Ed_Haynes

Having obtained his third class matriculation at the University of the Panjab in 1912, Ram Rakha seems to have entered pretty directly into British service. On 7 January 1913, he received the first of his (eventually twenty surviving) "chits", testimonials of good behavior and competent performance from a string of British engineering officials. These would stretch through 1923 and -- as this first specimen does -- attest to ". . . a young man of sober habits . . . . [Who] is hard-working & intelligent & also writes a good hand . . . ."

Education, part two:

One thing that makes the group espoecially interesting is the quantity of documentation that came with it. Not normal stuff (no BEM certificate, for example), but exotic and "real" stuff. It came all rolled up inside a tin tube and not in the best of condition. Some samples follow. His education, part one:

Head Clerk Lala Ram Rakha Singh, Military Works Service Now properly dressed: 1- BEM (civil) - "LALA RAM RAKHA" 2- BWM - "RAM RAKHA, M.W.S." 3- Victory - "RAM RAKHA, M.W.S." 4- IGS 08 "Afghanistan NWF" - "CLK. RAM RAKHA, M.W.S." B.E.M. is in London Gazette 12 June 1941 to "Lala Ram Rakha, Head Clerk, Office of the Commander, Royal Engineers, Waziristan District, North-West Frontier Province" - the recommendation has not been captured but it lies (absconding) in PSV file 10(2)-H/1941 in New Delhi - I am 100% certain it is a retirement gift for someone whose salary was below the threshold for a title. Maybe not "sexy" by all tastes, but this is the person whose work made the empire function!

Yeah, these new Baltic states are pretty "out of the closet" about such things. I could go on . . . .

All of sub-Saharan Africa (except maybe South Africa) is a real problem zone. Specimens are scarce, reliable information is even scarcer. Megan -- http://www.medals.org.uk/ -- has some of the best information and images around and what we have at the OMSA site -- http://www.omsa.org/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=679 -- is, at best, fragmentary. Help!

Me too. Was hoping to learn from the learned wise ones.

To drag us back toward topic -- and we are really not THAT far off -- all of this, the new Air Force doo-dad and the overlapping mess of awards and policies for service in Iraq and Afghanistan, just show how the US awards "system" is like a runaway locomotive, with no planning, no direction, no forethought. The designers and the implementers of policy are simply designing THINGS on a computer with no understanding of phaleristic or heraldic standards (much less coherent and logical award regulations). However much people may (reasonably) complain about recent UK, Canadian, Australian, ____ awards, they have a way to go to descend to the depths of the USA.

And here is an effort at "clarification". ACM_and_ICM_Implementing_Instructions_CHANGE_1.pdf

Absolutely, Eric, my understanding is that it is: 1- Expedtiionary 2- Iraq 3- Afghanistan Pick two. At least that is how it was (seems to have been) at first. The planning and forethought seems scant (on medals too). Obviously, there was no original intent of instituting the two specific theater medals and using the one-size fits all expeditionary medal. Moreover, I don't think there was the belief that these wars would go on the way they have. So far, I have heard nothing on campaign stars (or redeployment numbers, like the UN medals?). As multiple tours, in either or both, become universal, here's something else that wants reexamination.

And of course the venerable National Defence Service Medal. Taken together, these make the design and execution of the new Air Force gong look professional and artistic.

For Iraq

For Afghanistan

Yes, remember there are TWO medals for The War Against Terror, an "expeditionary" medal and a "service" medal. In additional to the National Defense Service Medal and the separate medals for Iraq and Afghanistan. Much confusion has ensued.

Thanks, Michael, will have to check the post-1945 IALs in detail. Should have done that when they were all at hand but I thought for a bit that he might be with the 3/17th (as there was a MC VCO over there by the same name), but he seems to have gone to the 4/17th on their raising 1 October 1940 (as a raising Jemadar).

Remember that, since it was "East of Suez", most of the cost of the pervious war was paid from Indian revenues and not part of the UK budget (and probably not in these figures). But, taking just that, and using GDP to index the conversion, that ?40,000,000 in 1920 would be ?8,199,156,662.76 in 2005. See: http://measuringworth.com/calculators/ukcompare/

And the final chunk-o-documents. http://faculty.winthrop.edu/haynese/VBL2.pdf Enjoy! (Enjoy?)

A nice one, fellow worker. Thanks for sharing.

Yes, a clear closeup scan of the serial number and mintmark area would help.

Great images. Thanks for taking the time and effort to post them.

In short: Invasion, occupation, establishment of a foreign-derived puppet government, rising (and untimately successful) resistance to the foreigners and their hand-picked rulers. While more dangerous that the usual Wikipedia pieces, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ir...hy_and_republic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_hist....281918-1932.29 For example, the "revolt" certainly wasn't over in 1922. It was just that, from a British perspective, "victory" was declared (without benefit of an aircraft carrier) but the fighting continued pretty much unabated until the overthow of the Hashemite rulers and the expulsion of the British in 1958.

Good point, Megan, and I, too, an enjoying these displays from an objective distance.

Sad, for this seems not to be much better than what we get in Hieronymussen, Rosignoli, or even Dorling or Werlich. Someone needs to do better!

I found a couple of copies (one is gone now ) on abebooks.com .

See also: http://www.uniforminsignia.net/index.php?p=state&id=97