LeicestershireTF-Gaunt B'ham Plaque??

[wardog]

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...=STRK:MEWAX:IT This badge and several other good badges has just been sold. I asked about the plaque and was told the it looked to be J P Gaunt B'ham. Not sure if this seller deals in badges often. If a dealer, it could have been a trick of mind, if not, I would have thought they would have said just what they thought it to be-hence J P. Any thoughts on a Gaunt Birmingham plaque on a WWI period badge?? New on me. Cheers, Paul.

[Alan O]

The badge looks genuine.

I did not bid because:

a. The plaque is not right if it is Bham. It should be London and then would only be correct if it was a private order TF badge.

b. I am not sure that a Hindoostan plaque has not been removed.

Alan

[matti467]

Just had a look at this and I am with Alan. The plaque is quite horrid and I think there is a sign of a deleted 'Hindostan'. I have seen many Leicesters badges ovewr the years, several courtesy of the late George Boss, a Tiger himself and none had such an odd looking addition to the rear.
Matti

['Ticker' Riley]

Personal circumstances have kept me away from the Forum for some time now, and indeed this may only be a short visit. Nevertheless I was particularly interested to see this string from last year, especially as I have an almost identical example of the badge in question myself - images of which I now post below:

This badge was kindly sold to me by a respected member of this Forum last year, who believed it to be a puggaree/pugari badge. I personally think the badge is genuine, but am not sure that it is a puggaree badge myself. Although I do not have an in-depth knowledge of the service of the 4th and 5th Territorial Battalions of the Leicestershire Regiment, I have so far not found anything to suggest that they were ever posted overseas and which would therefore have necessitated the issue of a puggaree badge (pre-1917 that is, as I understand this is when they stopped using the top scroll-less version). I think I have seen elsewhere on the Forum something about territorial regiments never serving abroad, so consequently assume one would not expect to see a puggaree badge for such a regiment.

I may be wrong on this next point, but from things I have read on the Forum, I think puggaree badges tended to be helmet plate centres, and that the slider (vertical shank) on such badges was actually extremely long, probably much longer than the example above which is approximately 45mm (1¾ʹʹ) in length. As I say, I may be wrong about all of this, but this does make me have serious doubts about the badge being a puggaree badge; even though I am more than happy that both it and its slider are pukka.

With regard to the strange “J.R.Gaunt B’ham” plaque, I am again happy with this for two reasons. Firstly, the tiger is definitely the Gaunt design, as I have seen numerous other examples of this same tiger bearing acceptable Gaunt marks. Secondly, I understand that badges for the 1st Volunteer Battalion of the Leicesters (the predecessor of the territorial battalions) bore a Gaunt Birmingham mark rather than a London one. I see Will (Diehard) posted the front of one such badge to the Forum here.

If the badge is a genuine Gaunt badge, as I believe, why does it have the unusual plaque and why a longer slider? I wonder if the answer may not be connected with the Brodrick Cap (NP Forage Cap), and the fact that cap badges apparently made for the Brodrick also had longer sliders (I believe Julian (KLR) has done quite a bit on this so I’m sure he’ll correct me if I’ve misunderstood). Before I move on to this, I should just point out that my badge does seem to have started out life as a regular ORs badge, and originally had two lugs (loops) on the back; traces of which can be seen where the legs join the body of the tiger. The top scroll has been so professionally removed that hardly any trace remains, though in the right light I can see a small dint on the tiger’s back and a fine line on the back of his neck which show that it did once have a top scroll.

My thinking is that this is an original Gaunt badge, which had been altered by Gaunts themselves, with the removal of its top ‘Hindoostan’ scroll and its original lugs and with the addition of a longer slider and B’ham plaque, for issue to the territorial regiments at their inception in 1908 and specifically for use in the Brodrick Cap. Now before the more experienced members jump down my throat to say that can’t be right as the Brodrick was replaced by the NP Field Service Cap after 1906, which is obviously two years before the territorial force came into being, please hear me out.

Whilst it is on record that the Brodrick appears to have ceased to have been general issue at the end of 1906 (see B. W. Cox and M. Prevezer’s ‘The Brodrick Cap’ in the Journal of the Society for Army Historical Research, Vol. LX, No. 244, Winter 1982, pp. 213-225), it would also seem that it continued to be worn by some units well after this date. Indeed Cox and Prevezer state that the Brodrick was not only “still available for issue in 1907” but that “the Territorial Army (Militia) would have continued to wear it even until 1908” (p. 215). These latter comments would then apply to the 3rd (Militia) Battalion of the Leicesters, though presumably could also be extended to include the 1st Volunteer Battalion/4th & 5th Territorials as well?

Interestingly Phil (singleman) has posted up a photograph here of members of the 3rd Battalion of the Gloucester Regiment seemingly wearing the Brodrick as late as 1910, so I think it is feasible the territorial battalions of the Leicesters could well have also been using the Brodrick after their inception in 1908; even if only for a brief period. If this was the case then they could well have purchased new badges directly from Gaunts with the longer sliders to wear in the Brodrick, and it would therefore be reasonable for Gaunts to have adapted an old stock of regulars’ cap badges (even pre-1903 lugged ones) to meet the order.

This is my theory anyway, but there may well be proof that the Leicestershire Regiment’s territorials did see action overseas and that such longer slidered badges could have been worn as Puggaree badges. If so then I’d obviously be glad to hear it. Though in the absence of this at present, I feel the use of longer slidered badges by territorial soldiers still wearing older-style headgear is a fair possibility. I look forward to hearing the comments and opinions of other members about this.

Regards

Martin

[GriffMJ]

Hi Martin

I am not an authority on the Leics Regts.... but just an observation. Is there a slight kink just forward of the rump of the begining of the tail? If you run your finger along that edge can you feel a rough notch?

['Ticker' Riley]

Hello Griff

Yes, your reference to a “slight kink just forward of the rump of the begining of the tail” is the same small dint I mentioned in my posting as being on the tiger’s back, and which I believe is indicative of the badge originally having had the top ‘Hindoostan’ scroll removed. I have seen other territorials’ badges where top scrolls have been taken off, but often they are not as tidy as this one is, which is why I suspect Gaunts themselves could have been responsible for its removal in this instance. By the way, I have been very impressed by all your postings and photographs on the Leicestershire/Leicestershire & Derbyshire Yeomanry – tremendous stuff!

Best regards

Martin