'Gaunt' Mark Vs Badge Quality
 

Dear All,

The Gaunt mark on the badge below seems to fall within the parameters of acceptability, though the badge itself gives me casue for concern.

Attachment 37338Attachment 37339

The MM measures 11mm x 0.75mm, and though very worn, seems okay and ties in with the forums 'guide' to Gaunt marks. However, the badge itself seems anything but 'okay'.

It is extremely soft and pliable, appears to be fairly poorly fashioned, no voiding, and has a general 'not good' feel to it. The only thing reasonable about it seems to be the slider.

My questions are:

a) Is the MM genuine?
b) Could the badge be genuine?
c) Could a good MM exist on an iffy badge?

I have taken a few photos of the MM as it is so small, I found it difficult to get a decent shot... please excuse the poor photography.

Attachment 37335 Attachment 37336Attachment 37337

With thanks,

Peter

Peter,
this is a typical example of a badge that "Flys in the Face" of all the guides and expert advice.. For starters the non-voided crown and center would immediately jump off the page as a repro. However the MM and the longer slider than normally found on the fakes and the reasonable signs of use would force me to put it to one side as a "to be answered" badge!

Andy

Hi, last week-end I saw a fake 22nd Dragoons and Army Air Corps with the small font J R Gaunt but with the dot before London. They had both been in a collection for some time, but looked fakes except for the small font Gaunt mark. Mike

Andy,

Incongruities which currently defy explanation.

I considered the possibility that a genuine slider might have been fitted to a questionable badge, but there seems to be no sign of tampering.

Also considered the possibility of a genuine Gaunt punch/stamp having been used to mark the slider.

None of this really seems to hold water though.

Peter

Mike,

In a way, I'd have been happier if this MM did have the 'dot', since it would be easier to compartmentalise the bagde. The fact that the MM appears to be kosher is the spanner in the works! :confused:

Cheers,

Peter