Jump to content
Great War Forum

Remembered Today:

Mystery tunic WW1 or 1922 Pattern?


Recommended Posts

I just got this tunic. It came as part of a job lot with mostly French stuff but all WW1.

I was wondering if minds greater than mine know what it is, it has double pleats, it has 2 hooks under the collar, which is unusually a stand up type, it has the belt hooks, all of which I have held under a black light and appear fine but it also has khaki lining, lined pockets, a cloth label saying SD OR No.3. There is a faint stamp saying 19 and 13 but I imagine the 13 probably refers to the size as it is a size 13 tunic. All patches, badges etc. seem WW1 period. Does anyone know what it could be?

post-28092-0-79938800-1386958736_thumb.j

Link to post
Share on other sites

Must have been made post WW2 as it has King's Troop RHA on the label. This is my old unit. They changed there name C.1948 from 'Riding Troop' to 'King's Troop'. They had given up wearing this type of Tunic by 1992, when I joined, but I understand they were worn up until the early 1980's

Link to post
Share on other sites

Certain miltaria shops back in the 70's were not above stamping interesting dates onto tunics. If I remember the blurb thay were advertised as "WW1 pattern, WW1 dated" which in away they are.

G

Link to post
Share on other sites

Irrespective of anything said above, a stitched label in ORs uniform - rather than glued - is a dead giveaway and always (way) post-WW1.

Cheers,

GT.

Also the full linings post-war too...

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great information, thanks guys. I am going to take the patches off and sell them separately without feeling bad about destroying the history of a WW1 tunic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The colour of the lining is also that which is seen on post WWI tunics, which used white if I remember correctly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Late war tunics and Canadian tunics did have khaki liners and late war ones also had stitched labels. When troops returned home their old war worn uniforms (which only survived about 1 month of front line wear) were taken off and destroyed, new ones were issued so the troops looked good when they disembarked in Folkestone, Dover etc. For these reasons most surviving genuine WW1 O.R. uniforms will be late war productions and could therefore have tanned liners and stitched labels. Indeed I would be far more wary if I saw a tunic with white liner and remains of a paper label. The misunderstanding that all WW1 liners were white with paper labels is quite common. Although in this case it appears to be a post war tunic which has been made to look like a WW1 example, from some other tunics I have seen it is really almost identical to the genuine example.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Certain miltaria shops back in the 70's were not above stamping interesting dates onto tunics. If I remember the blurb thay were advertised as "WW1 pattern, WW1 dated" which in away they are.

G

In fact watched the late Mike Ross of Quatermasters at the Angel stamp 1915 in to post 1922 pattern tunics remeber it well winter of 1979 spent an enlighting 2 weeks working in the back room!
Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact watched the late Mike Ross of Quatermasters at the Angel stamp 1915 in to post 1922 pattern tunics remeber it well winter of 1979 spent an enlighting 2 weeks working in the back room!

Ahh Happy Days!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it was a eye opner ,tend now to stay clear of any dated tunics and trousers ,as it was over 30 years ago it as aged quite well ,but they had a huge room cramed to the ceiling with sets of 08 webbing £25 a pop ,if i am correct it all was released from a film hire company ,but also a army surplus warehouse sold off its contents in 1979 it was in Tottenham removed lorry loads of kit including lots of Great War kit

Link to post
Share on other sites

Late war tunics and Canadian tunics did have khaki liners and late war ones also had stitched labels. When troops returned home their old war worn uniforms (which only survived about 1 month of front line wear) were taken off and destroyed, new ones were issued so the troops looked good when they disembarked in Folkestone, Dover etc. For these reasons most surviving genuine WW1 O.R. uniforms will be late war productions and could therefore have tanned liners and stitched labels. Indeed I would be far more wary if I saw a tunic with white liner and remains of a paper label. The misunderstanding that all WW1 liners were white with paper labels is quite common. Although in this case it appears to be a post war tunic which has been made to look like a WW1 example, from some other tunics I have seen it is really almost identical to the genuine example.

A good point, I have always thought that most surviving genuine enlisted men's tunics in VG or better condition were probably never worn in action, and that officers uniforms in the same condition were likely to be a suit that was kept for best wear or possibly never worn at all.

khaki

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an intresting story some years back in the East London Advertiser ,it concerned a factory rendering down returned tunics for rags ,the rule was any tunic contaminated by gas was supposed to be returned to a specfic factory where it would be destroyed ,but contractors hoping for increased proffits were taking all the tunics for rags ,the factory in Poplar E14 caught fire and panic ensured as it was belived the smoke and fumes would release gas in to the surrounding areas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, without wanting to start anything.....

Post 5 and Post 8 appear to flatly contradict each other. As a non expert (as I suspect many reading this thread in search of advice at some point will be) what should I make of this?

Are there examples (of unimpeachable provenance) of late war jackets with khaki linings and/or stitched labels (as described) that can be shown? I once bought one (sight unseen - it was very cheap!) described as a "late war" SD jacket but it turned out to be as far as I can tell, a 1922 Pattern.

Was there a variation in the clothing regs which specifies, requires or allows these changes? (CALLING JOE SWEENEY!) or is it a known "production variation"

And for the pedants - is this a "Tunic" or is it a "Jacket" (as in Jacket, Service Dress) and does the fact that is is RHA alter how it is described?

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

Late war tunics and Canadian tunics did have khaki liners and late war ones also had stitched labels. When troops returned home their old war worn uniforms (which only survived about 1 month of front line wear) were taken off and destroyed, new ones were issued so the troops looked good when they disembarked in Folkestone, Dover etc. For these reasons most surviving genuine WW1 O.R. uniforms will be late war productions and could therefore have tanned liners and stitched labels. Indeed I would be far more wary if I saw a tunic with white liner and remains of a paper label. The misunderstanding that all WW1 liners were white with paper label.

It is fair to say that many of the 1907/8 SDs extant are 'demob'. Mostly, they are indeed 1915 pattern..

However (and one can't speak for Canadian uniforms), while there is anecdote of 1921 pattern lined jackets having been trialled early - with in-war dated labels - not even one of the more venerable collectors espousing that has ever produced proper evidence of same. Sorry: but "I've seen..." doesn't count in this critical context.

And the whole 'late war' guff when it comes to lined tunics is a dealers' con.

Ditto stitched labels. More so, even. Dealer-spun cobblers, especially from East Midlands based types with a Times Roman John Bull printing kit.

As for 'white' linings with paper labels, there are plenty enough around that feature those that are far, far from dubious. It's a matter of whether has been lucky enough to encounter them.

Sadly, there is a almost an angry defensiveness to your post that sounds like you have a wardrobe full that needs justifying on grounds of rationalising the sales pitch given. If you own any of the jackets that you describe, I'd really, really (really) get shot of 'em now.

Cheers,

GT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That jacket is post WWII---SD No.3 is also a dead give away.

Its been messed with.

You can find Great War Jackets that start exhibiting characteristics of later models with part Khaki linings no arm hole double stitch during the war, but given the sewn in label definitely postwar (like GT states)--not done in the UK, and especially in that place and fashion.

Canadian Jackets on occasion can be found with a sewn in label--all I have seen (I own one) are not the Canadian Gov't purchased ones.

Joe Sweeney

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a great looking coat. I wouldn't take anything away from it and leave it as is. It would look good on a torso mannequin.

Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

as a matter of interest, what ribbons are on the tunic, I see a partial in your photo

regards

Bob R.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry GT, I didn't mean to have a angry defensive tone to the post, but was merely trying to explain a misunderstood fact. Whilst I am happy to understand the tunic to be post war, mostly because of the 'Kings Troops' comment mentioned in post 3, I have seen at least one very genuine khaki lined, un-messed with tunic myself. This is also stated in the book Tommy's war by Peter Doyle on page 55.

I can't count myself among the few that are lucky enough to have a wardrobe full of either WW1 or 1922 Pattern tunics and only bought this one for the patches as I had some doubts on the tunic itself, which have been confirmed. I got it together with a RAF greatcoat for a very small price so it was still a good deal, if the tunic was WW1 it would have been a great deal but hey ho, it wasn't to be. I am still happy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting,

but I would have thought that gas contaminated uniforms would have been burnt in F & F,

khaki

That was the issue they should have been ,the impregnated clothing was ment to be destroyed in Belgium ,but to maximise profit the contractor was shipping those to UK also.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry GT, I didn't mean to have a angry defensive tone to the post, but was merely trying to explain a misunderstood fact. Whilst I am happy to understand the tunic to be post war, mostly because of the 'Kings Troops' comment mentioned in post 3, I have seen at least one very genuine khaki lined, un-messed with tunic myself. This is also stated in the book Tommy's war by Peter Doyle on page 55.

Apologies if I was being a bit forthright, as thought you were being a bit dismissive of white-lined and labelled survivors, of which there are plenty. Apologies again - could have been more temperate.

One thing to note: 1922 pattern is a collectors' thing. The pattern was actually 1921. Not that I'm pedantic or anything....

I've checked Peter's text. I accept there may be khaki linings in some very late tunics. What I would dispute is the extent of the lining: in terms of button fly, pockets etc.

Some very reliable sources relate a single 1917 dated tunic, and a Canadian one, that show signs of the 1921 pattern features. I have been sent photos of the Canadian one, and I'm not convinced of the genuineness of the label, nor the WD stamp.

As for the British one of lore, I believe the person who told me - yet it is one and only one. And so it is assumed this was a prototype or a trial jacket. Just one though...

However, when it comes to labels, Peter's text on p.55 is at best ambiguous, or - heresy here - plain wrong. My reading is that he's saying that war time labels were stitched, and that the 1921s were stitched but differed by having cloth ones instead of paper. That is not the case: war time ones were never stitched.

Hopefully, he can pop up here and clarify whether it's perhaps just the way it's edited or my thick interpretation of the paragraph.

If looking at (or to buy) late war tunics, khaki linings may be just about OK - but I'd steer clear of fully lined ones and avoid stitched labels like the plague.

Cheers,

GT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lancashire Fusilier

Late war tunics and Canadian tunics did have khaki liners and late war ones also had stitched labels.

I noticed that your jacket has a maker's label for Moore Taggart and Co. Ltd., who were based in Scotland, and made, amongst other items, uniforms from the 1860's to the late 1970's.

Here are 2 references to Moore Taggart, including one, which suggests that MT kitted out Canadian units in 1913 - 1914 ?

WW1 seems to have been the swan song for Moore Taggart & Co as military outfitters and they featured strongly in the kitting out of Canadian units over the period 1913-14 (and probably beyond). No one could have wished the war to go on, but in terms of business the end of the war and the war's subsequent effects on Britain's economy sounded the death knell of these small military outfitters. Given the end of full dress for the line regiments in 1914 and the retrenchment of Defence in the 1920s, it is easy to imagine what a devastating effect these factors must have had on their business. I imagine that they were at one time one of the approved regimental tailors for the HLI (City of Glasgow Regiment) and significantly cheaper than Saville Row.

By 1869, Moore, Taggart & Co were established as general drapers and outfitters in Glasgow, Scotland. The firm later became a limited company, Moore, Taggart & Co Ltd, and by the early twentieth century they were acting as warehousemen, military and railway clothing contractors and overall manufacturers with premises at Tontine House, Cross, 34-54 Trongate and 2-18 Albion Street, Glasgow. Moore, Taggart & Co built their business by offering customers consistent good value for money rather than by discounting goods or by holding sales. Within a few years the company had leased the whole of the former Tontine Hotel. The warehouse was gutted by fire in 1911. In the late 1920s they concentrated on overall manufacture and military and railway clothing. The company appears to have ceased trading in 1977.

LF
Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries GT, I can get a bit passionate, suppose we all can :-). You are right about the 22 pattern, I believe it is officially called the 1902 Service Dress in the 5th modification.

The last post from LF is interesting too and does make me wonder when put together with post 17 from Joe Sweeney. I have to admit that all the other stuff from this lot was all good, beyond doubt, original WW1 gear, it included a number of French water bottles, canteens and cups, a French side cap, one French puttie, a French breadbag, a belt and a British Large pack and 2 sets of hospital blues therefore this one did seem out of place by being not correct. Does anyone know if the Canadian Household Cavalry were called King's troops in WW1? I understand that the word Guards lasted until 1950.

Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...