TYNESIDE IRISH?

[elgee45]

Took out my Reid & Sons TI badge, a no-name but (I believe) genuine one from a Bosley's auction and a slidered repro, also got out my calipers and strong glasses.

The Reid & Sons and the no-name version measure and look exactly the same except for the larger lugs on the no-name badge. Otherwise:

The lugged badges measure (H/W mm) 42.7/39.5. Slidered badge is 44.2/40.4

Crown on the lugged badges is (H/W mm) 12.3/12.9. Slidered crown is 13.3/13.7

"TYNESIDE IRISH" begins and ends well short of the curls on the scroll on the lugged version but starts and ends just past the curls on the slidered version.

There is no void beneath the crown on the slidered badge. Lugged ones have a void.

The ends of the harp's neck where it joins the column are finely detailed on the lugged badges but look coarse and 'blobbish' on the slidered badge.

Also on the harp, where the neck joins the sound-board the detail is much finer on the slidered badges.

Pictures 1 and 2 below show the Reid badge, 3 and 4 the no-name lugged badge and 5 and 6 the slidered repro.

Hope this helps.

Hi elgee45. Thank you for posting the pics. Putting aside issues such as lugs & dimensions for the moment, it's the colour of your badges that interests me. I have been unable to decide if my one is made of gilding metal or not. Yours seem to have a lovely reddish/gold quality accentuated by age and patina. My one is more yellow and shiney. 'tynesideirish' states gilding metal is the correct source material for all original badges. Obviosuly we must allow a certain amount of variation for all sorts of reasons but I'd feel a lot happier if my badge looked more like yours than mine. I'd be more than happy to own both your marked and unmarked versions.

Tony.

[Graham Stewart]

Originally Posted by Neil Pearce

Hi Tony

There are far better qualified than I to comment on this one. but there are some very informative previous threads on this. No, the strengthening is not a prerequisite as far as I know. My read of all the accumulated info is that the mark is much "preferred", for obvious reasons.

Attached are pics of my strengthened version for info. I've never been 100% happy with it, but it does feel good. It is very slightly larger than the marked version I have (by 0.5mm), and weighs 30.2 Grams
Good luck, and Regards
Neil

Neil - although mine doesn't have the strengthener, you'll be pleased to know the lugs on my genuine item are also North/South, which seems to be the more common position in all those I've seen.

[Neil Pearce]

Hi Graham

My marked version is E/W, so just hedging my bets I guess! I believe the consensus is both are likely OK, and also this was confirmed in previous threads.

As to Tony's point regarding the finish. Were not most, if not all, GM badges issued with the "shiny" coating? My understanding (and this could be wrong) is that this wore off with polish and general service wear. Can someone educate me on this point? I have several badges that have the "shiny" finish, but I am certain they are original.

Regards

Neil

[ANGLE IRON]

A note on strengtheners, During the 70s there was a run of rare badges that were re struck or copied and strengening wires were added to make them appear authentic, I have a pamphlet which refers to it somewhere . I dont know if this was one of those which was done, kevin

[Neil Pearce]

Thanks Kevin. That would not surprise me at all

Do you have a copy of this anywhere?
Cheers, Neil

[ANGLE IRON]

Yes i have a copy of Laurence Archers pamphlet 1980 which mentions 5th lancers fakes ,but there were others that were given similar treatment,Please note there are many genuine badge's with similar strengtheners, kevin

[Alan O]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/WW1-TYNESI...91048381085%26

Guaranteed original from a dead relative indeed! This was a shoulder title and was never issued with a slider. The original badges were lugged and supposed to be worn on the epaulettes. It has been suggested that they were put on collars as well (and even on the odd cap) but little evidence of this has been produced.

[2747andy]

Here's an interesting item, whilst I tend to agree they are STs, why has this one got a slider (?) and an extruded (c.1914-18) one at that! I can here you all rushing to your keyboards to type in "Fake" lol!

I'll just pop it back in to the "?" box.

Andy

[Frank Kelley]

They were certainly worn as collar badges!

Originally Posted by Alan O

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/WW1-TYNESI...91048381085%26

Guaranteed original from a dead relative indeed! This was a shoulder title and was never issued with a slider. The original badges were lugged and supposed to be worn on the epaulettes. It has been suggested that they were put on collars as well (and even on the odd cap) but little evidence of this has been produced.

[Alan O]

Frank

Thanks. I had seen a photo of them in use on the collar before but did not keep a copy so that is very useful.

Alan

[John Mulcahy]

Originally Posted by 2747andy

Here's an interesting item, whilst I tend to agree they are STs, why has this one got a slider (?) and an extruded (c.1914-18) one at that! I can here you all rushing to your keyboards to type in "Fake" lol!

I'll just pop it back in to the "?" box.

Andy

Andy

I would hold onto that one . This badge with slider has been known since at least 1954. The attached scan from The Bulletin of the Military Historical Society Vol V No. 18 Nov. 1954 mentions the badge with "hooks' which I think from the context clearly means slider.

In an e-mail correspondence I had with the owner of a major auction house, he mentioned meeting a veteran of The Tyneside Irish who indicated he was issued with a badge with slider. The story relayed being that the slider fitment was assumed to have been manufactured in error as the badge was intended to be worn on the shoulder. This is of course only anecdotal and one should take it for what it is. I have no reason to think that what I was told is untrue but cannot vouch for the accuracy of the veteran's information.

However in conjunction with he observation from 1954 it does introduced the possibility that some few versions with slider MAY be bone fide. Fox restrikes, and 1940's private purchase cap badges aside I am not sure why a Tyneside Irish badge with slider would have been reproduced prior to 1954.

Food for thought...

John

[LONGSHANKS]

I have to say, this is why I love the forum. I'm always learning, and because of it I have over time been able to spot many bargains for my collection as I knew what to look for.

Many thanks
Simon.

[2747andy]

Originally Posted by John Mulcahy

Andy

I would hold onto that one . This badge with slider has been known since at least 1954. The attached scan from The Bulletin of the Military Historical Society Vol V No. 18 Nov. 1954 mentions the badge with "hooks' which I think from the context clearly means slider.

In an e-mail correspondence I had with the owner of a major auction house, he mentioned meeting a veteran of The Tyneside Irish who indicated he was issued with a badge with slider. The story relayed being that the slider fitment was assumed to have been manufactured in error as the badge was intended to be worn on the shoulder. This is of course only anecdotal and one should take it for what it is. I have no reason to think that what I was told is untrue but cannot vouch for the accuracy of the veteran's information.

However in conjunction with he observation from 1954 it does introduced the possibility that some few versions with slider MAY be bone fide. Fox restrikes, and 1940's private purchase cap badges aside I am not sure why a Tyneside Irish badge with slider would have been reproduced prior to 1954.

Food for thought...

John

John,
very, very interesting! It is the extruded slider in particular that had me intrigued, as anyone who studies this type of vertical shank, may also have observed, that they tend to appear on c.WW1 produced badges, however c.1920s 4/7th DG can also be found sporting one!

A manufacturing error could be the most plausibly explanation, my badge does not appear to have had much, if any use? All the other aspects seem to be right, but to MM to the rear! I'll pop it back the the box as a possible WW1 manufacturers error!

Many thanks

Andy