All brass issue Cap Badges of the Great War

[Postwarden]

I have just received the latest copy of the Bulletin of the Military Historical Society which contains Part I of a very detailed and informative article on this subject compiled from official and authoritative sources by Julian Bowsher and the late David Linaker.

Recommended.

Jon

[Peter Brydon]

I agree with Jon ( if fact the article was mentioned earlier today by Andy in another thread ) a most interesting article.

Also interesting to see the picture of our member Tim ( Grey Green Acorn ) with his " Duke of Yorks Cup " winning exhibition of Warrant Officers Rank Badges .

P.B.

[Sonofacqms]

This publication is a must for badge collectors and has been since it's inception, £20.00 for a year which usually includes a special edition which is well worth having.

Rob

[badger123]

Brilliant piece of work.

An example to us all. Thank you Julian (and David).

Ivan

[KLR]

The article was strictly a documentary survey. Yes, I was puzzled why there were so few cavalry badges thus listed - nothing missed. Actually a member has just informed me that the B&P archives record large cavalry orders from c 1910 to 1916 so perhaps they had sufficient badges.

Does anyone have any views on the three errant infantry units ????

As for Part 2; it is going to be much more difficult. As Ivan intimates, there is very little central data. You'd have to go through every single county Territorial Association archives (I've only gone through the W Lancs for my own KLR study). Nevertheless, there is something that we can contribute !

But thank you all, for the encouraging comments.

[Alan O]

Julian

The thing about Cavalry regts was their very small numbers compared to the multiple infantry battalions so demand would be very small. Even if they had used up all existing stocks then the new order would be small.

Alan

[KLR]

Thanks Alan,
For those interested, the complete cavalry demands in that WO tender of 1916 comprised

5 8381A/1916 2,000 1st Dragoon Guards GM 21/- 22/-
6 6403/1906 2,000 7th Dragoon Guards GM 20/- 20/9
7 4692A/1916 2,000 6th Dragoons GM 21/- 21/6
8 4758B/1916 1,000 7th Hussars GM 20/- 21/-
9 8650A/1916 1,000 10th Hussars GM 23/- 23/9
10 8673/1916 4,000 14th Hussars GM 21/6 21/9
11 4735A/1902 3,000 20th Hussars GM 20/- 20/9
12 4780A/1902 1,000 9th Lancers GS 27/6 30/-
13 4693C/1916 4,000 16th Lancers GM 22/- 22/9


(the two prices are those of B&P and of S&W - proving that industrial espionage is nothing new !, not all were in favour of B&P !)

[badger123]

Julian,

Of the 3 'errant' infantry units (I suspect that phrase is going to stick and now be used to describe those BM infantry regiments that did not have all GM badges), obviously the York and Lancs are of interest to me.

I cannot say that I have come across any reference, correspondence or mention in the Y&L archives as to why their badge was not made in all GM especially considering as you say it was one of the more complex BM badge constructions.

The archive does hold various pre WW1 letters relating to CO's discussing (actually arguing) with the War Office about various badge designs but nothing relating to WW1 badge production.

However, you have now set me upon a quest!

I'll let you know if I find anything. Ivan

[KLR]

Jolly good ! I had hoped that the likes of Ivan and John (Mulcahy) would be provoked !




By the way - A LAST PLEA !!!!!!

I / we have tried to establish that the original terminology was "ALL GM" badges - nothing to do with "economy" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

perhaps we can all start to use the original terminology rather than modern constructs !!!!!!

(David would be happy to see this adopted !!)

[manchesters]

Originally Posted by KLR

Jolly good ! I had hoped that the likes of Ivan and John (Mulcahy) would be provoked !




By the way - A LAST PLEA !!!!!!

I / we have tried to establish that the original terminology was "ALL GM" badges - nothing to do with "economy" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

perhaps we can all start to use the original terminology rather than modern constructs !!!!!!

(David would be happy to see this adopted !!)

Julian,

If we did, then how would you differentiate the likes of RA, RE, RAMC etc?

regards

[badger123]

Provoked I am and puzzled too as to why the Y&L was excluded.

I think it might take some time to change the modern terminology of Economy Issue as these things tend to stick. Ask Andy P about his efforts to encourage people to stop referring to copies/fakes as restrikes!

The article has certainly given some food for thought.

Ivan

[KLR]

Good point Simon - but you should ask the people who devised the term in 1916 !
We are specifically talking about badges that were previously (and later) made in BM but now in GM !
Perhaps "1916 all GM" would be a better term !? The changes to RE, RA and ASC badges in 1917 are very different - and RAMC never changed to anything else !

The entire list, as recorded in the B&P archives, is a very interesting read !

[manchesters]

Originally Posted by KLR

Good point Simon - but you should ask the people who devised the term in 1916 !
We are specifically talking about badges that were previously (and later) made in BM but now in GM !
Perhaps "1916 all GM" would be a better term !? The changes to RE, RA and ASC badges in 1917 are very different - and RAMC never changed to anything else !

The entire list, as recorded in the B&P archives, is a very interesting read !

I like "1916 all GM", that does not cause any confusion.

regards

[Alan O]

The most striking omission from the Cavalry list for me is the 5th DG. The all gm badges are very convincing.

[manchesters]

I have seen what I thought were real, 3rd Hussars?

regards