Lothian & Berwickshire Yeomanry

[Matlock1418]

Hi Team GWF,
In order to help another I am having to throw myself on the mercy of the forum.
Can a member or members please help me with this uniform?

I can't date [or is it before, during or after our core period?] or add further.
Should photos of additional details be required I believe those can probably become available - well I can at least ask for them!
Looking forward to seeing what turns up from you.
Thanks in advance
M

[PRC]

M,

Can't help much, (more @FROGSMILE 's sort of thing , but don't the buttons read "Lothian & Berwick Yeomany Cav.". (Not sure about the last word).

There is what is possibly a senior NCO's jacket for sale on an American site, which has some element of overlap in style, (although I do wonder if the image you've posted might belong to an officer). https://www.antiqueweaponstore.com/product/victorian-era-scottish-lothian-berwick-yeomanry-cavalry-tunic/

The sellers description reads "This tunic would date between 1846, when the unit was reformed as the “Lothians and Berwickshire Regiment of Yeomanry Cavalry”, and 1888 when it was renamed “Lothians and Berwickshire Imperial Yeomanry”. It is single-breasted and fashioned of scarlet wool with quilted red silk lining with inside pocket, trimmed with gold brocade, braided toggle buttons and chainmail shoulder scales. Gilt brass sleeve buttons bearing a crown surrounded by “LOTHIAN & BERWICK YEOMANRY CAV.” At the jacket closure is a row
of small sewn-on acorn-shaped brass beads on each side. Heavy gold bullion embroidered sleeve patch depicting a crowned lyre bordered by oak leaves. Worn maker’s
label “Daniel Smith/DUNBAR”."

Here's a close up of the button from that site - does it look like a match?

Cheers,
Peter

[Matlock1418]

Thanks Peter,

It looks like I had looked a bit harder at the photos and had tweaked the title a bit whilst you were typing 

And having done a bit more web-browsing research and so fear it might be out of GW period - but who properly knows?

Hopefully we will get a knowledgeable opinion, from the likes of the aforementioned member perhaps.

= If out of period I would be grateful if the mods would please transfer to Skindles so discussion may continue.

But meantime ...

M

Edited 27 March by Matlock1418

[FROGSMILE]

You’ve got most of the answer already.  Unit as described.  The garment is technically a stable jacket, which became dual used as a mess jacket (i.e. for dining in the mess), and eventually matched with a vest (waistcoat) so that it could be worn open and usually fastened just at the neck.  So it’s a mess kit uniform.

I would date it to the late 1880s.  The shoulder piece is very much of that era and not something used subsequently (i.e. after the turn of the century and Boer war).

Edited 27 March by FROGSMILE

[Matlock1418]

1 minute ago, FROGSMILE said:

You’ve got most of the answer already.  Unit as described.  The garment is technically a stable jacket, which became dual used as a mess jacket (i.e. for dining in the mess), and eventually matched with a vest (waistcoat) so that it could be worn open and usually fastened just at the neck.  So it’s a mess kit uniform.

Thanks FS.

I'm struggling to date it - though I certainly suspect pre-GW ???

And any clues as to rank?

Mods: It seems likely it may be a pre-GW question.  If so then I would be pleased if the thread could be moved to Skindles for out-of period discussion rather than locked.  Thanks

M

 

[FROGSMILE]

13 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Thanks FS.

I'm struggling to date it - though I certainly suspect pre-GW ???

And any clues as to rank?

Mods: It seems likely it may be a pre-GW question.  If so then I would be pleased if the thread could be moved to Skindles for out-of period discussion rather than locked.  Thanks

M

 

It became the Lothian and Border Horse before WW1.  The rank is private or trooper depending upon date.

The officers had fancy cuff decoration and a bullion lace pouch belt.

Edited 27 March by FROGSMILE

[Matlock1418]

20 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

So it’s a mess kit uniform.

8 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

The rank is private or trooper depending upon date.

Not doubting you, but that does cause me some surprise given it now seems it's for an OR - I earlier/would have expected for an officer [but was struggling to find clues as to rank]

The date is much less of a surprise [and probably rather undoes my thoughts on rank].

Many thanks.

M

Edited 27 March by Matlock1418

[Matlock1418]

15 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

It became the Lothian a Border Horse before WW1.

Might it have been worn as L&BH?

I ask because my enquirer described/enquired if L&B[Horse]

M

Edited 27 March by Matlock1418

[FROGSMILE]

5 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Not doubting you, but that does cause me some surprise given it now seems it's for an OR - I earlier/would have expected for an officer [but was struggling to find clues as to rank]

The date is much less of a surprise [and probably rather undoes my thoughts on rank].

Many thanks.

M

Never underestimate a civilian auxiliary soldier’s love of poncing himself up in a fancy uniform…

They mostly die well enough though. 

3 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Might it have been worn as L&BH?

M

Something similar as sergeants’ mess dress perhaps, but with stripes on the arms, etc.  This is clearly from no later than Queen Victoria’s reign.  Hence the buttons.

Edited 27 March by FROGSMILE

[Matlock1418]

2 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

Never underestimate a civilian auxiliary soldier’s love of poncing himself up in a fancy uniform…

2 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

They mostly die well enough though. 

True enough.

M

[PRC]

The reference to the change of name to the Lothians and Berwickshire Imperial Yeomanry in 1888 kept cropping when I did a search earlier - of course they could all of been quoting each other \ an erroneous source. I suspect the buttons would have reflected the change of name.

This article from 1897 however makes no reference to Imperial in the title.

Image courtesy Archive Org https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.279093/page/n127/mode/2up?q="Lothians+and+Berwickshire"&view=theater

Here's the tunic I linked to earlier which differs significantly from the comparison examples - just wondering if it's rank specific.

Image courtesy https://www.antiqueweaponstore.com/product/victorian-era-scottish-lothian-berwick-yeomanry-cavalry-tunic/

Cheers,
Peter

[FROGSMILE]

2 minutes ago, PRC said:

The reference to the change of name to the Lothians and Berwickshire Imperial Yeomanry in 1888 kept cropping when I did a search earlier - of course they could all of been quoting each other \ an erroneous source. I suspect the buttons would have reflected the change of name.

This article from 1897 however makes no reference to Imperial in the title.

Image courtesy Archive Org https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.279093/page/n127/mode/2up?q="Lothians+and+Berwickshire"&view=theater

Here's the tunic I linked to earlier which differs significantly from the comparison examples - just wondering if it's rank specific.

Image courtesy https://www.antiqueweaponstore.com/product/victorian-era-scottish-lothian-berwick-yeomanry-cavalry-tunic/

Cheers,
Peter

It’s the jacket of the band (only) Peter.  That one was the Bandmaster himself’s.

Edited 27 March by FROGSMILE

[PRC]

6 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

It’s the jacket of the band (only) Peter.  That one was the Bandmaster himself’s.

Thanks - I was struggling to identify the rank and wasn't even sure if that was Victorias' imperial Crown that formed part of it.

Cheers,
Peter

[FROGSMILE]

20 minutes ago, PRC said:

Thanks - I was struggling to identify the rank and wasn't even sure if that was Victorias' imperial Crown that formed part of it.

Cheers,
Peter

It’s a King’s (Tudor) Crown in that particular case, so probably Edward VII.

[Matlock1418]

Thanks PRC & FS - appreciated as always.

So, if I have got this right ... in the OP is a: Lothian & Berwickshire Yeomanry Private's stable jacket & waistcoat/mess uniform from late Victorian period, 1880/1890s.

The mess uniform bit surprises me a bit - Did OR go in for that?  Or is it really for field use?

And I'm not sure if 'Imperial' and/or 'Cavalry' should go somewhere in my summary

???

Please correct me if that is an incorrect or incomplete attempt - or if you can improve on it then please do so.

TIA.

M

[FROGSMILE]

32 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Thanks PRC & FS - appreciated as always.

So, if I have got this right ... in the OP is a: Lothian & Berwickshire Yeomanry Private's stable jacket & waistcoat/mess uniform from late Victorian period, 1880/1890s.

The mess uniform bit surprises me a bit - Did OR go in for that?  Or is it really for field use?

And I'm not sure if 'Imperial' and/or 'Cavalry' should go somewhere in my summary

???

Please correct me if that is an incorrect or incomplete attempt - or if you can improve on it then please do so.

TIA.

M

Here are some details of the unit. http://www.uniformology.com/YEOMANRY-05.html

Imperial was generally dropped after the formation of TF in 1908.

Yes, cavalry was in the title.  It’s abbreviated to Cav on the button.

Queen Victoria died in 1901 so from the buttons it’s before that.

The garment is a stable jacket.  Stable jackets generally evolved to become the mess uniforms of sergeants and officers worn with a fancy vest/waistcoat underneath.  However, this unit was one that chose to style its review order (best) uniform in that waist length form and then wore it for a long time, so hence it spans 1880s to 1901.  The height of Victorian splendiferousness.

The conundrum is that it’s not a sergeant’s uniform or an officer’s uniform and yet there’s a vest/waistcoat with it.  We do not know if the waistcoat is contemporaneous or even if it belongs with it.  When in normal use the jacket is fastened and so a private/trooper had no need for a waistcoat.

Those then are the knowns and unknowns.  You can’t always have nice neatly packaged answers Matlock.

Note difference between buttons including change of title, which is important.

Edited 28 March by FROGSMILE

[Matlock1418]

11 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

You can’t always have nice neatly packaged answers Matlock.

Ha, how true that is often the case. 

I shall enquire more on its provenence but I do know it is clearly several generations away, and I know several familial relationships, away from its currently-enquiring custodian.

I don't know how well it has been scrutinised inside and out for any possible name details etc. - I'll suggest maybe getting some/possibly lots more photos to help us.

Thanks very much [so far - and maybe to be continued?]

M

Edit: The link was handy and the buttons just now added show some of the ways you achieve what to me is a really appreciated 'black art' 

The link to this thread has now been passed on so there are likely to even more eyes looking at it.  We'll see what transpires.

Edited 28 March by Matlock1418
edit

[FROGSMILE]

14 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Ha, how true that is often the case. 

I shall enquire more on its provenence but I do know it is clearly several generations away, and I know several familial relationships, away from its currently-enquiring custodian.

I don't know how well it has been scrutinised inside and out for any possible name details etc. - I'll suggest maybe getting some/possibly lots more photos to help us.

Thanks very much [so far - and maybe to be continued?]

M

It’s definitely not an officer as explained and there’s no sign of sergeants or sergeant majors badges removed.  Keep in mind that even private soldiers/troopers in some Yeomanry regiments during Victoria’s reign were landed gentry or well-to-do squires of the upper echelons of society.  There was very much a pecking order with some units maintaining a waiting list to join.  If the vest/waistcoat belongs with it then perhaps they had some unique dining arrangement.  They were about as different from regular soldiers as you can possibly imagine, more akin to a fox hunting club.  On another planet even.  Very different to VB/TF infantry units.

Edited 28 March by FROGSMILE

[Matlock1418]

31 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

Keep in mind that even private soldiers/troopers in some Yeomanry regiments during Victoria’s reign were landed gentry or well-to-do squires of the upper sections of society.  There was very much a pecking order with some units maintaining a waiting list to join.  If the vest/waistcoat belongs with it then perhaps they had some unique arrangement.  They were about as different from regular soldiers as you can possibly imagine.  On another planet even.

Yes, I do seem to recall Yeomanry and similar were quite elite, and have remained so in their modern Reserve and Regular descendents [Tank Regiments being much different from Cavalry (I recall in the1970's being advised - "Don't even think of Cavalry unless you can afford to run a polo pony, or two!" - which I couldn't, and still can't!!]

Whilst I don't have real detail on the jacket and waistcoat background, just a small whiff of such, I suspect that sort of societal scenario may have been the case here.

I/we await ...

M

 

Edited 28 March by Matlock1418
typo

[FROGSMILE]

4 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Yes, I do seem to recall Yeomanry and similar were quite elite, and have remained so in their modern Reserve and Regular descendents [Tank Regiments being much different from Cavalry (I recall in the1970's being advised - "Don't even think of Cavalry unless you can afford to run a polo pony, or two!" - which I couldn't, and still can't!!]

Whilst I don't have real detail on the jacket and waistcoat background, just a small wiff of such, I suspect that sort of societal scenario may have been the case here.

I/we await ...

M

 

All about money, fashion and influence in the end.  Until the 💩 hit the fan.