London Regiment cloth shoulder titles and patches

[poona guard]

On 01/01/2017 at 14:42, Drew-1918 said:

1/15th Bn., 140th Bde, 47th Division

1916/17

 

"two shoulder titles with CIVIL SERVICE RIFLES in red on khaki cloth, four company badges of blue, green, red and yellow rectangles, yellow spade and blue, green and red bands".

IWM

'A' Coy.

'B' Coy

'C' Coy

'D' Coy

 

 

L/Cpl wearing yellow spade patch and company bar. Also he may be wearing a cloth shoulder title- evidence that they were all worn together.  

From my own collection

 

 

Hi Drew,

Just putting the finishing touches to my third book on Great War badges and wondered if you could send me a copy of this photo for use in the book? You would of course be credited in the book.

Best,

Dave Bilton

[Drew-1918]

2 hours ago, poona guard said:

Hi Drew,

Just putting the finishing touches to my third book on Great War badges and wondered if you could send me a copy of this photo for use in the book? You would of course be credited in the book.

Best,

Dave Bilton

Hello Dave,

I cannot see exactly which photo you mean because all the original post is showing me is a blank jpeg with a question mark in the centre. I also tried changing the VPN to see if that was the problem, but no luck. I have been a bit busy with other things in recent years so cannot recall which one it was either.

I am in Korea until the 19th August so I can check when I get back home, if you like. 

Cheers,

Chris

 

[poona guard]

Hi Chris,

I don't know what is going on here. I would like to use any photo you are happy to provide that shows a TF man with battalion, Brigade or Divisional signs on their tunic.

Best,

Dave

[Steve B]

Morning Dave,

This is the best my somewhat decrepit scanner can manage! If it’s not up to scratch for publishing purposes, let me know and I’ll get the original photo in the post to you.

Regards,

Steve

[poona guard]

Hi Steve,

Apologies for being slow but have only just turned the computer on since Friday. I can't see a problem with it, so thank you very much. Remind me what battalion it is, the cap badge isn't that clear. Dou you have any other photos showing badges on TF men could use?

Best,

Dave

 

[Steve B]

Dave,

It’s men of the 2/10th London Regiment. I’ll look through my collection and let you know if I have any other photos that fit the bill.

Regards,

Steve

[poona guard]

Thanks. Appreciate your help.

Dave

[Steve B]

Dave,

Have a quick look through my collection. Only things that could possibly be of use are (1) a group from the 2/10th Londons that show the green square battalion patch a bit better than the image I sent through the other day (but without the curved patch at the top of the sleeve) and (2) a private in the 2/22nd London Regiment with a clear shot of the square battalion patch on his sun helmet (he’s on a camel by the Sphinx!). Let me know if you’re interested and I’ll get them scanned.

Regards,

Steve

[poona guard]

Very interested Steve, thanks. Look forward to them.

Best,

Dave

[Steve B]

Dave,

Battalion HQ of 2/10th London Regiment.

Regards,

Steve

[Steve B]

And finally…….

Photo of Pte William Arthur Cogger, C Coy, 2/22nd London Regiment. He’d previously been with the 2/21st Londons but was transferred over to the 2/22nd in June 1918.

Steve

[KENDO]

Hi Steve,

Great pic, would you happen to know what colour the square is on the Wolseley helmet?

Best regards 

Ken

[FROGSMILE]

3 hours ago, Steve B said:

Dave,

Battalion HQ of 2/10th London Regiment.

Regards,

Steve

An interesting photo clearly at home.  A very few men with overseas service chevrons but no wound stripes that I can see.  The band sergeant is even present cross legged at far left and the transport sergeant with bandolier on far right.  The 2/10th landed at Havre in Feb 1918 and so presumably saw a short, but fierce war until the Armistice in November.  Some good badges on view for @poona guard.

Edited 1 September , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[poona guard]

On 29/11/2016 at 17:30, Grovetown said:

 

At the risk of sounding churlish, they're my scans of items in my collection ackerchully...

 

Less churlishly, here's a QWR on a jacket for you.

 

Cheers,

 

GT.

Hi Grovetown,

What badge is on the back of this tunic? A red circle with a quadrant removed? If so, which is missing?

Best,

Dave

[Grovetown]

On 15/11/2023 at 21:53, poona guard said:

Hi Grovetown,

What badge is on the back of this tunic? A red circle with a quadrant removed? If so, which is missing?

Best,

Dave

Many apologies as I’ve now realised I totally forgot to send you better pictures of this. The light is poor at the moment yet I’ll try again tomorrow. Wednesday is looking bright and that might be better. Either way will email what I can get this week. 

For the QWR, I recall the position of the missing ‘cheese’ indicated brigade seniority.

You might also be interested in the QVR below too. It’s quite an early jacket (1915-ish) and the bar is unrecorded, so perhaps an early scheme.

I did wonder if it’s a Rangers with the STs changed, but they seem to have been there a long time - and, besides, the bar is way too small for the Rangers (size as related by Waring). 

I think it’s just an early company indicator.  

Apologies again.

Cheers,

GT 

 

[poona guard]

Thanks for these. The bar is intriguing. Must do some more resarch.

Best

Dave

[Grovetown]

On 19/11/2023 at 15:59, poona guard said:

Thanks for these. The bar is intriguing. Must do some more resarch.

Best

Dave

I think you'll do well to pin it down - I've been trying for years - and I'd be very pleased if you succeed.

I know we're better off for references than we ever were (relying on Waring only as we did for years), but to my mind most of those schemes shown in more recent texts are 1917 in the main. As you will know as well as I, if not better, battle patches were far from universal in 1916 and prior to that they were not common at all and were entirely ad hoc in design, application and 'issue', not even necessarily being unit-wide.

Why I think this jacket is 'time capsuled' to 1915/ 1916, apart from being of the March 1915 pattern, is that it bears the very rare 'Part Worn' label indicating previous service wear and its return for refurbishment. This jacket is missing it's dressing pocket - with signs of it being roughly removed (as you would in the circs) - and appears to be, without a feverish imagination doing overtime, bloodstained in places.

Such part-worn jackets were controversial (as being upsetting to those issued with them), with questions being asked in Parliament etc, and there was an answer in the House committing them to home wear only. Thus it would seem that this jacket returned to the UK in its current form (titles, bars), was cleaned and tidied but possibly not reissued owing to the imperfect removal of the staining and the dressing pocket not being reinstated.

Cheers,

GT.

[poona guard]

Very interesting summation. Will let you know what I find out.

Best,

Dave

[poona guard]

The titles look to 'new' to have been in France so makes me wonder whether they were added when it was re-issued.

[Grovetown]

15 minutes ago, poona guard said:

The titles look to 'new' to have been in France so makes me wonder whether they were added when it was re-issued.

Possibly, yet there are no other holes for previous STs (unless they too were T - 9/ single digit - County etc) and it would be a function of how long the original owner was in theatre before the jacket was ‘retired’. Could have been only weeks. 

All that said, as well as in the earlier post above, I’m not a fan of imaginative speculation so we have to treat it simply as we find it: an early jacket, previously service worn, with a rare paper label, and apparently original battle patches and ‘matching’ rifle buttons and STs. 

Cheers,

GT

[poona guard]

Not matching, the 9th never used that cloth badge. Did they go to France using the black titles or were they replaced with the more common ones?

[Grovetown]

2 hours ago, poona guard said:

Not matching, the 9th never used that cloth badge. Did they go to France using the black titles or were they replaced with the more common ones?

By matching I mean black titles and black buttons. 

I have a good number of 1914/ 1915 photos of the QVRs (and QWRs for that matter) and will have a dig through in the morning, and come back on the patches too. 

Cheers,

GT  

 

 

[poona guard]

Look forward to your comments.

Dave

[Drew-1918]

On 21/11/2023 at 03:41, Grovetown said:

I think you'll do well to pin it down - I've been trying for years - and I'd be very pleased if you succeed.

I know we're better off for references than we ever were (relying on Waring only as we did for years), but to my mind most of those schemes shown in more recent texts are 1917 in the main. As you will know as well as I, if not better, battle patches were far from universal in 1916 and prior to that they were not common at all and were entirely ad hoc in design, application and 'issue', not even necessarily being unit-wide.

Why I think this jacket is 'time capsuled' to 1915/ 1916, apart from being of the March 1915 pattern, is that it bears the very rare 'Part Worn' label indicating previous service wear and its return for refurbishment. This jacket is missing it's dressing pocket - with signs of it being roughly removed (as you would in the circs) - and appears to be, without a feverish imagination doing overtime, bloodstained in places.

Such part-worn jackets were controversial (as being upsetting to those issued with them), with questions being asked in Parliament etc, and there was an answer in the House committing them to home wear only. Thus it would seem that this jacket returned to the UK in its current form (titles, bars), was cleaned and tidied but possibly not reissued owing to the imperfect removal of the staining and the dressing pocket not being reinstated.

Cheers,

GT.

Could it be the 2/9th (later 9th Bn.) green bar that’s just been sewn on the wrong round (horizontally rather than vertically)? Someone made a mistake for whatever reason. 

[Drew-1918]

An alternative idea might be that he joined another London unit and simply refused to change his buttons and titles (though he did don a company bar such as was used in the 47th Division).
Bernard Livermore in ‘Long’un: A damned bad Soldier’, tell us that he and his mates were so disgruntled at being transferred from the QVR to the 2/20th, that they simply refused to change their buttons or titles. Sounds unbelievable. TF I suppose. 
Anyway, I suppose you have had thoughts along this or a similar line before. 

Edited 30 November , 2023 by Drew-1918