Your Assistance in Identifying fellow with Zulu War Medal Up!!

On the left we have definitely Id'd Trumpeter Nicholas Henry Martin (1863-1912) who enlisted in the Royal Artillery in 1875, served in South Africa with N/5 Battery in the Ninth Frontier War and the Zulu War, and escaped from Isandlwana when half of N/5 Battery was massacred.
    He rejoined N/5 Battery to serve in the Transvaal and at the age of 18 was awarded the DSO for rescuing a wounded man under fire on 22 January 1881 at Potchefstroom in the 1st Boer War.  He continued to serve with the RA until 1896 when he was discharged with the rank of battery quartermaster sergeant. [Rain of Lead-The Siege and Surrender of the British at Potchesfstroom, pages 30 and 132 by Ian Bennett]

  Now here is my conundrum!  The carte-de-visite on the right is in my collection.  It is by the photographer H. Kisch of Maritzburg, Natal and seems to show a military fellow with the Zulu War Medal up.
         1) Check out the two faces please.  Same guy, Martin?
         2) If not, then colonial unit?  If so, which one?  

Comments and assistance are welcome.  Thanks, Isandula
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I would say, the same chap!

Isandula,

That's certainly not a Royal Artillery uniform on the Kisch image.

I would say, personally, the Kisch image is not that of British regular, but that of a locally-raised South African unit.

John Y.

Looks Artillery to me!

impi wrote:

Looks Artillery to me!

Care to explain yourself to support your belief?

John Y.

John Young wrote:

Isandula,

That's certainly not a Royal Artillery uniform on the Kisch image.

I would say, personally, the Kisch image is not that of British regular, but that of a locally-raised South African unit.

John Y.

Can you explain why you think its not RA.

24th,

I take it that you are also under the misguided impression that the soldier is in Kisch photograph is a member of the Royal Regiment of Artillery?

John Y.

Enlighten us John as to why is not RA. Your the expert! Going by other photos I have seen, it looks much the same to me. So would like to know what the diffrence is.

Has a likeness, patrol jkt, corporal..

Appreciate the discussion and thanks to all for your insight. The soldiers just look dead on facially to me. If he's not Royal Artillery, John, then surely an expert should be able to place him in a specific colonial unit that was in the war. Anyway, that after the guy was besieged so long in Potchefstroom and then a prisoner of the Boers that he would have a pieced together uniform as his original would have been tossed surely? Would a "trumpeter" as Martin was, have any special uniform accoutrements such as that leather sash and sword, for instance? Isandula

Thought at first he was wearing a blue, officers
patrol jacket.but the more i look at that i'm
wrong, great image.

They look very similar, but I do notice that the pin fixing his medal is much wider than the ribbon on the Kisch photograph - not so in the picture on the left. The medal would not have changed.

Steve

Let us bring light into the darkness of those who cannot be bothered to research something for themselves.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Isandula Collection.

As you can see I have separated Isandula's Kisch photograph from that of Nicholas Martin, D.C.M.

Yes Les he is a Corporal, and he is wearing a patrol jacket and that is exactly why he is not a member of the Royal Artillery.  Why because Corporals in the Royal Artillery did not wearing infantry pattern frogged jackets.

So what should they wear?

There are three options:

No 1. the Dress Tunic

The tunic can be seen worn by a few individuals in the field in 1879. This was a dark blue cloth, single breasted tunic with nine brass buttons down the front. The scarlet collar with rounded in fronts and edged all round with trimmed yellow cord. The cuffs each had a yellow worsted braid Austrian knot and was devoid of buttons. Shoulder straps were blue with red piping and carried embroidered yellow flaming grenades and brigade number. Sergeants and above wore gold trimmings instead of yellow.

The soldier standing in the background of Isandula's photograph of Major Owen is wearing such a tunic.

Or for a better view see this image of a Farrier-Sergeant, R.A.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
John Young Collection.

2. Other Ranks Frock of 1878

Introduced April 1878 by General Order No. 26. Similar in shape to the tunic, but less ornamental. It was also dark blue and single breasted, but without piping and fastened with only five brass buttons down the front. The jacket’s scarlet collar was rounded in front with only the lower edge seamed with yellow braid to form a border between blue and red.  A yellow worsted trefoil was carried on the cuff, while each cuff had a small opening on the outer seam held down with two small buttons. In 1879 vide Royal Artillery Regimental Order No. 109 brass grenade badges and brigade numbers replaced the embroidered ones.

A number of other-ranks are wearing the 1878 frock in the below photograph of 3rd Brigade R.A., taken in 1880 as they are wearing the brass grenades which were formerly worn on the shoulder strap on their collars a change which came about vide Royal Artillery Regimental Order of 1st March 1880.  In all honesty despite how William Britain's depicts them in their Zulu War collection, I have never seen a Royal Artillery soldier in a contemporary photograph wearing the 1878 Pattern frock in the Zulu War.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
3rd Brigade R.A.
John Young Collection.

3. Fatigue Dress Jacket

A number of contemporary photographs from the campaign show a number of Royal Artillery men wore a plain dark blue frock with five buttons, it was devoid of yellow braid on the cuff or on the collar. There was its single external pocket, without a button, on the left breast of this jacket.

See Michael Barthorp's The Zulu War - A Pictorial History page 122 & 126.

The other giveaway that the Kisch photograph is not a Royal Artillery Corporal is the fact on their forage cap Bombardiers - one chevron and Corporals - two chervons worn their insignia of rank as well as wearing it on their sleeves.

See below a Bombardier of either N/5 or 11/7 photographed in a Stable Jacket in the Eastern Cape circa 1877.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Bombardier, R.A. Eastern Cape.
John Young Collection.

Should anyone be at all interested in the ins & outs of the uniform of the Royal Artillery, then get hold of a copy of The Dress of the Royal Artillery by D. Alastair Campbell published in 1971.

John Y.

Look like artillery to me. I'll check out some other photos for comparison!

Dave,

Enlighten me how you drew that conclusion?

John Y.

Mister YOUNG,
Thank you for this impressive demonstration!  
Cheers

John Young wrote:

Dave,

Enlighten me how you drew that conclusion?

John Y.

Not a conclusion John, just looks like artillery to me! Like I said I shall look at some photos for comparison.

But thanks for your interest!

Hi Isandula
I'm not sure they are the same chap to be honest ? .
90th   

Dave, will you post the photo's please so we all
can look at them and compare. they say more
heads are better than one. cheers...

Les,

There is no need I believe my Trans-Atlantic partner-in-crime and I have solved the case!

More when we've confirmed our findings.

John Y.

Should it not be, once you have confirmed your finding, the case will be solved?

Appreciate the interest and comments of John Young, impi, 24th, xhosa2000, rusteze, Dave, ymob, and 90th regarding the comparison of these two photographs and the identity of the unit of the one in my collection. John Young makes a convincing uniform-based argument that my fellow is a non-commissioned officer of the Natal Mounted Police. As he was still alive later to have his photo taken with the Zulu War medal up, I guess that means he was either out with Dartnell on that fateful day or one of the few to escape with his life from Isandlwana. Still a part of me wants, perhaps foolishly, to think he and Martin, R.A. were separated at birth.

Isandula wrote:

Still a part of me wants, perhaps foolishly, to think he and Martin, R.A. were separated at birth.

I wouldn't totally give up on the idea!

Isandula & Ray63,

isandula wrote:

Still a part of me wants, perhaps foolishly, to think he and Martin, R.A. were separated at birth.

Ray63 wrote:

I wouldn't totally give up on the idea!

Not unless one of them was wearing contact lenses, or they had a different mother!

The Corporal of the Natal Mounted Police (circa 1881 to 1883) pictured above has pale coloured eyes - grey or blue.

However, if you look at the photograph of Nicholas Henry Martin on the link to the Royal Archives you will discover he had dark eyes - brown or hazel.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Barry,

If you're out there any input from you as to who the Corporal of N.M.P. might be?


John Y.

And you can tell colour in a B/W photo?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
What's the real colour of this persons eye?

Ray

I can tell it in sepia tone, can't you?

John Y.

Okay,

Ray63,

Try uploading a contemporary image such as this one, modern images don't help I'm afraid it is to do with the filters applied in 19th century photographs:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Eye colour pale - known to be blue.

or this:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Eye colour pale - blue or grey.

or in this photograph the sitter has pale eyes - blue or grey:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
John Young Collection.

or in this photograph the sitter has dark eyes - known to be brown:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
John Young Collection.

or in this photograph where the sitter has pale eyes - either grey or blue:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
John Young Collection.

or in this photograph where the sitter has slightly darker eyes - which I would suggest are brown:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
John Young Collection.

Just to confuse you further I am going to ask you something in the second to last photograph what colour do you think is the facing colour of the Drum-Major's tunic?

John Y.

i would suggest light blue, yellow or buff, nice to
see you in night owl mode JY,

Les,

Manflu keeping me awake!

Right with your second option - yellow.

John Y.

Please keep that to yourself! to early for a jab yet.
interesting chaps eyes..i have seen a lot of victorian
Edwardian photography, the glass plate negative
process produced some of the finest results in terms
of clarity and definition..before the world switched to
a more industrial process, i when looking at facial images
am always drawn to the eyes, and if the image is clear-
ish, one can hazard a good estimation of the sitters eye
colouration, if there is no other personal information to hand.

It might sound basic, but the above examples are good ones,
there are not really that many options to choose..opaque
or very light would indicate the sitters eyes were light blue /
grey, and might indicate the race of the person /people. ie,
northern hemisphere, the colour would of course include in
various shade's, green and flecks of red, Hazel...the latins
and blacks from all over the world,their eyes range from jet
black to any shade of brown, so i tend to think it is entirely
possible, given that range and with a clear image to gauge
with a reasonable amount of probability the natural colour of
the sitters eyes, thats just my opinion..not including all the
variables such as genetics and interbreeding.