Ed_Haynes Posted May 5, 2006 Author Share Posted May 5, 2006 To offer a corrected nomenclature:Type 1.1 (screwback, number prefaced by ?No?); Low = 316/High = 1763; 1941-??Type 1.2 (screwback); Low = 1795/High = 9263; 1951-60Type 2.1 (pinback, silver, rotating-tool-engraved); Low = 10020/High = 16999; 1982-??Type 2.2 (pinback, silvered bronze, enameled ribbon); Low = 18071/High = 23354; 1985-??Type 2.3 (pinback, silvered bronze, enameled ribbon, unnumbered) Sorry for helping to keep an myth alive. May that "thump" we hear be a stake going well through its heart? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolf Posted May 5, 2006 Share Posted May 5, 2006 To offer a corrected nomenclature:Type 1.1 (screwback, number prefaced by ?No?); Low = 316/High = 1763; 1941-??Type 1.2 (screwback); Low = 1795/High = 9263; 1951-60Type 2.1 (pinback, silver, rotating-tool-engraved); Low = 10020/High = 16999; 1982-??Type 2.2 (pinback, silvered bronze, enameled ribbon); Low = 18071/High = 23354; 1985-??Type 2.3 (pinback, silvered bronze, enameled ribbon, unnumbered) Sorry for helping to keep an myth alive. May that "thump" we hear be a stake going well through its heart?Ed,So which Type & Var. is the one I posted on Posts #10 and #11?When posting it I identified it as a T2V4 as it was the only one unnumbered on your previous Types & Variations list (Post #1 on this thread). But apparently there are two Var. unnumbered, one with a reverse like mine from Posts #10 and #11, and another with the funny reverse as the one you posted on Post #25 !Any opinions?Thanks,Dolf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vatjan Posted May 5, 2006 Share Posted May 5, 2006 Sorry for helping to keep an myth alive. May that "thump" we hear be a stake going well through its heart?I'm sorry for the outburst that was sheer frustration taking the upperhand. Just goes to show how hard it is to stop rumours Jan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Haynes Posted May 5, 2006 Author Share Posted May 5, 2006 I'm sorry for the outburst that was sheer frustration taking the upperhand. Just goes to show how hard it is to stop rumours JanNo, they have to be stopped. Dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Haynes Posted August 29, 2006 Author Share Posted August 29, 2006 (edited) A new type. Enameled ribbon, lightly silvered bronze, unnumbered. Believed to have been awarded only for Mongolian-Chinese border clashes in the 1960s. Edited November 11, 2006 by Ed_Haynes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Haynes Posted November 9, 2006 Author Share Posted November 9, 2006 An oddity. An unfinished (unsilvered and unenameled) brass core for a B # 37.4 (type 2.4). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Haynes Posted November 12, 2006 Author Share Posted November 12, 2006 (edited) For the lonely crowd on this forum, the latest update:A 37.1/M 20 -- Type 1.1 (screwback, number prefaced by ?No?) -- Low = 112/High = 1984A 37.1/M 20 -- Type 1.2 (screwback) -- Low = 2146/High = 9263M 20 -- Type 2.1 (pinback, silver, rotating-tool-engraved) -- Low = 10020/High = 16999Type 2.2 (pinback, silvered bronze, enameled ribbon, unnumbered ? said to have been awarded for border actions against China?) A 37.3/M 20 -- Type 2.3 (pinback, silver-plated bronze, enameled ribbon) -- Low = 18071/High = 23354A 37.4/M 20 -- Type 2.4 (pinback, silver plated bronze, enameled ribbon, unnumbered, unawarded escapee?) Edited November 12, 2006 by Ed_Haynes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlennC Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 (edited) Hi Ed,You can change Low number for Type A 37.1/M 20 -- Type 1.1 (screwback, number prefaced by ?No?) form 1984 to 1989and Low from 316 to 112 Edited November 12, 2006 by GlennC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Haynes Posted November 12, 2006 Author Share Posted November 12, 2006 Hi Ed,You can change Low number for Type A 37.1/M 20 -- Type 1.1 (screwback, number prefaced by ?No?) form 1984 to 1989and Low from 316 to 112Done. Nice one, Glenn! Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lingqi Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 thanks ED, nice work. I am gonna update my data now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 A new type. Enameled ribbon, lightly silvered bronze, unnumbered. Believed to have been awarded only for Mongolian-Chinese border clashes in the 1960s.This appears to be such a bronze one but numbered - or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Haynes Posted January 7, 2007 Author Share Posted January 7, 2007 Excerpted from Bob's really useful master list of serial numbers and dates of award (see http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=9917 and THANKS, BOB! ), here are known data points for the Honorary Medal of Combat (A37):854 26/09/19461,288 16/09/19473,813 08/07/19474,312 08/07/19474,521 11/09/19535,228 24/07/19545,514 20/08/195119,346 24/09/198420,151 19/07/1985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christophe Posted June 9, 2007 Share Posted June 9, 2007 And a nice Soviet way to wear it...Ch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev in Deva Posted July 1, 2007 Share Posted July 1, 2007 Hallo Gents,any opinions on this piece?http://cgi.ebay.com/MONGOLIAN-HONORARY-MED...1QQcmdZViewItemThe seller is offering 50 Mongolian pieces direct from Mongolia if anybody is interested.Kevin in Deva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 any opinions on this piece?A beauty!Sometimes, as I've also indicated in a different thread, the more "simple" medals don't get enough appreciation. Guess it's too easy to succumb to enamel addiction:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Haynes Posted July 2, 2007 Author Share Posted July 2, 2007 A pretty one, with some history on the ribbon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usairforce Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 very rare! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stogieman Posted July 5, 2007 Share Posted July 5, 2007 I also notice he's offering three rather rare documents that appear to be from the same recipient.......... individually... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulsterman Posted July 5, 2007 Share Posted July 5, 2007 Ack! Individually! History wrecker. Any of you read the article in Harpers, "The Man Who Would be Khan"? It gave a lot of great background detail on the Mongolian army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Haynes Posted February 7, 2008 Author Share Posted February 7, 2008 Just to keep the documentary record intact, a new low number data point (18009) for type 2.3 (the silvered bronze ugly one). A summary of "the neighborhood":Type 2.1 -- 10020-16999Type 2.2 -- unnumbered (the "China border" one)Type 2.3 -- 18009-23354 (still awarded?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulsterman Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 (edited) Well, Rick and I had a good day yesterday. T1V2This is what I got. Engraved serial # 9231, screwback...@ 1960ies? mayhap a long service award?By the way, are these the equal of the Soviet military combat medal? Edited September 8, 2008 by Ulsterman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Haynes Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 (edited) Well, Rick and I had a good day yesterday. T1V2This is what I got. Engraved serial # 9231, screwback...@ 1960ies? mayhap a long service award?Nice 'en. Long service is not a bad guess, but we'll never know until research clicks in.Since we have no documented data points between 7760 (1950) and 19346 (1984) there is quite a gulf. Again, research will fill all the blanks.By the way, are these the equal of the Soviet military combat medal?Something of a combination of the two? Direct parallels to the Soviet system are difficult, though there is some similarity (obviously). Edited September 8, 2008 by Ed_Haynes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulsterman Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Ah- so much to research, so few frequent flier miles! :banger: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usairforce Posted October 12, 2008 Share Posted October 12, 2008 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usairforce Posted October 12, 2008 Share Posted October 12, 2008 2 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