From 'Remember Britain's Home Guard' Facebook group:
"A (Post-war) Home Guard Oddity... Much In Little?
This evening, a post-war Home Guard battledress has sold for an eye-watering whopping £477.00 - the most I have seen in 35 years, more even than a top-quality wartime HG BD set.
This is a hell of a lot of money and reflects the huge bonkers prices militaria sellers charge and collectors increasingly pay since the pandemic.
To a certain degree, in this case, there is some logic. Followers of this group may have noted that I have stated several times how rare post-war HG items are compared to wartime HG, even though wartime HG is more popular. At its peak, the wartime HG reached almost 2 million men and women - the post-war HG only reached around 37,000 at most, meaning, uniforms and insignia are, in theory, over 50 times rarer!
Nonetheless, prices for post-war HG militaria have only risen in the last decade at most and I certainly recall post-war HG badges and uniforms unloved and passed over at militaria fairs not that long ago...
So does this explain the price this BD has gone for - and is it everything it appears to be?
Rutland is England's smallest county (its motto is 'Much In Little), so, just like its wartime predecessor, its post-war HG force comprised of just one battalion and due to the post-war HG's limited popularity, battalions were often no more than platoon number in size (!), making the area titles on this uniform rare in themselves.
The auction listing offers no backstory to the BD, just the BD's sizes. The rank insignia, however, indicate a Lieutenant-Colonel - which is a unique position, as a Lt-Col is head of the battalion - so, in theory, it makes it possible to name the actual former owner of this BD.
Research for my book on the Leicestershire and Rutland HG 'To The Last Round' reveals that the head of the post-war Rutland HG from 1952 was Lt-Col Thomas C.S. Haywood OBE JP (10.3.1911-23.1.2003), who lived at Gunthorpe Hall, Oakham. He was a local worthy who served as Lord Lieutenant of Rutland and did much for his (adopted) county, so much so, The Times noted that he was known as 'Mr Rutland'.
The uniform's medal ribbons are (from left) WW2 Defence Medal, WW2 War Medal and the Territorial Decoration.
There are, however, a few confusing and puzzling if not concerning features. Whilst the trousers are labelled, the BD tunic is not. It could be that this is a local private purchase tailored tunic, so did not have a label. Alternatively, these labels are, unfortunately, commonly removed by the unscrupulous if the date on the label does not tie-in with the service period of the accompanying (added) badging.
The 'HOME GUARD' shoulder titles are sewn on the shoulder seam: the regular army did this but the wartime HG were forbidden from doing so and official instructions said the title had to be just below the seam. This is a common mistake made by those fabricating HG tunics. However, very occasionally, both wartime and post-war HGs ignored this rule.
If this was the BD of T.C.S. Haywood, why does the trouser label have the apparent name 'N. Tate' written on them? Would so high a rank HG officer wear someone else's secondhand trousers? Or have the trousers and tunic been put together since?
This is a confusing battledress - it could be right or it could be wrong. I would be interested to hear others views on this high-price item. Did the buyer just splash out on the BD - there are enthusiastic Rutland collectors - or do they know something that we don't? If you bought the BD and wish to anonymously provide an answer, I would also be interested.
Either way, this illustrates the difficulty historians and collectors face with such uniforms that come without any provenance."
|