Liverpool pals 'cap' badge.

[Frank Kelley]

I think you did really quite well in the case of both, the latter in particular, although, I think the former is both unique and that little bit nicer, back in the day I should imagine local jewellers must have engraved a considerable number for wife's and girlfriends as keepsakes.

Originally Posted by KLR

I bought my (London) HMS Lpl Pals badge in a pawnbrokers in Liverpool in about 1970. It cost I think 17/6 ! It had been converted as a brooch - BUT it had the name and address engraved to one in the 20th Bn.


I bought my (Chester) HMS Lpl Pals from a dealer about 2005. It cost I think about £100 (almost ruined me!) - again it was brooched, but I think the Chester ones are scarcer.

[KLR]

I've pasted all my Lpl Pals into my Album - with descriptions etc
enjoy .... all genuine badges!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(researched in the TNA, IWM, NAM Mus of Lpl)


All of the illustrated in my album that are 'bronzed' have retained the original patina; "Badges forage cap VS GM bronzed …" (ref WO 359/16, p63)

[Luke H]

Originally Posted by KLR

I've pasted all my Lpl Pals into my Album - with descriptions etc
enjoy .... all genuine badges!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(researched in the TNA, IWM, NAM Mus of Lpl)

Julian,

The aforementioned OSD badge appears to be included. It is not genuine.

I found your close ups of the badge in question in the below thread, hopefully you don’t mind but I’ve also attached them below for comparison purposes and ease of reference.

https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/fo...3&postcount=31

I greatly respect your work as a researcher but please let’s not legitimise this fake for the sake of pride. Someone has done an excellent job on it adding some nicely battered tangs and giving it a bronze wash but it is from the fake die. There is no doubt. No debate.

It features in the Martin Marsh catalogue, it is terribly rendered as previously detailed in my earlier posts and was without doubt only created after the 1970s.

Below I’ve attached one which appears made yesterday and is available on eBay brand new with a multi-buy option, plus the MM picture next to yours. You can see all 3 are identical. There are no other dies with all these features that are original.

I’m going to tap out of this thread now as I feel the evidence is in all my posts and see no use continuing this.

Also I’m sorry this has upset you so much and you felt the need to ‘un-friend’ me. My only aim is to help collectors and prevent people wasting their hard earned cash. For my part I still consider you a friend despite our professional disagreement on this one.

Yours,

Luke

P.S. I’ve added pics of a ‘silver’ marked badge as sold by the infamous Croft Militaria, again same die. You will also recognise the reverse impression used for the die cast as it is identical to your OSD and the other ‘collars’.

[KLR]

I'm not upset at all, I'm just saddened that you have told so many collectors that their badges are fake / copy. Yes, there are a lot of reproductions out there but I'm not convinced for most! You must know that there were thousands of badges made during the 1st WW which involved umpteen different dies (WO records give how many were made). Have you looked at museum collections? Have you looked up documentary descriptions of badges?


Well, we will agree to differ, good luck with your collections.
(I "unfriended" all my friends so that I can start again properly)

[Luke H]

The truth is the truth however many it affects, and the forum exists to find it.

When you found the list of 1916 issues how many badges and collections did you consign to the scrap pile of iffy box? Likely thousands. But it is more important to be accurate.

I’m yet to see any documentary description that can tell a collector if a badge is genuine or not for certain aside from an ‘original’ Sealed Pattern card. If you had any such documents that demonstrates this particular die is genuine please show it? But I know there isn’t because it is as I’ve said a 1970s creation.

That this badge may be in a museum’s collection does not mean it is genuine. Thousands of badges have been gifted to museums since the 1970s and repros sadly are included even the IWMs own website shows fakes. e.g. https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/30103121

You will not find a badge from that die attached to any original Sealed Pattern card or contemporaneous manufacturers sample I guarantee you that.

[KLR]

Originally Posted by Luke H

The truth is the truth however many it affects, and the forum exists to find it.

When you found the list of 1916 issues how many badges and collections did you consign to the scrap pile of iffy box? Likely thousands. But it is more important to be accurate.

I’m yet to see any documentary description that can tell a collector if a badge is genuine or not for certain aside from an ‘original’ Sealed Pattern card. If you had any such documents that demonstrates this particular die is genuine please show it? But I know there isn’t because it is as I’ve said a 1970s creation.

That this badge may be in a museum’s collection does not mean it is genuine. Thousands of badges have been gifted to museums since the 1970s and repros sadly are included even the IWMs own website shows fakes. e.g. https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/30103121

You will not find a badge from that die attached to any original Sealed Pattern card or contemporaneous manufacturers sample I guarantee you that.

There's clearly "truth" and "truth".

I'm not sure how I would find iffy badges from a list??
I've found two Firmin dies from SPs.

Museums mark down the date their acquisitions!
LDRG - or whatever - is too modern to me.
Yes, I took a badge of mine to a museum and compared it with that on the Sealed Pattern - and bingo! Don't forget that the SP will be the first production, subsequent dies may well be different.



Well as I said, enough of this.

[High Wood]

I start to worry about some of the items in my collection when I see threads like this.

This example has a wide mouth but on closer inspection it is not a fat beak but has a clearly visible tongue. Is this a good or a bad sign?

[Luke H]

That one’s fine.

[High Wood]

Many thanks, much appreciated.

[Frank Kelley]

Just from the photographs, I agree with Luke, I certainly don't think you need to worry about that one!

Originally Posted by High Wood

I start to worry about some of the items in my collection when I see threads like this.

This example has a wide mouth but on closer inspection it is not a fat beak but has a clearly visible tongue. Is this a good or a bad sign?