Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bazsi

Victorian Infantry Tunic - Help Needed

Recommended Posts

This tunic is my latest item in my collection.

It looks like an infantry tunic from 1889 without shoulder boards, and a badge also missing from the lower part of the right sleeve.

There is a stamping on the inside which reads 'RBR 1889'. What do you think RBR stands for? Is it Royal Berkshire Regiment or Border Regiment or something else?

The place of the badge looks like a bandsman badge. What do you think?

Thanks,

Balazs

 

DSCN9550.jpg

2.jpg

4.jpg

6.jpg

DSCN9551.jpg

DSCN9552.jpg

Edited by bazsi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Mike McLellan said:

Haven’t a clue, but very, very nice. 
Mike. 

Thank you Mike. Yes it is a very nice tunic, luckily in a very good condition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello bazsi, A question ,the lace on collar and cuffs is made of gold thread ? The silhouette and position of the absent insignia appears to be that of a WO1 badge of rank, the quality of the tunic points in the same direction .apart from that, the cuffs are not pointed so it is not a Royal Berkshire Regiment Tunic , the buttons are not of the RBR too

The buttons bear the crest of arms with queen Victorias crown , this fact dates the buttons until 1901

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Bayern,

Thank you for your help. Yes, the laces are made of gold thread. It wasn't in my mind that the absent badge could a WO1 badge be, but you are right, it is the most possible solution.

The impact of the collar badges are also different from the Royal Berlshire Regiment.

Edited by bazsi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello bazsi, well WO1 but in which unit ? the question persists .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s much too tempting to assume that RBR stands for Royal Something Regiment. After we eliminate the obvious Berkshire, Borders, Bermuda, etc , there are very few to zero in upon, even among the amalgamated regiments. I would almost wager that it was not a Royal regiment, but rather a privately sponsored entity with or without official endorsement. I think that it’s also safe to say that it is now defunct but still within the grasp of a zealous historian. Good luck!

Mike. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...