Button and buckle - Miltary related?

[Raindancer411]

Hi All

The Father In Law was metal detecting in his garden and found these and wondered if they could be of military origins.  Can anyone confirm or help please?

Many thanks

I should have said the button photos are back and front.  I looked up the button marker but it says it could be either military or constabulary.

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

I think it might be a pre 1881 military button, from the 86th Regiment of Foot.
I think associated with County Down in Northern Ireland.

But best to ask an expert @FROGSMILE

[FROGSMILE]

The button is a typical British infantry button probably for the 86th (Royal County Down) Regiment of Foot pre July 1881.  It’s the pattern of button that would have been worn at the Battle of Waterloo.  See chart of uniforms and insignia below, your button is the one that followed.

In July 1881 the 83rd merged with the 83rd (County of Dublin) Regiment of Foot to form the 1st and 2nd Battalions Royal Irish Rifles.

The other item is reminiscent of a Trotters knapsack buckle, but I’m not so positive of that as of the button.

Where were the items found? 

 

Edited 6 April by FROGSMILE

[FROGSMILE]

Looking at this in more depth I think it might not be the British regiment of the line with numbered precedent 86th, but instead perhaps an Honourable East India Company 86th Native Infantry Regiment of Foot.  I’ll continue to look and see what I can find.  I say this because I cannot at the moment find any record of the 86th British line having a button with both numerals and the crown superimposed.

Hebbert & Co were military outfitters/contractors from the mid 19th century turning to police and railway outfitters later on in the century.  There are recorded examples of a 'Hebbert & Co'** backmark on military buttons dating from the 1840s on.  Hebbert & Co., became a limited company in 1895.  Buttons with their back mark seem to have disappeared around the time of WW1.  From after the 2nd Boer War they seem to have shifted their priorities to leatherwares including, harness, baggage, patented rifle slings, and infantry belts and equipment.

They seem to have become “clothiers” (makers of uniforms requiring fitting with buttons) in 1843, which chimes exactly with the type of button found via the metal detector.  Note that the company only became Hebbert, Charles & Co specifically between 1840 and 1844, which given the exact detail of your button’s backmark enables it to be dated precisely as between those dates.

HEBBERT & Co. Ltd.
8, Pall Mall East, later, 16, James Street, Haymarket, and, 51, Bermondsey Street, London, and Leeds

** There was also a Herbert & Co, which unfortunately causes some confusion.  They were more renowned for making police constabulary buttons, which did not generally feature numbers. 

Edited 5 April by FROGSMILE

[Bob Davies]

I am drawing a blank on this @FROGSMILE

I was reading about the 86th Carnatic Infantry the other week in the 'Sons of John Company'

Screenshot courtesy of https://archive.org/details/sonsofjohncompan0000gayl/page/326/mode/2up

The original post picture seems to me to suggest a Queens Crown, so possibly Victorian?

From https://collection.nam.ac.uk/detail.php?acc=2013-10-20-29-116

we have this button, screen shot courtesy of the above.

Kings Crown.

From memory the 86th Carnatic remained in India during the Great War.

Regards, Bob.

 

[FROGSMILE]

20 hours ago, Bob Davies said:

I am drawing a blank on this @FROGSMILE

I was reading about the 86th Carnatic Infantry the other week in the 'Sons of John Company'

Screenshot courtesy of https://archive.org/details/sonsofjohncompan0000gayl/page/326/mode/2up

The original post picture seems to me to suggest a Queens Crown, so possibly Victorian?

From https://collection.nam.ac.uk/detail.php?acc=2013-10-20-29-116

we have this button, screen shot courtesy of the above.

Kings Crown.

From memory the 86th Carnatic remained in India during the Great War.

Regards, Bob.

 

Thanks for your help with this Bob, you have via your contribution helped me to explain my conclusion.

We know that the button dates to between 1840 and 1844.  The only garment that used a convex button with enclosed back during that period was the officers coatee** worn between 1830 and 1855, so that is what I think it is.  In essence it’s therefore a button that precedes the introduction of tunics for officers and other ranks in 1855.

Turning to regiments it could only be either, regular British line infantry, or Honourable East India Company Infantry.  There was an earlier 86th Regiment named for Rutland that was raised to fight in the American Revolution and disbanded in York in 1783, so it cannot be that.  It also cannot be the 86th Carnatic Infantry Regiment, as they existed much later (previously 26th Madras Native Infantry) and used a different button design anyway, as you’ve pointed out.

Unfortunately the premier research publication on buttons and belt plates is very old now, but it is still the first place to look.  It was written by Major H G Parkyn and based on years of painstaking old style research, combined with the collated works of earlier collectors going back many years, but it has gaps, and doesn’t benefit from the opportunities provided by the internet.  Major Parkyn states that it’s believed the 86th Co Down Regiment adopted a button with a crowned harp and the numerals 86 beneath in the early 1830s, but I now believe that that’s likely wrong.

 It seems to me that Raindancer411 has discovered a new button for the 86th Co Down used in the 1840s, before the button with harp was introduced.  I say this primarily because the button design of a simple number inside a circle, or so-called ‘French scroll’, but with Crown surmounting was common for a majority of line regiments at that same time, but also because by way of the process of elimination that’s been undergone it is the logical conclusion to reach.

If it can be determined where the button was found I will look to see if the 86th were ever based nearby, but of course it’s possible that it simply belonged to an officer who originated in the area, or who just happened to be visiting/passing through.  Either way it’s very intriguing to find what seems to be new information about the buttons worn by the 86th Regiment of Foot.  The regiments service companies were based in Bombay in 1844, but it’s two depot companies were at Chatham training drafts of recruits for sending to India. 

** As seen in the colour image of an officer and sergeant below.

Edited 6 April by FROGSMILE

[Raindancer411]

Hi and thank you for all that information.  I doubled checked and it was in his garden, which is Tilmanstone/Deal, East Kent.

[Tony Barton]

The buckle is pretty typical for the Early Modern period, say 1550-1700, so not relevant to the button, unfortunately.

Buttons of the Waterloo period were normally of pewter rather than brass, so this button would be post 1854, after which they became brass.

[FROGSMILE]

8 hours ago, Raindancer411 said:

Hi and thank you for all that information.  I doubled checked and it was in his garden, which is Tilmanstone/Deal, East Kent.

It’s a fraction over 50-miles between Chatham and Deal so a carriage ride away and in the same county.  It seems to me entirely possible that it came from an officer of the 86th based with his regiments depot companies.

7 hours ago, Tony Barton said:

The buckle is pretty typical for the Early Modern period, say 1550-1700, so not relevant to the button, unfortunately.

Buttons of the Waterloo period were normally of pewter rather than brass, so this button would be post 1854, after which they became brass.

Hello Tony, you’re of course quite correct that soldiers buttons of the 1840s were still pewter, they were also commonly flat type on their version of the coatee**.  Conversely officers buttons on their coatees were convex, and either silver, or gilt plate on metal with closed backs.  We know that C (for Charles) HEBBERT & SON only appeared as a backmark between 1840 and 1844 and between that period only coatees were worn with that type of button.  The only other officers garment, the blue single breasted frock coat for undress, had covered buttons at that time.  It seems a significant coincidence that the 86th regiment’s depot companies were only 50-miles away from where the button was found (in Kent), not something that I was expecting.  Of course the button is soiled and having it scientifically analysed for metal content and age would be the finite proof.

NB.  My mention of ‘Waterloo’ was early on before I’d fully analysed things and not meant to mislead.  Apologies for any confusion.  The whole thread explains the progression.

** They received buttons with closed backs in brass for the first time with their new tunics in 1855 or 1856 (the latter date for Highlanders).

Edited 6 April by FROGSMILE

[Raindancer411]

Thanks FROGSMILE, we live right near to Chatham Dockyard. Learning new history all the time! We been driving down that way to visit the Father In Law and to think we are doing a similar journey in 45 minutes that would have probably taken them hours.

I wonder if any other buttons like it have been found?

[FROGSMILE]

7 hours ago, Raindancer411 said:

I wonder if any other buttons like it have been found?

Not that I’m aware of, but I’m not a specialist button collector and Parkyn’s reference book is now very old and known not to have every button listed.  A more modern button expert, Colin Churchill, has published an excellent book, but it only covers the just pre and post 1881 buttons.  I’m not sure if he is still alive.

The parent regimental museum is in Belfast and it will be nice if you consider donating the button to them.  I think it’s quite rare, but unlikely to be valued expensively necessarily.  With your permission I’ll email them and explain what’s been found.

Your location near the Chatham dockyards is significant too.  The depot companies (usually two) were at that time posted near to major coastal and inland ports so that they were always close to shipping that could transport the drafts of trained reinforcements quickly to their parent units.  Chatham was one of the locations described and held the depot companies of several different regiments.

Edited 6 April by FROGSMILE

[Raindancer411]

It’s not mine to say what to do with it, but I can mention all this and what you have suggested to my Father In Law. If you do speak to the museum, I would be interested to hear what they say. 

Thanks again for all the time you spent looking into this. 

[FROGSMILE]

Just now, Raindancer411 said:

It’s not mine to say what to do with it, but I can mention all this and what you have suggested to my Father In Law. If you do speak to the museum, I would be interested to hear what they say. 

Thanks again for all the time you spent looking into this. 

I will email them and see what they have to say assuming that they reply.  Not all museums do but in my experience the museums in Northern Ireland have always responded, unlike several that I’ve tried to communicate with in England.

[Raindancer411]

That’s such a shame, they probably miss out on quite a bit. Even a thank you and we will get back to you, would be a polite response. 

[FROGSMILE]

12 hours ago, Raindancer411 said:

That’s such a shame, they probably miss out on quite a bit. Even a thank you and we will get back to you, would be a polite response. 

Northern Ireland museums have always been good, so fingers crossed 🤞 

P.S.  Just to say that I concur with Tony regarding the buckle.  I cannot find anything similar on the Trotter knapsack, or other equipment of the time. 

Edited 6 April by FROGSMILE

[Bob Davies]

21 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

Thanks for your help with this Bob, you have via your contribution helped me to explain my conclusion.

Happy to have helped you FROGSMILE.

Thanks  for working it out as far as you have done and best of luck with your email reaching an interested mind who will help out.

Regards, Bob.

[FROGSMILE]

34 minutes ago, Bob Davies said:

Happy to have helped you FROGSMILE.

Thanks  for working it out as far as you have done and best of luck with your email reaching an interested mind who will help out.

Regards, Bob.

I have written to the RUR Museum in Belfast today.

[GWF TEAM]

Locked as not Great War Related You may wish to continue by using the GWF personal message facility