speedytop

Hi, https://www.weitze.n...und__15979.html Uwe

Deutscher Sängerbund, Silberne Ehrennadel für 25 Jahre Mitgliedschaft Central German choir association, silver honorary needle for 25 years membership Uwe

Naxos, I nearly always accept your transcription, but not here! Your text: Nach 14 Monaten kotzte er ein Stück Hosenträger aus von 2,5 cm Correct is: Nach 14 Monaten hustet er ein Stück Hosenträger aus von 2,5 cm The result is the same, but in more polite words. ... and after 14 month he coughs up a piece of his suspenders .. Uwe

Hi john, military (Army, Air Force) or civilian (Forestry service, Hunting Association)? Uwe

Medal "Sportfest der Waffenbrüderschaft" > sports meeting of brotherhood of arms: Unfortunately no date, maybe in the 80s:

Sonntag, den 15.9.1918, im Felde. Herrn Zahlmeister Paetzke für seine treue Mitarbeit beim Bataillon 33 Zum freundlichen Gedenken an seinen Kommandeur XXXXX Hauptmann

Sports badges in cloth: bronze, silver and gold for colour comparison:

I want to show here athletic honorings and documents in no particular order. Everyone can add his medals and documents. Nationales Olympisches Komitee der DDR (NOK), Ehrenplakette (badge of honor) "mens fervida in corpore lacertoso" (an overflowing spirit in a muscular body). This might probably be a specimen with the number and the engraving on the reverse:

Interesting, to see different crests of one pope, Leo XIII. Uwe

Here it is, there is a round notch: Uwe

Could this be helpful? http://www.austro-hu...dett.html#_edn2 Uwe

17. März 1891 http://www.munzinger...ler/0/6782.html http://en.wikipedia....ns_von_Schiller Uwe

This must be the oldest one, Leo XIII. A. CERBARA, ROMA VIA CONDOTTI, 23,P.P. Complete with cross and minature. Uwe

"He got both grades?" No, only one was allowed. Uwe

Not "signed by the Chief of Staff" "Für den Chef des Stabes" [i.A.] > signed in by proxy of the Chief of Staff Uwe

No! Uwe

Hi Christer, I found nothing about this very special case. I think, that he got no new wound badge. It is possible, to have wound badges from two wars. There are several possible combinations. Earlier wounds were counted. But you could only wear one, the latest and highest badge. You could not wear any longer the previous wound badges from WWI or the Spanish Civil War. Uwe

Hi Matthew, it is a common mark. G. LOOS DIR Gottfried Bernhard Loos, Direktor der Loos´schen Medaillen-Prägeanstalt (head/director of the Berlin Medallic Mint). http://www.numispedi...tfried_Bernhard http://www.smb.museu...ontent=0&side=0 Uwe

It is written: 3tes Reformationsjubiläum 1817 3rd jubilee of the Reformation 1817 It is meant the Reformation in 1517 (Luther), 300 years ago. Therefore it is a protestant cross, religious. Uwe

Phil, "... then I class the medal as Original." Do whatever you want. For me, and not only for me, there is a difference between original, copy and fake/forgery. A piece made after the award period could not be an original. This is my firm belief. It could be a copy, with easy detectable differences. It could be a fake/forgery, not direct and easy to detect. See for example the Rounder KC, detectable only with very special material examinations. Several collectors are not willing to differentiate between a copy and a fake/forgery, therfore I normally use the terms "original" and "not original". If you can not accept this, then another discussion with me is not required. "... so then none of us would have any 1914 EK's made during the TR era in our collections." It is not forbidden, to have "not originals" in a collection. Uwe

Phil, it could not only be based on the translation. I really know, that my English is not good. I don't say it is a fake! I don't call it a fake, because the difference is visible. I say, that it is not an awarded piece. I think, in my opinion, I believe etc., that it is not an original, made up to 1918. And I don't know, in what period they werde made. Please remember, it is now nearly 100 years ago!!! To be precise, 93 years All these pieces had been copied after 1918; in the 20s, the 30s, the 40s, the 50s, later and up to now. I don't have proofs for my opinion, only my experience. Once more, don't put words into my mouth, which I had never said. Uwe

Hi Phil Steele, in your comment is so much wrong, that it is not easy for me, to answer. "I differ strongly to your opinion that any award made after the end of hostilities in 1918 is not original" Wrong! I wrote here about the Hanseatenkreuze. The iron cross award period ended in 1924. "That is a big call saying the crosses from Herr Weitze are fake" Wrong! I said, that these crosses are not awarded pieces. I'm sure, that not awarded original crosses exist. I think, with a normal ring. "Now you are also saying that crosses with the normal round rings as shown on Hueskens photo are ok" Wrong! copy > with a simple ring. And when I write: in my opinion ..., or: I think that ..., or: It is my firm belief ..., you should not declare it as factual claim! Please be precise. Uwe

Hi, everybody is free to believe, what he want to believe. Knowledge is better than a believe. I can definitely say, that the 3 Hanseatenkreuze in Post 6 are awarded originals. With the flat oval upper ring. I know that. Per definition we can find originals only in the award period. The award period for Hanseatenkreuze ended in 1918. All later produced pieces are not originals. This is my personal opinion, this is that what I believe. It could be the same with the Memelland-Medaille. Several collectors say, that there is only one original medal type. I don't believe that, because I can show 5 different medal types in contemporary sources (here in GMIC). When I look in older sources, I can only find crosses with the (original) flat oval ring or crosses with a normal small round ring, see Post 5, the Hüsken cross. There had been the same problems in former times, see for example HuS 1940, page 153: "Oben in dem angeprägten Öhr ist ein gewöhnlicher Bandring mittels eines kleinen Verbindungsringchens eingehängt. (Die vielen etwas schlanker und dünner ausgeführten Nachbildungen haben dagegen eine gewöhnliche Drahtöse mit einfachem Ring.)" ... Nachbildung > copy ... mit einfachem Ring > with a simple ring This is definitely a copy, you can see it on the center medallion: http://www.ordensamm.../html/vs80.html And this is the same copy type, Post 13 and the following: http://gmic.co.uk/in...__1#entry437814 Is it a pure coincidence, that there is the same flat ring? "Weitze ... are they copies too? It is my firm belief, that the two crosses from Weitze are not awarded crosses. Hi Phil Steele, "... after 1945 awards from this war were not made again until the release of the 57 versions so there were no replacement awards for lost or damaged originals." Do you really believe that? Why we can find several catalogues with offers for post WWII copies before 1957? For example Sedlatzek 1956: "Originale wie verliehen!" originals as awarded! Uwe

Hi, "... made for sometime after the war" After the war > not original > copy or fake "... is flawed thinking as the ring is not an integral part of the medal itself." Have a look on originals. Both rings are soldered. You must cut them, to replace them. Why should anyone do that? "Why you think it's a fake?" I think, that it is not an original piece (a copy). We can clearly see the differences, therefore it is not made to fool someone (= fake/forgery). Awarded originals have the flat oval upper ring. With this flat but not flat oval ring it looks more like an original. The upper ring looks for me like a flat washer. Therefore my personal opinion: pieces with the flat ring (not flat oval) are not originals. And yes, I also think, like Sascha, that these are recent made pieces. Uwe

These are original awarded pieces: There are several differences. For example compare the 9 in 1914 with the 9 in the other Hanseatenkreuze. The main difference is the upper ring. Awarded originals have a flat oval ring, see the embedded picture. Uwe