Somerset L I

[hindoostan]

As I have plenty of time this holiday I am sorting out the badges that I am not sure of. The picture shows two badges, the bottom badge is the standard badge, the top one has smaller letters and different spacings on the scroll with two lugs to the reverse. Is it genuine? It appears to have age. Is it Victorian/Edwardian or just a makers variation, or just a pure fake.
John

[hindoostan]

Have seen this striking is in K &K No 607, so it must be genuine?

[Frank Kelley]

I would be very surprised, based upon the photographs, if the top example was original.

Originally Posted by hindoostan

As I have plenty of time this holiday I am sorting out the badges that I am not sure of. The picture shows two badges, the bottom badge is the standard badge, the top one has smaller letters and different spacings on the scroll with two lugs to the reverse. Is it genuine? It appears to have age. Is it Victorian/Edwardian or just a makers variation, or just a pure fake.
John

[hindoostan]

In that case the Som L I badge in K &K is a fake as well?

[49lassiepen]

Iam not a fan of these -posted photo of my luged example in my album and gallery

[Luke H]

The badge with the thick border and small lettering is not in my belief a Victorian / Edwardian badge due to their quality plus that every example of it I’ve seen, and I own a couple, has been slidered.

Your badge is very strange with the flat scraped area middle of the scroll and also what appears to possibly be a scar from either a slider being directly removed or cast around. It also appears to be chemically aged?

In my belief either your badge is broken and has non contemporary replacement fixings or it is a cast copy but with such poor photos I cannot say which. Notwithstanding it has certainly been mucked with, not a badge I would give a thumbs up to or want in my collection.

[hindoostan]

There are the marks where lugs have been removed at North and South on the badge. I have posted better pictures .

[cbuehler]

That mark or scar is not the remains of a lug, but appears to have been a slider. Unfortunately I agree that it is not a good badge.

CB

[Luke H]

You can see the scar from a slider here.

The reverse impression around the lettering on all the undoubtably good examples I’ve seen is much sharper with raised borders and edges around each letter. Your example is very indistinct in this respect, add to that the uneven edges and their thickness of your badge plus what I pointed out earlier so I believe it’s a cast copy from an original.

[49lassiepen]

Mine is ex Richard Cornish collection Still has the original card board these came on with his notes

[hindoostan]

Thank you all for your comments.
One final question, was this particular striking with the smaller letters actually issued at ant time to the regiment?
John

[Frank Kelley]

I never bother to use the volumes as the photography is so poor.

Originally Posted by hindoostan

In that case the Som L I badge in K &K is a fake as well?

[Frank Kelley]

Thanks for the new photographs, both the material and manufacture suggest to me that this badge cannot be original.

Originally Posted by hindoostan

There are the marks where lugs have been removed at North and South on the badge. I have posted better pictures .

[Frank Kelley]

An original example of the Victorian SLI for comparison.