KRRC Glengarry.

[Keith Blakeman]

It's not a mystery being KK521, a glengarry for the KRRC, but what's the marking above the 60 in the central roundel? At first I thought it was the tassle ends but it looks more like a 3 or more likely a 5 going by the back view. The badge itself is a belter and a highlight of the Bromley fair, possibly blackened nickel and many, many thanks to Mike for hanging onto it for me.

[Rockape]

Looks like a 3 Keith (Bn number?)

I reckon it's a '5':

KRRC Keith.jpg

PJ

[Keith Blakeman]

'kinell, does that mean I've got to buy 1,2,3 (or 5) & 4 then!

I wondered about a battalion number, I reckon this would make them pretty much unique as a regiment if so as this pre-dates the TA by donkeys years.

[Fatherofthree]

Hi Keith.

1. I tend to agree with PJ on it being a 5, it certainly looks like a reverse 5 in the piccie of the back.

2. I don't like the badge, I think it's a wrong 'un.

3. Anybody can stick a bit of an old label on the back.

Nice badge mate, looked good on the day.

Regards
Brian

[Keith Blakeman]

Originally Posted by Fatherofthree

Hi Keith.

1. I tend to agree with PJ on it being a 5, it certainly looks like a reverse 5 in the piccie of the back.

2. I don't like the badge, I think it's a wrong 'un.

3. Anybody can stick a bit of an old label on the back.

Nice badge mate, looked good on the day.

Regards
Brian

To dip or not to dip, that is the question!

[talavera48]

Hi Keith,

I vote for 5 too - no idea what or why!

The one I had did not have this in the centre.

Personally, I wouldn't dip it but your call.

It has the look of the "Gaunt Pattern Book Collection" to me.


Regards,


David.

[Keith Blakeman]

Originally Posted by talavera48

Hi Keith,

I vote for 5 too - no idea what or why!

The one I had did not have this in the centre.

Personally, I wouldn't dip it but your call.

It has the look of the "Gaunt Pattern Book Collection" to me.


Regards,


David.

Hi David,

You're correct about the Gaunt link. I was only joking, I wouldn't dare with this one!

[davec2]

Well done Keith,

Deffo a " 5 " over 60, you jammy #*$+#@#, I wonder how many of us are just about to break into tears, lol.......

Dave.

[Charlie585]

Hi Gents,

I saw the badge as well on Sunday but didn't notice the figure 5 either, I didn't want to get too attached to it as I was committed elswhere and I have the breaking strain of a wet KitKat when faced with such temptation!

I was glad that you gave in first Keith, good drills that man.

As to the "5" the quote below states the reason for the formation of the 5th 60th and I suppose that it is not improbable that this was a deliberate distinction given their role?

[It wasn't until 1797 that green uniforms were introduced. A 5th battalion was raised, by another Act of Parliament, in Cowes on the Isle of Wight to serve in America only. The strength of the regiment came mainly from Hompesch's Mounted Riflemen and Lowenstein's Chasseurs. They were armed with rifles instead of muskets and wore coats of green with red facings.]
From:

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/force...antry/krrc.htm

On the other hand if it is from the Gaunt pattern archive, could it have been made as a sample for approval possibly as a number to distinguish the die with the 5 removed from it before production was commenced after approval?

Only a thought of course and I personally go for the 5th Bn theory. A very nice addition Keith whatever it is.

Regards to all.

Ry

[Peter Brydon]

I would be more inclinded to the 5th Militia Battalion raised as the Huntingtonshire Militia in 1759,became the 5th Bn of the regiment on 1/7/1881. (Frederick - Lineage Book of British Land Forces )Notwithstanding the battle honours.

P.B.