Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unknown City of London Officer...........

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Robert View Post
    It doesn't seem to be the City of London shield. If only I could read the lettering.

    That's interesting I felt sure it was City of London? But I was basing this on the fact that the picture was taken in Bishopsgate.


    Unfortunately I'm unable to make it any bigger, I'll get a magnifying glass out and see if I can read anything.
    Attached Files

    Comment


    • #17
      It looks fairly similar to the City of London Coat of Arms to me, although it's far from clear. There is a faint blob in the top left quadrant of the shield which I take (imagine) to be a sword. I'm sure small differences make a big difference in heraldry, but one big difference seems to be that instead of the shield being surmounted by a helmet, it is surmounted by a crown....Which could be significant.
      Here is a page on what the crown means in heraldic terms;

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_(heraldry)

      Wasn't a jubilee medal awarded to people other than just policemen? A quick Google says the following;

      "The medal was awarded to members of the Royal Family and the court, guests at the celebrations of Queen Victoria's golden jubilee and the soldiers and sailors that paraded that day in London.

      The medals were made in two categories - (1) Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee Medal (Gold, Silver and Copper) and (2) Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee Police Medal (Copper)."

      The medal was made in gold and silver and copper with gold and silver medals going to individuals of higher rank."

      Appropriate that the police medal was copper.

      I did think the Afghan campaign medal might provide a clue. So I went through a medal roll that I had handy (9th Lancers) ad found that there were about 30 men (out of about 600) who were awarded the medal and one clasp, but no Kabul to Kandahar Star. But of course there were dozens of other regiments in Afghanistan, and most weren't even eligible for the star, so it doesn't really mean much. Needle in a haystack, as said.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
        It looks fairly similar to the City of London Coat of Arms to me, although it's far from clear. There is a faint blob in the top left quadrant of the shield which I take (imagine) to be a sword. I'm sure small differences make a big difference in heraldry, but one big difference seems to be that instead of the shield being surmounted by a helmet, it is surmounted by a crown....Which could be significant.
        Here is a page on what the crown means in heraldic terms;

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_(heraldry)

        Wasn't a jubilee medal awarded to people other than just policemen? A quick Google says the following;

        "The medal was awarded to members of the Royal Family and the court, guests at the celebrations of Queen Victoria's golden jubilee and the soldiers and sailors that paraded that day in London.

        The medals were made in two categories - (1) Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee Medal (Gold, Silver and Copper) and (2) Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee Police Medal (Copper)."

        The medal was made in gold and silver and copper with gold and silver medals going to individuals of higher rank."

        Appropriate that the police medal was copper.

        I did think the Afghan campaign medal might provide a clue. So I went through a medal roll that I had handy (9th Lancers) ad found that there were about 30 men (out of about 600) who were awarded the medal and one clasp, but no Kabul to Kandahar Star. But of course there were dozens of other regiments in Afghanistan, and most weren't even eligible for the star, so it doesn't really mean much. Needle in a haystack, as said.




        Thanks for your reply Joshua.

        I fear I'll never be able to put a name to this chaps face. Which is such a shame as I'm sure he would have had an interesting tale to tell.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by The Station Cat View Post

          We know that this photograph was taken at sometime between 1902 & 1909.
          Hi i stumbled across this thread and i just found this regarding a photographer named William George Johnson aka William Wright deceased 1898

          https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/.../5685/data.pdf

          Be WILLIAM GEORGE JOHNSON (commonly known as WILLIAM WRIGHT Deceased). Pursuant to Act of Parliament-22nd and 23rd Victoria cap. 35 intituled "An Act to further amend the Law of Property and to relieve Trustees." "Vj OTICE is hereby given that all creditors and other JLM persons having any claims or demands against the estate of William George Johnson (commonly known as William Wright and sometimes known as William George Wright) late of 79 King's-road Brighton in the county of Sussex and carrying on business as a Wine and Spirit Merchant at the Old King's Head No. 282 Euston road and at the Lord Stanley Sandringham-road Hackney both in the county of London and as a Photographer at 83 Bishopsgate-street Without))), 93 High-strest Whitechapel, 422 Mile End-road, and 232 Mare-street Hackney all in the county of London deceased (who died on the 18th day of August 1898)

          So would mean the photo was taken before 1898 rather than 1902 onwards if i,m on the right track..

          Obviously i have not helped discovering who the gentleman in the photo is though:-(

          Comment

          Working...
          X