TOPIC:

Paul
I have compared the 'Natal' clasp on White's medal with some of the 'Natal' clasps in my collection, and I think the former may be a 'tailor's copy'. The letters making up 'Natal' are more widely spaced on my examples. This tends to confirm a tailor's intervention in the addition of this clasp to the medal.
Regards
Brett

I forgot to add this pic:

Brett,

Thanks for that.
My theory is he probably added it in all innocence to prove he was there.
I personally do not think it distracts from the medal, when I purchased it I was informed by the dealer of his non-entitlement.

Regards
Paul

Brett Hendey wrote: Paul
I have compared the 'Natal' clasp on White's medal with some of the 'Natal' clasps in my collection, and I think the former may be a 'tailor's copy'. The letters making up 'Natal' are more widely spaced on my examples. This tends to confirm a tailor's intervention in the addition of this clasp to the medal.
Regards
Brett

Brett,

Thanks for adding this comparison pic, nice medal BTW

Regards
Paul

Brett Hendey wrote: I forgot to add this pic:

Paul
No, I don't think the unofficial "Natal' clasp detracts from the medal you illustrated. The unofficial clasp provides a talking point and the vendor informed you of the actual entitlement. Examination of Pte. James White's service documents might reveal why he thought he was entitled to the "Natal" clasp; did he stage through Natal?
That is a nice medal shown by Brett. I have never seen a QSA to Murray's Horse.
REgards to both
IL.

To be quite honest Paul, as the medal and clasps appear to have been together for quite some time because of the way the clasps look, I'd just leave it alone, again, I assume the set of rivets between the first two clasps is clearly unofficial and wrong?