The Rorke's Drift VC Discussion Forum
(View Discussion Rules)

** IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO ALL USERS **

PLEASE NOTE: This forum is now inactive and is provided for reference purposes only. The live forum is available at www.rorkesdriftvc.com/forum

(Back To Topic List)

Date	Original Topic
25th December 2003	Natal Carbineer "F.B." By Edward Garcia Perhaps someone cane help me with this. I recently picked up a carte de visite photograph of a Natal Carbineer which was taken by J.H. Murray (30 Church Street) Pietermaritzburg, Natal. I know that Murray was active at that location from 1879 until 1893. The photograph shows what I assume to be a trooper of the Carbineers. On the reverse of the image is the following inscription: To Mrs. Sheppard from an old friend. F.B. Does anyone know who F.B might be? No one with these initials appears as a casualty in Tavander�s book and he may not even be a veteran of the AZW. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Date	Replies
28th December 2003	a.burke hello Edward,could you possibly describe the troopers uniform in more detail, ie tunic,pants, and accutrements, is the photo sepia or b/w.all the best.
28th December 2003	Edward Garcia The uniform - the photo being sepia - appears to be dark blue or black with a white collar, white pointed cuffs on his five button jacket and single white stripes down each side of his pants. He also has a white banded pill box style hat on and carries a swagger stick in is hand. I could also send a scan of the image to you if that might be of use. Thanks, Ed
29th December 2003	Edward Garcia He is also wearing a white cross belt. Ed
29th December 2003	Peter Quantrill Edward, It is possible that your unidentified Carbineer is F. Bucknal, Karkloof Troop, Natal Carbineers. I have a group photograph taken in 1867 of this troop. The group are wearing identical items of clothing and headgear as described by you. Bucknal is heavily bearded. The troop commander is Captain C. Barter. ( Source----Langalibalale and the Natal Carbineers, published 1973.)
30th December 2003	Edward Garcia Thanks Peter. The man in my photo has a rather long mustache but no apparent beard and since the photographers working dates which should be 1878 to1898 (I erred above when I stated 1879) he could very well have shaved the beard off in the intervening years. Could you drop me a scan of the photo that you mentioned? I would like to compare the two images. Thanks again, Ed