[Force136]

I am reinvigorating this thread because another example of the "fused" non-pinned/riveted Officers Canadian Parachute Corps cap badge has surfaced. I acquired it in an auction in the UK.

I have diligently gone over this badge measuring to known original "riveted" unmarked examples from vets and there is no difference in measurements at all. They are all dead on.

In addition to that, the fine hatching that exists between the shroud lines of the parachute are present as are the dimpled effects of the top of the canopy and around the letters in the scrolling. The quality of the badge is identical to the "known" originals on the front of the badge. This to include the gilt finish , although darker, and the sharpness and quality of the silver overlay and how they fit to the gilt brass base.

The lugs are soldered on with superior quality and fineness with the gilt colour covering the base of the lugs.

Therefore the only difference between these "fused" examples and the riveted ones is the differing quality of the finish of the base material and how it is finished on the back. On the example I have there are visible file markings on portions of the edge of the base metal. There are visible lumps of metal at the top and just under the parachute. However that said, I need to clarify that...

1. Examples of the original "riveted" version have single and multiple lumps on the back as well.
2. One example of the "fused" badge has the identical backing metal and older gilt finish with the "riveted" indent at the top of the parachute canopy with no lumps.
3. The other "fused" examples with the lumps on the back are using a kind of anodized? metal for the base that I have found on other late war and post war badges (up to 1950's)

There are some other points that need to be stressed. The original tendering of the badge was done in 1943. So it was a competition among several badge makers. THEREFORE Scully Montreal was not the only company to produce samples of the badge. Other Canadian Companies made samples as well. I would think Birks could be one as they also had a branch there. It is almost guaranteed that J.R. Gaunt Montreal made samples as well. So what happened when the Battalion shipped overseas? Well they acquired officers badges there. Gaunt obviously had branches in the UK but there were other badge makers of varying quality. Now in order to see the varying quality of badges available you only need to go as far as original Gaunt, Ludlow, Firmin and SS ltd. made US Parachute Badges. Some I have seen come off US veterans uniforms are of a quality one would expect from a repro or copy.

In addition, while someone originally made the badge with copper pins, it does not mean that the same company, J.R. Gaunt Birmingham /London could not have done away with the pins and create less expensive, less time consuming examples later in the war. There is also the possibility that several UK manufacturers like the above mentioned companies made this same badge in varying degrees of quality.

The problem is, there are so few "known" examples of the unmarked badge out there. The latest member to join the battalion that had examples that I have seen was Lt. Charles Richer of the Film and Photo Unit who joined the battalion in early 1945. The CO Col. Eadie wore one as well but there must have been later officers that joined the Battalion in 1945 who also had them. So far none of these "fused" types have any provenance.

However I recall not too long ago when no one had heard of, or had ever seen, the stamped Scully Montreal version. These are riveted as well with speculation from recollection that a fused example of the stamped example also exists. With regard to those, some are marked and some are not. I would also like to add that "re-strike" or copy Scully Officers badges also exist. These are in brass (solid and stamped) and bronze. As far as I know unmarked but many I have seen are mounted.

I also recall the surprise when the first 1944 dated Maroon Dorothea beret popped out of the woodwork about 20 years ago. So it does not do anyone any good to state outright that this is a "repro". In my opinion until someone can prove otherwise, the traits, quality and lineage point to it being a variation of the officers badge. However at this point to find one with provenance might be very very difficult.

It seems like a lot of work and expense to create a badge where the maker likely does not profit from his crafty-work. I doubt the supposed forger ever made back his troubles in initial sales. I know most airborne collectors and would have heard about this badge if they were "circulating". The first one I saw was at an Ottawa militaria show a few years ago. I was asked for an opinion and if my memory serves me correctly I did not come to any conclusion. Of coarse the common "restrikes and copies" came to mind as a possible source. However If a forger wanted to make money on this he would have been better off making and selling them openly through one of the reinactor suppliers. The brass, gilt and silver work involved could easily net him 200$ per copy. Therefore it does not really make any sense.

I would also like to add that the "known" unmarked badge "re-strikes" or "fantasy" badges have been around for ages. I saw the first one in the 70's. This was the bi-metal version and white metal version and they were stamped. They were of good quality and cut from a die. You can't easily bend the metal by hand. Some originally thought these were late war examples never issued. Although this is not true, no one has ever discovered who made these? I contacted Gaunt and Firmin a long time ago and both denied making them. It is obvious from the quality that these are made from some original equipment. However other later examples of these copies are clearly not made from original equipment and simply molded from a badge.

It is impossible for the badge in question to have been molded from a badge. It is made in the same manner as the originals or the original quality stamped "restrike" "fantasy" badge. So if these are recent creations, someone out there still holds the die from decades ago. This is obvious in the quality and detail and the fact that there is absolutely no difference in measurements with the known originals.

I suppose until one is found in the hands of a vet, this will not be certain, however it is my opinion, especially in seeing a sort of morphing of quality from the 1943 examples through the unmarked, unpinned examples, that these can very well be good.

I will keep my eyes open and if anything new develops will post.