mark holden Posted 9 January , 2010 Share Posted 9 January , 2010 I have recently acquired the Signallers Badge shown below. It interested me because the colours on the right flag (as you look at it) seem reversed from the normal white blue white. Is this a known variant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 9 January , 2010 Share Posted 9 January , 2010 To the best of my knowledge enamel versions are vanity items, and not Ordnance. Can you imagine the Treasury paying for such a badge? And yes, the blue/white is reversed, probably a bazaar or PRI purchase. As a curio, OK, but does not belong in a serious collection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark holden Posted 9 January , 2010 Author Share Posted 9 January , 2010 Grumpy, Many thanks but it will remain in mine to show the vanity or perhaps pride of the British Tommy. regards Mark To the best of my knowledge enamel versions are vanity items, and not Ordnance. Can you imagine the Treasury paying for such a badge? And yes, the blue/white is reversed, probably a bazaar or PRI purchase. As a curio, OK, but does not belong in a serious collection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
high wood Posted 11 January , 2010 Share Posted 11 January , 2010 It looks very much like an original badge that has been enamelled. A jeweller could have done the enamelling very easily. I would like to think that it was given by a soldier to his best girl as a sweetheart badge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Doyle Posted 17 January , 2010 Share Posted 17 January , 2010 Interesting; retention depends on your definition of a serious collection! As far as I'm concerned, such items were worn, are seen on period jackets, and whether bought by the soldier or not, are as much part of a Great War collection as an 'Ordnance issue' object. But this kind of debate has been aired before! Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBettsMCDCM Posted 17 January , 2010 Share Posted 17 January , 2010 ..like an original badge that has been enamelled.....given by a soldier to his best girl as a sweetheart badge. I have seen a considerable number of these over the years & would conclude that @ very least they were commercially available rather than being Jewellers one offs?? Could they be from another Service?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Doyle Posted 17 January , 2010 Share Posted 17 January , 2010 They were used alright; this tunic is named dated and just right...(flag colours correct on this one) Cheers Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smithmaps Posted 17 January , 2010 Share Posted 17 January , 2010 I have one of these, though not reversed) These often come up, and I'm not sure they are vanity items. Surely the vanity item of choice would be the regimental badge. There are far more of them around than I would expect. The enamel is very thin and very liable to cracking off. I am not sure what was worn pre war, or indeed for parade? I wonder if they were an early variety, that was found to lose it's enamel, and be unsuitable in service use, and therefore the un enamelled version was then standardised. That would explain their surviving numbers. Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Doyle Posted 18 January , 2010 Share Posted 18 January , 2010 I would think that they are, in effect, vanity items in so much as they were bought/modified by the soldiers themselves; but given that the cloth versions were coloured, and the brass (gilding metal) versions weren't, it makes sense that a soldier, proud enough to have passed the course of instruction, would have obtained an enamelled one to show off his prowess. Evidence shows they were worn. Cheers Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 18 January , 2010 Share Posted 18 January , 2010 I can't prove they were NOT issued officially ....... but IMP [inherent military probability] suggests not, and I have never traced a Sealed Pattern or a reference in Clothing Regs, PVCN, or the ledgers of the Clothing Department. And, absolutely, they were indeed worn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Doyle Posted 18 January , 2010 Share Posted 18 January , 2010 Makes sense to me! Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now