Jump to content

Trooper_D

Active Contributor
  • Posts

    543
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Trooper_D

  1. The more I hear of this system, the better I like it
  2. Thanks for the confirmation and further explanation. Yes, I can quite see that not having to carry the heaviest of your kit would put a spring in your step
  3. Thanks for these interesting posts, Chris, but I am puzzling over how having one of the two Legionnaires mounted would improve the pace of a Legion column. I would have thought that the column could go no faster than the walking men, thus it would be no faster than if they were all walking. Unless this is about saving the energy of the man who is mounted, thus ensuring that the column could march for longer in the day, even if not faster, than if they were all walking.
  4. ... which would be absolutely right for a ring. So he wasn't the graf's younger son who ran away for some adventure, then I wouldn't read too much into the box in which the sealing wax impression was housed as this is the kind of thing I would expect the aforementioned jeweller to present it in to the new owner of the ring. There is no reason why the impression may have been given as a keepsake, though. I think that the mystery remains unresolved, although identifying the coat of arms would be a step forward, perhaps.
  5. When one commissions a jeweller to make a signet- or seal-ring, along with the finished item one is typically given an impression in sealing wax to show that the finished ring produces the desired heraldic device. This is one of those. It looks like the kind of coat of arms that a noble family might bear. Was your legionnaire a 'von'? Edited to add: the dimensions of the impression would help determine whether it was produced by a ring. What are they, please?
  6. The answer is going to be provided by identifying the ribbon of the second cross, isn't it?
  7. This is not what you asked but, in case you didn't know, the hallmarks are for the Birmingham Assay Office and dated 1884. See this link, https://www.silvermakersmarks.co.uk/Dates/Birmingham/Cycle 1875-1899.html I can't identify the maker's name.
  8. The lack of sharpness compared with the Dorotheum example, even taking into account wear, makes me wonder if this is not a cast copy*. The plug hole is strange. All the examples in this thread have a suspension attached (soldered?) to the top of the medal rather than having a hole piercing the medal. Has this hole been made in a medal which had the top suspension removed? Furthermore, the plug appears to be of the same metal as the medal. In addition, it is almost invisible on the reverse. All of this makes me wonder whether it is a cast copy of an original which had its top suspension removed and a hole drilled through it (why?). * it has a number of the characteristics of an electrotype copy but I can't believe that anyone would go to the trouble.
  9. Gordon The Library of John F. Kennedy has got this seriously mixed up. The Grand Cross of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre looks like this: Source: https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/order-holy-sepulchre-vatican-grand-1908172190 As the Library's catalogue entry text says (my emphasis), So why would it be presented by the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem? This should have jumped out at the cataloguer, one would have hoped. That having been said, your advice to consult the office of the aforementioned Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem about the Order which was actually awarded seems like a good idea.
  10. The badge says Bombay Light Horse and, based on the link below, that seems right, https://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/auction-catalogues/bosleys-military-auctioneers/catalogue-id-srbos10016/lot-b3904555-4341-492d-864d-a6f800dbc6f6
  11. Do you have the dimensions of this badge? As the surface of this example is uniformly flat, I find it hard to believe that this particular one was made from a coin. However, if we know its diameter, it will be possible to identify the coin it might be fashioned from. From my memory, the only one that might have been big enough would have been a 'half crown', which was made of silver, at that time, but was only 32mm in diameter (according to Wikipedia) so I wonder if it would have been big enough for this purpose.
  12. If the tunnel was closed off and the air in it used up by the unfortunate soldiers, I wonder if that might have created conditions whereby everything would have been preserved as they were on the day of the bombardment. The article also refers to mummification present in the bodies of, I think, the soldiers dug out of the tunnel found in the 1970s, another indication of optimal conditions for preservation. All of that being the case, I suppose it might be that items found in the tunnel would have appeared in auction houses - or the 'Bay - before long.
  13. A fascinating story, Claudius. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. For those who are interested, it concerns the fatal entombment of soldiers of the 10th and 11th companies of the 111th Reserve Regiment, during a French bombardment on 4 May 1917, and the recent rediscovery of the tunnel they were trapped in. Worth reading. Edited to add: I don't completely understand the seeming indifference of the German War Graves Commission (VDK) to identifying and reinterring the bodies.
  14. Thank you for this further information, which does suggest what was behind the official thinking. However, as you have indicated, this prohibition doesn’t appear completely logical.
  15. This has been a very interesting thread and I join Graham and Ian in giving kudos to Utgardloki for correcting this misconception. However, it raises a new question, does it not? Why should members of the Nazarenes - a Christian sect - be prevented from being awarded the Karl-Truppenkreuz?
  16. Thanks for posting what is, perhaps, the final piece in the puzzle. This has been an interesting thread which has thrown a much needed light on the role of American volunteer medics in France before the official entry of the USA into the Great War.
  17. Thank you for the link to 'The Lost Legion'. What a shame it doesn't have an index! However, the search function indicates that there were no mention of our man in the text. He does appear in the Roll of Honour, however, which shows the names of the 1,500 who served. Interestingly, where appropriate, the MC (and other decorations earned) is shown as a post-nominal, giving an indication of how many were awarded, https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015039349421&view=1up&seq=413 The page linked to belowe shows the abbreviations used in the book for decorations awarded, showing the range of British decorations awarded to these American doctors (one tiny quibble, it lists the MC under 'Decorations for Valor', whereas we have identified that it wasn't awarded exclusively for bravery), https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015039349421&view=1up&seq=432 Thank you, also, for the link to the pamphlet 'The Army Medical Corps Reserve in World War I'. Those who prefer to read it on screen, rather than downloading it, maybe interested in this link https://alphaomegaalpha.org/pharos/PDFs/2018/Winter/2018-1-Wood.pdf
  18. Dom Thank you for posting the link to what looks like a fascinating paper, which I have saved for later reading. I suspect that, once it has been digested, it will give us much better insights into what seems to be a little known aspect of Anglo-American cooperation during the Great War.
  19. I wonder what kind of numbers these badges were made in? My point being, if the production run was in the many 10s or even 100s we, perhaps, shouldn’t expect to see the same quality as we find with Orders.
  20. Thank you for this interesting account. One correction, if I may. The Agnes Fyfe Hunter you have identified is, I believe, actually the aunt of his wife - not his wife (if she was, she would have been 58 when she had their daughter). Furthermore, they married in 1920 not 1926. It was the 'aunt' who died in 1946 not the wife (who died in 1968). The actual dates can be gleaned from the following extract of the marriage register (rather than post the whole sheet, I have posted the extract below and put the date in blue) and the probate register, None of this detracts from a great piece of research!
  21. Thank you for your kind words, Dom. It sounds as if you have a lot on your plate at the moment (9" and 8"? Yikes!) so stay safe - and warm!
  22. Dom In the second post in this thread, I pointed you to a post you had made in the Great War Forum. I assumed that you would have read the next post in that thread, which answered your question. In it, the poster said that the war diary entry for 30 Sept 1918 noted that "Lt Raymond US Medical Corps is attached for duty". Here is that entry, from the war diary I downloaded using the link in the post from Great War Forums I have quoted above, We know from earlier posts in this thread that he was attached to a hospital when he first join the British forces in Feb 1917. He then went to join the US forces in March 1918. As for why he was awarded the MC, why do we need to look beyond what was said in the document, that it was awarded for 'meritorious service'? In effect, it was a thank you for serving with British forces twice, the first time before the USA's entry into the war. If it had be for an act of bravery, I am sure it would have stated such on the The real question here, I believe, is why he was attached to a British front line unit rather than continuing to serve in an orthopaedic hospital as he had been previously.
×
×
  • Create New...