Artillery button

[Artynut]

Reference my previous post Royal Navy button. also included are two other buttons, hoping someone can identify them. Thank you. David J.

[Lazio]

Hi David, no one to my knowledge is 100% certain of the meaning of the two facing cannons button. Dixon Pickup suggests it may be a possible Dockyard Artillery but its still unknown.

[Irv]

2&3 look like volunteer buttons.

[Lazio]

Originally Posted by Irv

2&3 look like volunteer buttons.

yes they are look like LFV and RLV

[Lazio]

I found I have the LFV I have so many vol buttons now I don't know what I do and don't have. The LFV is The loyal Fareham Volunteers Hampshire.

[Guzzman]

Re the two cannon facing each other either side of an anchor.

No-one is 100% certain of the origins of this button, but it is increasingly considered to have been worn by a ship's Master Gunner. It was between 1800-10 that buttons for surgeons and physicians, masters and pursers first appeared and it is thought that these buttons appeared around the same time. The design of this button is similar in many respects to those designed for the masters and pursers, etc.

However, as I said, no-one has yet been able to confirm this. But it is highly unlikely that they would have been worn by any form of Dockyard Artillery. The cannon are usually shown mounted on carriages for use at sea - although there are some variations in the design of gun carriage used. Quite a few of these buttons are in existence (I have a couple in my own collection), which suggests they were issued in quite large numbers - certainly on a par with the numbers issued to masters and pursers.

As I said, maybe one day someone will be able to confirm it's identity. Until then it will remain the subject of conjecture - although I'm pretty convinced myself that it WAS used by Master Gunners and my own examples are catalogued as such.

Pete

[Artynut]

Hello Guzman and others, I have it on authority of Tim Burt, that it is for Royal Navy Transports.. A line drawing of it is in his book.

[fairlie63]

A Brief History of Australian & British Naval Buttons, Buckles, Banners, Badges & Braid, 1748 – 2006, by CMDR John M. Wilkins RFD* RANR, February 2010 - Revised Fifth Edition, notes this button as being for the RN Transport Service.

Described as an unofficial private production button, with unauthorised use of a cabled anchor. The coloured drawing accompanying his description shows an oval roped ring.

I am unable to confirm or elaborate, just happened to have that secondary source on hand.

Keith

[btns]

I go with Guzzman.
Mr. B. is a hard working book publisher who gets his data and pictures off the webb and e-bay.
The sketch of this button is not in my early 2002 edition of the CMDR's book.

Attached is a scan from a big 1970's catalogue on naval buttons. It was put together by one man (P.I.) with help of many collectors.
Do the pictures in both books originate from this catalogue?

[Guzzman]

This button was most certainly not used by the Transport Service.

The button worn by officers serving on transports bore the insignia of the Transport Service - a crossed anchor and cannon barrel.

It is possible that this button was adopted unofficially by Master Gunners as everyone else seemed to be getting their own buttons at the time!

Pete

[Artynut]

Just wondering then, Do I assume my button on view a few posts ago is A= worthless, B= a fantasy piece or C= just not worth mentioning again? There seems to be a very divided opinion on it! Regards, David J.

[Lazio]

Originally Posted by Artynut

Just wondering then, Do I assume my button on view a few posts ago is A= worthless, B= a fantasy piece or C= just not worth mentioning again? There seems to be a very divided opinion on it! Regards, David J.

I think everyone agrees it was a valid period issue. I personally reserve judgement on who actually used it but as has been also said quite a few turn up its of an early Georgian period. The condition of yours is not great if you are thinking along the lines of a monetary amount when you say worthless that will lower monetary value.

[fairlie63]

Originally Posted by btns

I go with Guzzman.

Attached is a scan from a big 1970's catalogue on naval buttons. It was put together by one man (P.I.) with help of many collectors.
Do the pictures in both books originate from this catalogue?

The one in the Wilkins book is very similar to No 71 in your picture btns.

Keith

[btns]

Originally Posted by fairlie63

The one in the Wilkins book is very similar to No 71 in your picture btns.

Keith

Thank you. The author of the catalogue released his drawings to his network of old style collectors. Forty years later not many people know who made them and they feel free to use them without reference.

[Guzzman]

One final point about the mystery button. I have never understood why these buttons are often described as 'Dockyard Artillery'. What Dockyard Artillery? Dockyards do not have artillery batteries! The defences OUTSIDE the dockyards mounted artillery batteries but they were manned by the Army. And besides, the dockyards were full of warships mounting heavy guns. So there was no need for any form of 'Dockyard Artillery'.

And even more importantly, there are no records of any 'Dockyard Artillery' being in existence within the dockyards during the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars. The security and defence of the dockyards themselves was the responsibility of the Royal Marines.

This is just another case of something that often happens with naval buttons. No-one is exactly sure what they are, so someone boldly states that they are 'Whatever' - without any proof or reasoning to back them up - and it is accepted as gospel. No-one ever looks at these buttons logically or compares them with other buttons of a similar date and design.

I still firmly believe that these buttons were worn by Master Gunners and came into use somewhere around 1805. The Master Gunner was a very important man in any warship and it was around this time that the Master, Purser and Surgeon all received their official buttons. This also leads me to believe that the design was official rather than something acquired unofficially. There are too many examples in existence and the design is too uniform for it not to have been an officially sanctioned button. I think that the official documentation announcing its introduction has either been destroyed or mislaid amongst the masses of documents from the time. Hopefully the documents detailing the introduction of this button will one day appear.

This is just the conclusion I have reached over many years of collecting and researching naval buttons and an obsessive interest in Royal Navy history! Please feel free to reject or accept it as you wish. But if you do believe it to be a 'Dockyard Artillery' button please give me some evidence or reasoning for your decision.

Pete