Claudius

Hello All; I'm trying to make sure I understand these correctly. Could someone tell me how the MP and SB were used? Which one was carried on the soldier's person? Where was the other one kept? What is the reason for the differences in the information contained in each? While NCOs and soldiers had MPs and SBs, did Officiers only have SB? Did they carry any other forms of identification? Thanks -Claudius

Doesn't that Wurtemburg have swords for a combantant? Or am I missing something. (maybe it didn't come without swords?) That's really neat about the Hungarian non-combattant medal.

I just wanted to toss in agree that Medals and documents that belong to one guy should stay together. I haven't seen groups "grow" too much. But I could see why that would be a neferious attraction to a seller looking to increase the value of the group by increasing its size. I would obviously be against that. Having said that, I have added representive medal in the ricker mount next to the docs to a guy However, when I sold that group, those medals went back into my collective pool of specimens. I know it was said that this is a dangerous practice. Adding items for your own benfit and trying to remember later when you come to sell them that they were added. But every collector should know their collection well enough not to forget these things. If you can't remember, log your collection and groups. That's what I do. How else would I know exactly how much I paid for something, and when I got it. I such a purist that I have a medal bar with the Centennial medal that is pulling out of the bar. It's pulling the bar string and stuffings with it. It's not too bad, but the bar would look a heck of a lot better if it was snugged up tight. I didn't want to mess with it and I was that way when I bought it, almost 20 years ago.

My vote is for the H&S on a CD. Thanks Cherpurko

I agree w/ Ed and Paddywack/Rick...I'll explain... First, ANY medals you put on this bar are not the ORIGINAL medals. We know the first two are the 1866 and 1870/71 campaign medals, but the original medals to this bar are gone. Why is this important? Just look at this bar. It has a very homemade look to it. It's aged and looks well worn, but where the medal hung, there isn't a lot of natural wear. Perhaps the owner was very pleased with his service in two wars and wanted to have this bar made very soon after the 1871 conflict. And he wore the bar, but he did not frequently hang the medals. Or maybe he wore the 1866 medal for years by itself and only when he was in the 1870/71 war did he have a mount made. The style was to have it possible to remove the medals and wear the bar as only a ribbon bar. Then when he died maybe that's how the family found them. The medals went one direction and the bar another. The point is we don't even know what condition the medals he owned were in. Do you get bright shiny medals or worn, tarnished ones? Yes, I'm a bit of a purist. Having said that, if representative medals are going to hang from under the bar, they need to be (in my opinion) without serious question, the correct ones. It would be difficult to argue anything but the 1866 and the Franco-Prussian War medals in the first two positions. The third is speculative. To put anything there is lend credibility to that medal on that medal bar. What would solve this is if even one example trio medal bar (with sown on medals) that would show these three medals together. That way, even if the original medals are gone, and there is still is a possibility that a different, green ribboned medal was originally in this place, there can be no argument that the trio being represented did exist. Now then, between all of us collectors, over all these years, has anyone ever collected a bar of this age that also had a dr. green ribbon mounted after the 1870/71 medal? It should be possible. It's unreasonable to say this is the only example. I often dislike it when I'm told by a seller that any inconsistencies or irregularities I find in his products is due to the fact that "its a very rare marking/die mold/grouping/(enter-what-you-want)". My collecting friend and I used to have a saying for this situation that we would privately share..."It is such a unique configuration that it was never made" (i.e. a never issued fake made to look even more valuable). I hope an (unadulterated) example can be found to lend credibility to the third medal's identity. Until then, this is my opinion. Oh BTW: That is a nice ribbon bar, even without the exact indentity of the third medal.

Missed it...what was clearly wrong with it?

I can't seem to get a photo to attach to my replies. The message is that the size of the photo is too large. "The total filespace required to upload all the attached files is greater than your per post or global limit. Please reduce the number of attachments or the size of the attachments."

Hello, (new member here); Any advice then on someone who is contemplating a purchase on the authenticity of a Bav. Pilot badge. Let's just suppose, I have a photo of the badge (the back). Would it be possible to be comfortable with the badge? I understand that without holding it, it would be impossible to be 100%, but a photo goes a long way. Thanks in advance. Bav_Pilot_badge_4_sale.htm