sebastian

Tkany you for your help.

Hello, I'm trying to complete the british WWII map case with all its contents. I've already bought the map case and the Ivorine "A" Mk IV rectangular map protractor. But now I'm faced with the question of what kind of pens fit into it. I had already searched for information about these pens on internet, but was not very successful. So far, I’ve been able to find out that the map case contained one HB graphite pencil and three coloured (green, blue and red) chinograph pencils. I've also be able to find out that the HB graphite pencil sholud be signed with Stationary Office (S - crown – O) mark and that it should have no coat of gloss paint on the outside, but its outside supposed to be left in plain wood. Is that correct? What about the other three, which are supposed to be chinograph pencils? Is it correct that they supposed to be of green, red and blue colours? How should the correct british WWII coloured chinograph pencil looks? Does anyone have an example of such a pencil in collection and and would be willing to post a photo of it to show how such a pencil should actually look like. Thanks for any help, Sebastijan

Hi, I came across this interesting photo. It was taken in the village Opatje selo in the vicinity of Trieste (today in Slovenia). I guess it was taken between may and june 1945. My attention was drawn to the flag on the building. I was able to identify the flag as the Royal Banner of Scotland. I also find out that this flag is used officially at the Scottish royal residences when the Queen is not in residence and that several Great Officers of State who officially represent the Monarchy in Scotland are permitted to use the Royal Banner of Scotland. But I couldn’t find anything about its military use. I will be grateful for any information about its military use. Is this flag traditionally hung by Scottish regiments (there are Scottish soldiers on this picture – IMO from London Scottish or Scots Guards, who were at that time in the Trieste area)? Why there is only the Royal Banner of Scotland and no Junion Jack? There is also a road sign “61 MAIN”, which can be seen on that photo. Any idea about its meaning? Best regards, Sebastijan

Hello! On internet I came across this picture, which shows british troops in the suburb of Triest (Italy) in May 1945. On the back side of the tank there is visibile a tactical sign. It seems, that this sign consists of a horse over the number 74. I have made some research and found that the white horse on the green background was sign of the 9th Armoured Brigade. What do you think, is it the sign of the 9th Armoured Brigade? I will be gratefull for any oppinion. Thanks in advance. Sebastijan

Hello, I'm looking for Italian royal navy submarine badge for my collection and have opportunity to by the badge which is shown on this picture. I will be grateful for your help about this badge. What is your opinion about it, is it original period badge? Thanks in advance, Sebastijan

These medalions are realy not medals. As Gordon Craig and Kevin in Deva have alredy said, they are mementos or souvenirs. In mean time I have found out that these medalions are part of keychains. Here in the following picture you can see how such keychain looks

Here is my small contribution to this topic. Some badges of navy military schools: 1. command staff school of operatics 2. political academy 3. naval command staff academy 4. naval academy (period form 1972 to 1974) 5. naval academy (period from 1974 to 1991) (I have also found information that this is badge of naval tehnical academy) 6. naval NCO tehnical school (period from 1970 to 1974) 7. naval NCO tehnical school (period from 1974 to 1976) 8. naval NCO tehnical school (period from 1976 to 1990)

Here is scan of the picture from Front magazine (October 1990) which shows flag of marine infantry unit. On the streamer there is name of that unit - 472. brigada mornaričke pešadije. I'm sorry that I can't make better scan of that picture on which the unit name can be seen clearer. Regards, Sebastijan

Administrator, may I ask you to remove my first record which I add by mistake without the picture. Thanks. And there is picture of the reverse of that order. I will be grateful for any opinion.

May I ask you for your oppinion about this order. The left leg of the front man and the arm of the woman in the middle looks strange to me (I signed them with red). The star is not well filled with enamel. Are these sings reason for caution or are these only effects of different mould using in the production process of that order.

May I ask you for your oppinion about this order. The left leg of the front man and the arm of the woman in the middle looks strange to me (I signed them with red). Are these sings for caution or are these only effects of different moulds using in the production of that order.

Thank you for your opinions Andreas and Darell. Regards, Sebastijan

Hello! I'm not familiar with soviet medals, because my interests are focused in yugoslavian orders, medals and badges. I have opportunity to buy a medal for liberation of Belgrade. I know that there are copies of that medal in market. So I would like to ask you what is your opinion about that madal, is it original or copy: I will be greateful for any opinion. Best regards, Sebastijan

My opinion is that this is an early type of yugoslavian made case for order of partisan star.

It seems that there we have in general two different groups of those documents. In first group I will put wlodzimierz's and mine. They are issued by the federal Union of war veterans ? ex partisans. As we can see, they also have Yugoslavian coat of arms and signature of Tito and Rankovic. As wlodzimierz already said, they were issued for fallen. But I see the distinction with the Befehl227's document. On wlodzimierz's and mine states that they were issued for those who joined comunist party of Yugoslavia in battle against occupants and their helpers (accessories). On the other hand, on the Befehl227's document states only that it was issued for the victim of occupant's terror who lost his live. And there is another important difference. The Befehl227's document was issued by the Union of war veterans of the republic of Bosnia and Hercegovina (in former Yugoslavia there were six federal units ? republics). It also has the coat of arms of that federal unit (not coat of arms of Yugoslavia). And it was not signed by Tito and Rankovic, but by representatives of that federal unit. Here I posted another document which belongs to my colleague. I will put it in the second group together with Befehl227's document. It has the same design, it was issued by the Union of war veterans of the one of yugoslavian federal unit (in that case it was Slovenia ? see the coat of arms printed on the top of that document) and there states that it was issued to Anton Lisac, who lost his life as the victim of occupant's terror. His story is: he was deported by Italians to the camp on the Rab island in Adriatic sea where he died. So, my conclusion is, that there we have two diferent groups of those documents. Maybe we can say that the documents from the first group were issued to fallen combatants and the documents from the second group were issued to non-combatants, who lost their lives as occupant's victims. And in every group there are documents written in different languages (Slovenian, Croatian or Serbocroatian and we must mention also Macedonian) and also in different writing: latin or cyrilic. I know that my English is not perfect and that someone will find better translation of the text on those documents, but I hope that you will understand what I was talking about. Regards.