19th Hussars elephant

[Robthereiver]

Hello

Just come across this tread and its an interesting theory, and worthy of posting, but I do not think it holds much water. I agree with Luke its a red herring.

With regards to the 19H cap badges:

1st Pat. SP4659/1898 Indian Elephant c/w single scroll - 19th P.W.O. Hussars

2nd Pat. SP4659a/1903 Indian Elephant c/w double scroll - 19th Alexandra/P.W.O Hussars

3rd Pat. SP6968/1909 The Dannebrog interlaced with the letter A and surmounted by a Coronet, and 1885 on the arms of the cross.

The Dannebrog can be seen being worn as collars in photographs as early as c.1904 (see L&D sect.38) I have no date as to when they were sealed.

Why is the Double scrolled Elephant so scarce?.........I have know idea!. There are many other badges that are equally so. Alan has put forward a few sound suggestions as to the reasons why, but in truth we can only surmise without facts and evidence, documentary or photographic in this case.

Alan thank you for post its certainly made me look at the 19H again.

My references for the above were as follows:

Dress Regs. for the Army 1900,1904 & 1911, PRO WO 359/14 p.304, The Linaker Badge Collection & L&D Cav. Arm Badges

Hope the above has been of help/interest to someone

Cheers
Rob

[cbuehler]

Interesting thread here. The double scroll is a bit of a mystery in that it is so rare.
As an aside, I think the 19H badge change was a most unfortunate one in the history of the the army. They went from one of the more fabulous badges to one of the most unremarkable.

CB

[Luke H]

Originally Posted by Robthereiver

.

With regards to the 19H cap badges:

1st Pat. SP4659/1898 Indian Elephant c/w single scroll - 19th P.W.O. Hussars

2nd Pat. SP4659a/1903 Indian Elephant c/w double scroll - 19th Alexandra/P.W.O Hussars

3rd Pat. SP6968/1909 The Dannebrog interlaced with the letter A and surmounted by a Coronet, and 1885 on the arms of the cross.

But do we know for certain the middle pattern is indeed that?

Last time this subject was discussed it had not been confirmed 4659a/1903 was definitely the Double Scroll Nelly. Merely that the design contained an ‘elephant’ according to notes made by John Mulcahy at the National Archives from WO 359 Vol. 15 p. 17.

It was debated that the ‘a’ suffix may denote an alteration of fixing i.e. from loops to the long slider for the Brodrick.

A wholesale change of design often (but not always) results in alteration of SP number itself rather than just an addition of a suffix.

If this pattern has been confirmed I would be delighted to hear this and the source please?

Should the double scroll not be the above pattern it would not fit into the official sequence and therefore not be officially sealed and I think more likely a privately produced regimental affection such as a band badge.

[Robthereiver]

Originally Posted by Luke H

But do we know for certain the middle pattern is indeed that?

Last time this subject was discussed it had not been confirmed 4659a/1903 was definitely the Double Scroll Nelly. Merely that the design contained an ‘elephant’ according to notes made by John Mulcahy at the National Archives from WO 359 Vol. 15 p. 17.

It was debated that the ‘a’ suffix may denote an alteration of fixing i.e. from loops to the long slider for the Brodrick.

A wholesale change of design often (but not always) results in alteration of SP number itself rather than just an addition of a suffix.

If this pattern has been confirmed I would be delighted to hear this and the source please?

Should the double scroll not be the above pattern it would not fit into the official sequence and therefore not be officially sealed and I think more likely a privately produced regimental affection such as a band badge.

Luke

I can confirm that the information I have given is correct the Double scroll Elephant is recorded in the PRO WO359/14 p.304 in fact there is an image of it along side the SP No.

All that has happen here is the Scroll has been changed as an alteration to the original pattern, and an 'a' added to the SP No. to denote that, which is not unusual in these matters.

There is also recorded the fact that it was made obsolete in 1909.

The Double Scroll Elephant is also listed and illustrated in Dress Reg's of the Army 1904.

I trust this reply is adequate to delight you

Regards
Rob

[3748 Hussar]

Hi all ,

Without high jacking this thread and for those who are intrigued by this post I’ve added the below link to a couple of double scrollers

https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/fo...hlight=Nellies

Regards

Tony C

[Alan O]

Originally Posted by Robthereiver

Luke

I can confirm that the information I have given is correct the Double scroll Elephant is recorded in the PRO WO395/14 p.304 in fact there is an image of it along side the SP No.

All that has happen here is the Scroll has been changed as an alteration to the original pattern, and an 'a' added to the SP No. to denote that, which is not unusual in these matters.

There is also recorded the fact that it was made obsolete in 1909.

The Double Scroll Elephant is also listed and illustrated in Dress Reg's of the Army 1904.

I trust this reply is adequate to delight you

Regards
Rob

Rob.

It is odd because the elephant is not the 1898 animal but a totally different design so I am surprised that the "a" was added when it is a totally new design and not a modification to the 1898 one. It's very strange that the '1903' badge has a 1902 hallmark in one case so I can only assume the 1902 silver one was made for an officer a year before the S/P was produced but that again is odd.
Nothing makes sense with this badge.
Alan

[GriffMJ]

.... there is a genuine double scrolled ORs cap badge. I have seen one. A crimped slider.

[Alan O]

1908 and no elephant.

Does rather reinforce the view that the design was rejected by the regt even though a s/p was produced and a few badges were made for that.

[magpie]

The hallmark year starts about June so could be the year 1902/3 depending on when it was sealed and badge made.

[Luke H]

Originally Posted by Robthereiver

I can confirm that the information I have given is correct the Double scroll Elephant is recorded in the PRO WO395/14 p.304 in fact there is an image of it along side the SP No.

Thank you Rob, this is very delightful news!

Sorry my ignorance of parlance, could you explain PRO WO394/14 p.304 please? If you had a picture of the document I should be very grateful to see it. It’ll end a ten year hunt.

Knew the double scroll badge is shown in officers dress regs 1904, but, can find no pattern number for it within that document.

[mac mcconnell]

Robs info looks sound to me.
Not every change is recorded as a sealed paten if the badge remains fundamentally the same i thought.

Best Mac

[Robthereiver]

Originally Posted by Alan O

1908 and no elephant.

Does rather reinforce the view that the design was rejected by the regt even though a s/p was produced and a few badges were made for that.

Alan

As I have said, I have know idea why the the Double scrolled Elephant is so scarce but in my experience the answer is often out there and it possibly will reveal its self given time, luck and the appropriate research.

I recall its not long since it was proved that the 14th King's Hussars O/Rs 1st pattern Cap Badge was actually worn for example and there had been speculation over that for decades.

The image you've posted with respect does nothing IMO to further the view that the Regt. rejected this badge.

The image is dated c.1908, note the prefix circa earlier or later, so it could easily be 1909 then? if say it was 1908 then that is right on the cusp of the 'Danneborg' being sealed as a cap badge and the Elephant being made obsolete.
You could speculate all day along on those lines. He might be wearing a Danneborg collar as stop gap, the Regt might as a whole taken to wearing the Danneborg collar early in honour of Alexandra and so on etc.etc......

I would humbly suggest that if this view is to be substantiated it will require much better dated documentary/photographic evidence and more of it as 'One Swallow does not a summer make'....so happy hunting.

If I find anything I will post it.

Regards
Rob

[Robthereiver]

Originally Posted by Alan O

Rob.

It is odd because the elephant is not the 1898 animal but a totally different design so I am surprised that the "a" was added when it is a totally new design and not a modification to the 1898 one. It's very strange that the '1903' badge has a 1902 hallmark in one case so I can only assume the 1902 silver one was made for an officer a year before the S/P was produced but that again is odd.
Nothing makes sense with this badge.
Alan

Alan

The thing is I think you will find that the army saw things in a different way to you and me. In basic terms the 1898 Pat was an Indian Elephant standing on a single Scroll and the 1903 amended Pat was an Indian Elephant on two scrolls, but in essence its still the same badge. its general size, shape & metal has not altered. Agreed the 1903 Elephant is a little dumpier to accommodate the scrolls but is still an Elephant over a scroll, therefore in their view as an amendment to the 1st Pattern it not require the badge to be resealed with its own number.

Now if you think that is 'odd' try this one 3rd The Kings Own Hussars Arm Badge 1st Pat. Rearing Horse SP No.63/1884 and the 2nd Pat. Galloping Horse SP No.63a/1899 two very differently styled horses on fields, but note still classed as an amendment to the 1st Pat. as opposed to having a new pattern number of its own.

Regards
Rob

[Alan O]

Rob

All good points and with the dearth of photos and lack of documentation it is a challenge. It's ironic that there are lots of pre WW1 photos about of the 14th Hussars wearing the regimental eagle in their caps rather than the sealed pattern badge whilst there are so very few photos of the 19th from the some period. Quite frustrating!

Alan

[Robthereiver]

Originally Posted by Luke H

Sorry my ignorance of parlance, could you explain PRO WO394/14 p.304 please? If you had a picture of the document I should be very grateful to see it. It’ll end a ten year hunt.

Luke

I'm afraid I cannot help you any further in this matter.
All I can suggest is you get in touch with the National Archives (PRO) at Kew in London on line or otherwise and obtain a copy of WO359/14 page 304. and all will be revealed to you.

Please note this number is correct and I have corrected my error on original post #20 ..........had a touch of dyslexia !

Regards
Rob