Show us your UNTOUCHED & BATTLE WORN field tunic!

[Luca Ongaro]

... and this well worn post war
Luca

[Luca Ongaro]

..

[Luca Ongaro]

And this one is for Jerry! ..not often to encounter a well worn Polizei M44 tunic. Would still love to see a period picture wearing one.

Who's next?!

And this one is for you Frederik, should be one of your favourite if I remember correctly.....
I do not collect mint or unused uniforms so this is one of my favourite thread.
Luca

[Luca Ongaro]

.

[Luca Ongaro]

..

[B. N. Singer]

Some Very Nice items to be sure in this thread; but I think “ORIGINAL” should have been incorporated in the thread’s title.
B. N. Singer

[Johnny R]

Some Very Nice items to be sure in this thread; but I think “ORIGINAL” should have been incorporated in the thread’s title.
B. N. Singer

I agree. Also some nice tunics posted but when I hear "Battle worn" or "Battle Damaged" or "Untouched" I head for the bomb shelter. A lot of heavily worn tunics were created by suffering ragging while painting farms in France until the 50s and planting potatoes in NRW etc. through the 70s and beyond as barn coats. Nice to see the stuff but most of the tunics thought to be war damage etc. are just heavily worn tunics. Unless from families or German Vets or direct bring back etc. IMO are most likely souped up POW left overs.

[Luca Ongaro]

I add "ORIGINAL" for mines Sir but I would know at the same time which uniforms do you consider not original
Luca

[Johnny R]

I am more concerned about the use of the term "battle wear" and untouched etc. I think that title needs to be carefully applied to trashed and heavily repaired tunics. It is an assumption much more than a fact. People were wearing tunics etc. as work clothes after the War. If they are not from bring backs etc. the interpretation they are battle-worn etc. based on wear is pretty weak. Damage does not always mean it was from wartime use etc.

[Luca Ongaro]

I am more concerned about the use of the term "battle wear" and untouched etc. I think that title needs to be carefully applied to trashed and heavily repaired tunics. It is an assumption much more than a fact. People were wearing tunics etc. as work clothes after the War. If they are not from bring backs etc. the interpretation they are battle-worn etc. based on wear is pretty weak. Damage does not always mean it was from wartime use etc.

By the way I have not seen till now what I consider post war reparations.
Luca

[Johnny R]

We never know do we. The field tunics were beat up and repaired but most never survived. Most the heavily repaired tunics came out of barns where they were used for work clothes after the War. With wear and a 70 year window of when things were worn or repaired how does one ever know when a repair was made or wear occurred.

I have two or three tunics that are bring backs and are used and real like many posted here in the later part of the thread. The hardest thing to find are officer's field tunics- usually poorly made and most were thrown away.

[CWP]

I would argue that it is not too challenging in the case of machine-sewn breast eagles to determine if they were applied at the factory or replaced after the war. If the original factory applied breast eagle remains intact I think the overwhelming likelihood is that traces of wear and use are from the war years. This is especially the case with tunics with very heavy nap wear and small mendings, a vet wearing his bring-back at a Halloween party is never going to create this look. I would argue that clothing worn after the war would be stripped of at least the breast eagle.

[wewelsburg]

i would argue that it is not too challenging in the case of machine-sewn breast eagles to determine if they were applied at the factory or replaced after the war. If the original factory applied breast eagle remains intact i think the overwhelming likelihood is that traces of wear and use are from the war years. This is especially the case with tunics with very heavy nap wear and small mendings, a vet wearing his bring-back at a halloween party is never going to create this look. I would argue that clothing worn after the war would be stripped of at least the breast eagle.

agreed.

[Rogerd]

"I would argue that clothing worn after the war would be stripped of at least the breast eagle. "

I was thinking the same thing. No one here in Europe would have worn a German tunic with the insignias still on, just after the war! They would take of all insignias and cut them in pieces, burn them, then bury the asches...

And I like this thread, tunics that show some use (not abuse) are welcome in my collection! There is a story behind these...

Regards,
Brecht

[CWP]

I also like this thread and hope it has not been forever derailed (as seems to be the case) by someone making the vague and broad allegation that the uniforms shown here are fake(!), and someone else making the rather strange suggestion that the people posting here couldn't tell the difference between an untouched worn jacket and a restored POW or barn coat. Glenn, thanks for posting some of your beauties in this thread as well. I know there are more field-worn survivors out there, in the hopes of getting back on track here is a well-worn and IMO untouched enlisted upgrade tunic for an Oberleutnant, with an upgraded collar and insignia, and shortened skirt, but with the original cuff setup- for me the typical field uniform of an officer at the front (or near it, as is perhaps more likely the case with this Artillerie soldier) and not at all poorly made. Please excuse the decorations which I added and which are perhaps not the most likely combination for this branch/rank, though they fit the original loops. A ribbon bar with WWI awards and a GAB might be what was there originally.