...

[pipesndrumsnun]

Hey, Jim...be CAREFUL!! There is a bear behind you!!

[pipesndrumsnun]

UPDATE: Thanks, X-Markers! I've got the badge on there now! I'm having trouble deciding between the MacArthur badge and the X-Marks badge (a gift from Father Stan/Ozman). The X-Marks badge is on the balmoral now...I like both badges so much! Maybe I'll switch them for fun every now & then!

[macwilkin]

did they also wear hose? how would it look with say scruched down hose/ hiking socks, and boots?

I guess the point is how dressy is a balmoral and how casual can you wear it?

----------------
Now playing: Riley Lee - Sea Breeze
via FoxyTunes

http://www.51hd.co.uk/museum/item?i=7

Not the best photo, but take a look at the officer standing on the left.

In terms of hose "scrunched down", I have seen one photo of a group of Commando officers (No. 12 Commando, if I remember correctly) -- two of the officers, one of them from the Argylls, are wearing kilts, and one officer does have "scrunched" hose with his ammunition boots. The picture is in Mike Chappell's Army Commandos, part of the Elite series by Osprey.

Now, given that the chap is a Commando, I would say that this is most likely a "field-expedient" thing; as Jock states, hose were worn the proper way with "Bombay bloomers".

Regards,

Todd

[thescot]

There is also the fact that in "undress" uniforms, the head gear was probably a khaki tam-o-shanter and not a proper balmoral bonnet. I'm guessing that's what the members of the 51st were wearing in the photo Todd attached above.

I wear a couple of them, too, instead of an actuall balmoral when I am very casual, e.g., in jeans, casual shirt with a kilt, or just knocking about. My balmorals look a little dressier than do the tams. Here's a look at a typical regimental tam like mine:



I have both the older, larger styles and the newer smaller ones which took some getting used to.

[The Barry]

Too many cap badges? Maybe someone needs to buy more hats!

[macwilkin]

There is also the fact that in "undress" uniforms, the head gear was probably a khaki tam-o-shanter and not a proper balmoral bonnet. I'm guessing that's what the members of the 51st were wearing in the photo Todd attached above.

I wear a couple of them, too, instead of an actuall balmoral when I am very casual, e.g., in jeans, casual shirt with a kilt, or just knocking about. My balmorals look a little dressier than do the tams. Here's a look at a typical regimental tam like mine:



I have both the older, larger styles and the newer smaller ones which took some getting used to.

Good on ya, Jim!

Cheers,

Todd

[Friday]

Thanks, Jock. I might get one as I described: navy blue with red toorie. After a few months of wadding it up and stomping on it, it should be good to go.

One rainy day that one good way to block a Balmoral is to get it every wet and wear it until it drys. Once wet push it and pull it until you like the shape and then just keep it on you head until dry. Every easy if the rain catches up with you at highland games.

[Jock Scot]

http://www.51hd.co.uk/museum/item?i=7

Not the best photo, but take a look at the officer standing on the left.

In terms of hose "scrunched down", I have seen one photo of a group of Commando officers (No. 12 Commando, if I remember correctly) -- two of the officers, one of them from the Argylls, are wearing kilts, and one officer does have "scrunched" hose with his ammunition boots. The picture is in Mike Chappell's Army Commandos, part of the Elite series by Osprey.

Now, given that the chap is a Commando, I would say that this is most likely a "field-expedient" thing; as Jock states, hose were worn the proper way with "Bombay bloomers".

Regards,

Todd

Forgive me, I may have misunderstood what you are trying to say, but the Officer (hands in pockets) on the left of the picture is not wearing his hose scrunched down,you can see his flashes,hose at regulation height and puttees around his ankles as should be for the British army!I do apologize if I have misunderstood.

[macwilkin]

Forgive me, I may have misunderstood what you are trying to say, but the Officer (hands in pockets) on the left of the picture is not wearing his hose scrunched down,you can see his flashes,hose at regulation height and puttees around his ankles as should be for the British army!I do apologize if I have misunderstood.

Jock,

it is I who should apologise; the photo I referenced is from a book in my library, not the photo on the 51st Highland Division's web site.

The book in question is Army Commandos 1940-1945 by Mike Chappell, part of Osprey Publishing's Elite Series. I'll see if I can scan the photo and post it.

Regards,

Todd

[1MUNK3]

I see it the same way has you Jock Scot. He must of put the wrong pic up.