Legion of Frontiersmen

fantastic thread lads, from a few lines in K&K to this depth now, thanks for broadening our collective understanding free of charge.

for light relief; wasn't it said to be a garage in bermondsy or bethnall geen? i reckon this ones from a garage in benwell or byker!

frontiersman 001.jpg

frontiersman 002.jpg

among of a number of otherwise genuine badges stuck to wooden sheilds, i guess the owner got tired of the chase, worth a fiver for the laugh. martin

[atillathenunns]

Steve, I had hoped putting the 25th badges into order according to Atilla’s logic, would have stimulated more comments and discussion.

Certainly, if a British badge collector came on to a New Zealand badge forum, who didn’t collect NZ badges, didn’t have any relevant NZ badge books, and then proceeds to post how NZ badges should be ordered according to his logic.
I for one would certainly question his logic, if not his sanity.

So just to pour petrol on a somewhat smouldering fire, here is how Atilla’s logic is based.

In regards to the two Main Body badges, it should be considered that they had only a short period in which they had to get the badges authorised, organise production and then distribute them prior to embarkation.
As such it is logical to me that the topic of badges was discussed at one of the first get togethers of the 25ths officers, quite possibly the first meeting.

Driscoll’s officers were hand picked, and I suspect that the most qualified artist among them drew the original design for the 25ths badge, and that the task of submitting it for authorisation would have been delegated to Driscoll’s adjutant.

I have to say I truly doubt that 2 badge designs would have been submitted for approval. I’m more inclined to think that only the ‘Type 1’ badge was submitted for approval with the idea that the officers badge would be made of a different metal to brass, such as bronze or gilt metal with silver.

I am inclined to think that the stalk attachment is a bad design for mass production, and can only speculate that the badge maker would have pointed this out, and that it would be easier to attach the grenade directly to the scroll. Maybe the badge maker suggested using the Type 1 as an officers badge and the Type 2 badge as an ORs badge.

Unless someone undertakes to visit the archives to see if there is a paper trail for the authorisation of the 25ths badges, I guess we may never find out what the reason was.
But the fact remains, both ‘Type 1 and 2’ badges appear in period photographs prior to the embarkation.

Going by the pre embarkation photos we also have 25th RF men wearing what looks like standard RF badges.

Given that the initial offer of LOF men was in September, after their service was declined many LOF men joined other Regiments. When it finally came down to providing a complete battalion formed from the Legion of Frontiersmen by April 1915, the just didn’t have enough men and the balance was provided by men who were not Frontiersmen.
Did these non-LOF men recruited at the last moment miss out on the supply of regulation badges or were they drawn from other RF battalions??? Maybe we shall never know.

Would that number of badges really have been produced in such a short space of time?

If there was two or more reinforcement drafts to the 25ths, then yes it possible that the Type 3 and 4 were produced in England to cater for these.

Possibly the original badge maker of the Type 1 & 2 produced so many badges that the dies were not serviceable for another run, or perhaps he had other contracts and was unable to take on another order of 25ths badges.

Which ones are the real ones and how can we figure out which ones are the good ones?

Damn good question, I don’t know, but think it worthy of a good debate.

As for the field made Type 5, this was a standard practice in Africa to use local made badges to replace lost or broken ones.

The number of variations of badges worn after the 25ths return to England suggests to me that no old stocks of badges existed and new ones were not produced for the men of the 25th who were without regulation badges.

Or were new ones made (Type 6)????????????

Brent

[atillathenunns]

I thought the following might be of interest, it is a letter that was sent by Colonel Driscoll to the Commandant of the New Zealand Legion of Frontiersmen.
It is dated the 15th December 1914.

“There is little opportunity for the mounted work, in which the legionaries excel, at present. I think it will be all infantry work this side of the Rhine, but I think there will be big scope for mounted men on the other side later on. The legion now totals over 12,000 men. I have been offered the command of an infantry regiment, but I feel I must see the legion fixed up first. Members of the legion are joining everything, and are to be found everywhere. I presided at a dinner of Princess Patricia’s light infantry some day’s back at Winchester. This regiment was started by the legion in Canada, and consists largely of legion men. I have just received a letter from Calgary stating that the Government of Canada has approved the raising of a regiment of legionaries purely. The legion is doing wonderful work in this war, and I feel rewarded for the long years of patient toil. But I can never thank New Zealand sufficiently for its grand work for the legion during the past two and a-half years. New Zealand for the two years preceding the war, has been the back-bone of the legion, and has never given any trouble or made any fuss. Good luck to all my comrades in that splendid little country.”

At the time that this letter was received, it is estimated that there was around 400 members of the NZ LOF with the New Zealand forces in Egypt. From approximately 1700 plus NZ LOF members during WW1, around 1200 of these served with the New Zealand forces and other foreign units such as the 25th RF Battalion.

[SteveE]

Originally Posted by atillathenunns

In regards to the two Main Body badges, it should be considered that they had only a short period in which they had to get the badges authorised, organise production and then distribute them prior to embarkation.
As such it is logical to me that the topic of badges was discussed at one of the first get togethers of the 25ths officers, quite possibly the first meeting.

Driscoll’s officers were hand picked, and I suspect that the most qualified artist among them drew the original design for the 25ths badge, and that the task of submitting it for authorisation would have been delegated to Driscoll’s adjutant.

I have to say I truly doubt that 2 badge designs would have been submitted for approval. I’m more inclined to think that only the ‘Type 1’ badge was submitted for approval with the idea that the officers badge would be made of a different metal to brass, such as bronze or gilt metal with silver.

I am inclined to think that the stalk attachment is a bad design for mass production, and can only speculate that the badge maker would have pointed this out, and that it would be easier to attach the grenade directly to the scroll. Maybe the badge maker suggested using the Type 1 as an officers badge and the Type 2 badge as an ORs badge.

Unless someone undertakes to visit the archives to see if there is a paper trail for the authorisation of the 25ths badges, I guess we may never find out what the reason was.

Brent, I follow your logic and can't really find fault with it. As you say though I guess we may never find out the reason even if someone undertakes to visit the archives as I doubt whether there's even a document trail to follow, however you never know??

Originally Posted by atillathenunns

But the fact remains, both ‘Type 1 and 2’ badges appear in period photographs prior to the embarkation.

Going by the pre embarkation photos we also have 25th RF men wearing what looks like standard RF badges.

Given that the initial offer of LOF men was in September, after their service was declined many LOF men joined other Regiments. When it finally came down to providing a complete battalion formed from the Legion of Frontiersmen by April 1915, the just didn’t have enough men and the balance was provided by men who were not Frontiersmen.
Did these non-LOF men recruited at the last moment miss out on the supply of regulation badges or were they drawn from other RF battalions??? Maybe we shall never know.

The last man recruited for the initial battalion enlisted the day before they embarked. My GGFather, one of the last 100 or so men to enlist prior to the battalion going overseas did so 9 days before embarkation and is on a photo wearing the Type 2 badge, as are the majority of men in the photo. It would appear therefore that there were enough badges to satisfy the original battalion’s requirement at any rate. The only RF badges in evidence are NCOs who were presumably either doing the training or had been posted to the battalion to strengthen it.

Originally Posted by atillathenunns

If there was two or more reinforcement drafts to the 25ths, then yes it possible that the Type 3 and 4 were produced in England to cater for these.

Possibly the original badge maker of the Type 1 & 2 produced so many badges that the dies were not serviceable for another run, or perhaps he had other contracts and was unable to take on another order of 25ths badges.

There were four main reinforcement drafts in total, the first of which departed in July 1916, some 15 months after the original battalion. The last draft left the UK in July 1917 so it is therefore quite conceivable I suppose that at least one, maybe even two, alternative badges were produced by different manufacturers or using a different die during this time.

Originally Posted by atillathenunns

As for the field made Type 5, this was a standard practice in Africa to use local made badges to replace lost or broken ones.

Peter Doyle and Chris Foster’s “British Army Cap Badges of the First World War” has an African produced 25th RF badge with a good provenance so that appears to confirm that particular variant.

Steve

[SteveE]

I said in my first post here that I'm not a "collector", well that's changed over the weekend as I've brought my first badge in the last twenty years or so.

I'm now the proud owner of what is shown in Brent's list (Post #89) as the Type 4 badge and, more importantly, I know it's a 'good un'.

The badge comes with extremely good provenance and I know exactly who it belonged to and can therefore date it reasonably accurately. The badge's owner proceeded overseas with the main battalion (not a subsequent draft) which means we possibly have to revise the Type numbering as this badge was worn prior to the embarkation of the main battalion.

Regards

Steve

[Alan O]

Now that badge I really like.

[Neil Pearce]

Fantastic to see, and nice to have provenance!

This is an identical strike to mine by the look of it, which is also very reassuring.

Cheers, Neil

[dragonz18]

.....and mine also.
Thanks!

Cheers !
Steve (NZ)

[Keith Blakeman]

Originally Posted by dragonz18

.....and mine also.
Thanks!

Cheers !
Steve (NZ)

.....and the one I handled the other day in someones collection.

[atillathenunns]

Steve, a Type 4 badge with provenance is indeed an important piece of the puzzle.
It certainly has provided forum members who have an exact match to this badge a whole lot of comfort knowing their badge is the real deal.

Of all the six types of badges, it always came down to the Type 3 & 4 badges were going to be the hardest to prove.

In regards to revising the order of the 6 badge types, I think your new acquisition will only reinforce the order rather than change it.

My own suspicions is that the Type 3 badge was worn by the first two reinforcement drafts, and the Type 4 badge was worn by the last two reinforcement drafts. (More discussion required on this)

It is worth considering that it would be very probable that with each manufacture of the Type 2, 3 and 4 badges, that there would have extra badges left over after the issue to the Main Body men and the reinforcements drafts that they were made for.

It is also very probable that a number of extra badges were carried by one of the reinforcement draft officers and given to the 25ths QM on arrival in Africa, to replace any of the badges that had been lost or damaged due to active service.

As such it would not be unusual for a Main Body man to end up with a variation of badge that was primarily worn by reinforcement men.
The African made badges certainly suggest that there was a need for replacement badges.


Just to crank it up to another level, I would like to offer up the following picture of a Type 1 badge and IMO the HOLY GRAIL of the 25ths badges.
Admittedly I had reservations about posting this picture due to a previous agreement, but as it is already widely available on the Internet; I can see no harm in posting it.
As with the photos on the Internet, I have cropped it so it does not include the original wording beneath the badge and won’t compromise the integrity of the original photograph.



This photograph is another important piece of the puzzle, as it appears to have been taken shortly after WW1, and IMO shows an extremely honest version of a Type 1 badge.
Until I joined this discussion, it had been the only picture of a Type 1 badge that I have seen.
So when Neil posted the collection of RF badges (#76) I was very ecstatic to see a Type 1 badge among the grouping that is an exact match to the photo above.



Also among the grouping that Neil posted was another extremely rare 25th badge, the type 2.
I doubt many badge collectors could claim to own one of these rare badges, but fortune has smiled on some lucky collector to be in possession of both Types 1 & 2 badges.
It is unfortunate that Neil is unable to recall who the collection belongs to, as a photo of the back of these two badges would answer many questions.

On close inspection of the Type 1 & 2 badges, we can see that they are identical except that respectively one is positioned on a stalk and the other is welded directly to the scroll.
This suggests to me that these two badge variations were produced from the same dies, and that the badges worn by the ORs of the Main Body are most likely to be the Type 2 badge.

The Type 5 badge I would surmise is an African copy of the Type 2 badge.

[SteveE]

Originally Posted by atillathenunns

In regards to revising the order of the 6 badge types, I think your new acquisition will only reinforce the order rather than change it.

My own suspicions is that the Type 3 badge was worn by the first two reinforcement drafts, and the Type 4 badge was worn by the last two reinforcement drafts. (More discussion required on this)

From what I know of my Type 4 badge owner's service it can't be associated with the third and fourth reinforcement drafts as he'd been transferred to the Suffolk Regiment long before the drafts were ever formed in the UK. Associating it with the second draft is also problematic as, although he was back in the UK before it left, he had been posted to the 5th battalion RF so I think it unlikely he would have picked himself up a new 25th badge, I rather think he woud have been issued a standard RF badge if there was the need. I still think there is the possibility that the Type 4 could have been issued pre-embarkation of the main battalion.

The image attached (pre-embarkation of main battalion) appears to show two badges of a 'similar' type but with an obvious difference, the flames of the grenade being a different shape. Could these be the Type 2 and the Type 4?

[atillathenunns]

Steve, the production of two different dies for the Main Body would be highly unusual, but not impossible.
Interestingly, the chap on the right has the top of his badge obscured by it being wedged under the crown of his SD cap.
I would imagine that if the Type 4 badge was worn by the Main Body, there should be other examples of it being worn within the same photo???????

By no means is the order that I have placed these 6 badge types into set in concrete, it is just a opening platform that can be rearranged and even added to.

I believe the more “WE” question what is presented, the easier it will be to separate the fact from the fiction.

[SteveE]

Originally Posted by atillathenunns

Steve, the production of two different dies for the Main Body would be highly unusual, but not impossible.
Interestingly, the chap on the right has the top of his badge obscured by it being wedged under the crown of his SD cap.
I would imagine that if the Type 4 badge was worn by the Main Body, there should be other examples of it being worn within the same photo???????

If anything, of the 30 men in the photo, I'd say the Type 4 badge was by far the majority (about 5:1 ratio), the image I attached was the best one for comparing the two.

I do wonder if the Type 1 and 2 badge was a short term 'privately produced' version, hence the style of text which is out of character with all army cap badges I've seen before, and the Type 4 was the 'officially produced' one in time for the battalion to proceed overseas.

Regards

Steve

[atillathenunns]

Originally Posted by SteveE

If anything, of the 30 men in the photo, I'd say the Type 4 badge was by far the majority (about 5:1 ratio), the image I attached was the best one for comparing the two.

Steve, this new revelation could be the key we needed to crack the mystery of the 25th RF Main Body badges.
I am however somewhat surprised that you had not identified this earlier, I guess you had to succumb to becoming a badge collector before you could appreciate the importance of your latest observation.

It definitely seems logical to me that the Type 1 and 2 badges could have been the first prototypes, based on their rarity. Certainly the rough appearance of the scroll and the 25 on the grenade of the Type 1 and 2 badges, suggests that the engraver was not as skilled as the engraver who executed the Type 4 badge.

Perhaps the Type 1 and 2 badges are the ACTUAL garage version and not the Type 6??????
If this is the case, could the Type 5 badge possibly be the Type 2 badge and not an African made badge??????

Regardless it has certainly brought us a few steps closer to conclusively prove the correct order and originality of these badges.

Brent

[SteveE]

Brent

I suppose you’re right to some extent about not identifying it earlier, it was only when I compared my known good Type 4 badge with a known Type 3 copy (without the void below the grenade) that I realised the flames were different, up to that point I hadn’t really looked closely at the badges on the photo and had grouped them, quite wrongly as it turns out, as a generic “Type 2”.

Closer inspection has, as I’ve now shown, highlighted a difference in the flames of the badges and coupled with what we know can perhaps lead us to a ‘better’ conclusion?

Based on your numbering scheme and descriptions in post #89 I’d suggest the current order is:

Type 1 (Main Body) – Earliest, possibly ‘privately produced’, officer’s only version. Image of Dartnell as evidence.
Type 2 (Main Body) – Earliest, possibly ‘privately produced’ other ranks version. Image of pre-embarkation group as evidence.
Type 4 (Main Body) – ‘Officially produced’ version for other ranks (and maybe officers at later date?). Badge with good provenance and image of pre-embarkation group as evidence.
Type 5 (Field Manufacture) – ‘African’ produced cast version of badge based on Type 2 above. Badge with provenance as per Peter Doyle and Chris Foster’s book “British Army Cap Badges of the First World War” as evidence.
Type 6 (Unofficial Version) – The ‘garage’ version ? Image of sergeants group on return from East Africa in 1918 as evidence that it’s a late version.
Type 3 (Reinforcements) – No evidence as to its use as yet, may be a reproduction.

What do you, or others, think?

Regards

Steve