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

[GriffMJ]

Hi Martin

I agree that the "Hindoostan" scroll has been removed.

Many thanks for your comments.

['Ticker' Riley]

Originally Posted by wardog

The TF badge caused doubt due to the Gaunt 'Birmingham' tablet. Have you been able to do any research on such 'Birmingham' tablets? Apart from that yours looks good to me. Unable to make out if it has sweat holes. Best regards, Paul.

I thought it best to reply to Paul’s comments here after he posted them to the other thread on Leicestershire Regiment badges – whilst I am hoping to look at Gaunts and their marks in more detail at some point, so far I haven’t done any specific research into these Birmingham tablets/plaques. Actually it would be interesting to know if any other Forum members have come across anything similar on other badges, be that for the Leicesters or any other regiment? I do know that a 1st Volunteer Battalion Leicestershire Regiment white metal badge was sold by Bosleys last April that apparently had a “JR Gaunt & Son Ltd B’ham shaped plate” on the back, hence why I’m personally happy with the Birmingham mark on this territorials one as well.

Whilst I’m here, Matti (matti467) has asked if I have been in touch with Col Veitch at the Royal Leicestershire Regiment Museum in Newarke Houses about things? I have corresponded with a Mr French at the Museum before with regard to badges, but as of yet not about this particular one. I was rather hoping to hear a few more opinions on matters from Forum members in the first instance, especially with regard to my theory that this could have been for the Brodrick Cap rather than being a puggaree badge.

Regards

Martin

P.S. Sorry forgot to mention – yes the above territorials badge does have two sweat holes visible (and possibly another underneath the plaque as well). They are a nice oblong shape and seem contemporary with the badge, again I should think suggesting an early date for it.

[Alan O]

The Broderick might be an option. While the Broderick was replaced in 1906 there is photographic evidence showing it still being worn by reserve bns and overseas regualrs up to 1910 and maybe 1912.

The TF at the time were a bit of a law unto themselves with badges and headgear so the Leicters TF cold have worn Brodericks beyond 1906. However this is unlikely imo for the following reasons:

1. The TF had a real thing for slouch hats and hung onto them for quite a while. Is there any evidence that the Leicesters TF actually wore Brodericks? The regulars disliked them intensely and I cannot remmeber seeing a photo of a post 1908 TF solider in one.

2. Secondly if they had done and not replaced them in 1906, then they would have had Leicester VB badges in them. If this badge was a post 1908 private purchase badge for the Bn why put it on an obselete disliked hat and not on a new FC cap or on their beloved slouch hats.

3. http://www.1914-1918.net/leicesters.htm As the Leicesters TF were not sent to India in 1914 to backfill the regular bns who went to fight, it is unlikely that the TF bought long slidered badges for their Pagris. I think you can rule this pagri option out.

Alan

['Ticker' Riley]

Hello Alan

Many thanks indeed for your contribution to things, which makes for very interesting reading. So whilst the suggestion that the badge might have been a puggaree one is still unlikely, so too, it would seem, is my thinking it could have been for the Brodrick Cap. Your point about the Brodrick being widely disliked is a valid one, and you are quite right that without photographic evidence of it being worn by the Leicesters territorial battalions it’s very hard to tell what headgear they were using around 1906-1908.

If the Territorial Force in general was so keen on the Slouch Hat, could the longer slidered version have been worn with this? I’m still happy that the Gaunt badge is genuine, and that it is of a fairly early date with regard to the formation of the territorial battalions of the Leicesters. The question, of course, is why the longer slider and what could it have been for? If not as a puggaree badge on the FS helmet, or for use on out-dated Brodrick Caps, could the Slouch Hat be the answer?

As an addition to things, here is yet another Leicesters Territorials’ badge with a longer slider which I only acquired the other week, and which I believe would be contemporary with the Gaunt one:

This other badge is one of the ‘kitten-faced’ variety, the makers of which I do not currently know. The badge itself is in excellent condition showing practically no signs of wear, which I would personally ascribe to its use possibly being very restricted to just a couple of years, and has three nice sweat holes. I have a number of these ‘kitten-faced’ Leicesters badges with ordinary length sliders, but this has by far the best definition. Although there is no obvious sign of it ever having had a ‘Hindoostan’ top scroll, I suspect like the Gaunt one it might have started out life with one but that the manufacture removed this. The slider length is again approximately 45mm (1¾ʹʹ), though this one is nearer 44mm whereas the Gaunt one is a tad longer and more like 46mm; the metal of the slider is slightly thicker than the Gaunt one as well

The fact that I now have two of these longer slidered territorials’ badges, by different makers, does make me think they were made for a specific kind of headdress, and that there’s a good chance it was from the inception of the territorial battalions around 1908, but like I say if not as a puggaree or on the Brodrick then what? Anyway, many thanks for your comments so far, and I’d be glad to hear any further thoughts you might have on matters. As you know I haven’t been collecting that long, so any advice Forum members can give really is much appreciated.

Best regards

Martin

[Alan O]

Martin,

It might well have have been worn on a standard peaked cap as used throughout WW1. I have a number of WW1 badges with long sliders. As the badge sat quite high up on the cap then it could be quite long. It was only with the advent of the side cap and the GS cap, where the badge sat lower often just above the cap band, was there a need for shorter sliders (or even lugs in the case of berets).

Alan

['Ticker' Riley]

Hi Alan

Your latest comments on First World War badges with longer sliders is particularly interesting, as I had been assuming that, as a general rule, and based on things Julian (KLR) has said (which I may well have misinterpreted!), the more standard length sliders came in after 1906 with the introduction of the peaked service cap. It would be really useful therefore to know the length of the sliders on your badges, and if they too are around the 45mm (1¾ʹʹ) mark?

So far the regular ORs Leicestershire badges I have that I think date from the Great War are all of a much more standard length; apart from one particular kind which appears to have a short dumpy type of slider (see this posting I made when I first started looking into things). I have to say that the fact the Gaunt territorials one seems to be an altered lugged badge still makes me inclined to think its adaptation was some time before the First War, as presumably the badge itself would have had to have been made before the 1903 introduction of the ‘vertical shank’ for it to originally have had loops. I’d be really grateful if you could post a picture or two of some of your longer slidered badges for comparison, and also apprecite it if you could let me know what length of slider we are talking about here. Many thanks again for contributing to things.

Best regards

Martin

[KLR]

Martin, there was certainly a ruling that sliders were shortened in 1906 (the SP of the KLR cap badge in the IWM can be seen to have been shortened and is now c 45mm)
BUT there is no indication what it was shortened from !!! It is only a guess that it might have been like that on the HPCs - ie around 60mm.
Maybe if one found a Brodrick complete with a badge in it we might know !?
When, I have more time I'll get back to you about Leics TF badges etc - though they'll be thoughts rather than facts ! Julian

[Alan O]

I am away from home but I can supply some measurements later in the week.

This is my 1st Monmouths with a very long slider. It has impecable provenance so I know thta it is genuine.

['Ticker' Riley]

Hello Julian

Many thanks for joining the thread, and for putting up things about the 1906 order for shortening the vertical shanks. It seems I have misunderstood your previous postings on this, but, if I’m reading things right this time, it would appear that when sliders were first shortened this was to a length of approximately 45mm (1¾ʹʹ)? If that is so, then Alan’s view that these longer slidered badges were for use on the peaked service cap would be correct, which, in turn, could mean that my two longer slidered Leicesters Territorials’ badges might well still date from the early years of the battalions’ formation as I first thought (even if my thinking about them being used in Brodrick Caps looks to be wrong).

Though this does now lead to another question – when did the more standard slider length come in? I have checked some of my other Leicesters badges, especially my ‘kitten-faced’ ones, and they are all around 35mm (1⅜ʹʹ); this includes the all brass economy ones which would presumably date from the Great War. Could a further shortening have taken place in the early years of the War? It will be interesting to know the lengths of Alan’s badges, but from the one he has posted it looks like it could be about the same as those on my Leicesters territorials. I look forward to hearing more on this most interesting subject.

Best regards

Martin