Ed_Haynes

Nice things, Dolf! You have launched this very nicely!!

I discussed this with "A Friend of Us All" in Ulanbaatar. He believed an identity can be assigned. Watch this space . . . . That last ribbon is very much tinkered together on my bar, but has what seems to be a French-style 2nd class (gold-rosette-silver) device. And just to see them side-by-side . . .

There hasn't been much focused discussion of these (to me at least) very confusing badges. Could we start some? Please?? Just to start it off, here is what my notes have on types and such details. I am sure these need MUCH help. Type 1 (E01, numbered) - Low = 203/High = 945 - 1940s? Type 2 (E02) - Low = ??/High = 1054 - 1950s? Type 3 (E03) - 1960s? Type 4 (heavy construction, reliev reverse, Soviet-made?) Type 5 (E04) - 1970s? Type 6 (E05) - 1980s? Type 7.1 (E06, unnumbered) - 1990s? Type 7.2 (E06, numbered) - Low = B-5/High = B-1266 - 1990s?

Congratulations, Glenn!

The additional complexity was that these badges were made up by so many European makers to "improve" on the quality and design of the Iranian insigniae. The standing lion/lying lion does seem to indicate no more than a civil/military division, and not a religious categorisation. As most civil awards went to foreign "experts" in Iran (most of whom were Christians) we see the source of this confusion.

And the best I could do with the stamp. Yes, Mongolian names are often more of a complexity that Soviet ones, but at least this isn't a mundane X Yovich Z certificate to a Russian. Thanks -- as always -- Rick!

Clarification #1

Oh . . . oh . . . simply lovely. And worth working to try to figure out. Shall confront boxes of files and back issues of JOMSA tomorrow!

I guess this is the best place to put this . . . ? In hopes that something interesting may surface from a decipherment of this one, from Ulanbaatar, . . . . Help please!

Since we may have missed/forgotten this thread, allow me to cross-reference here: http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=7781

Let me look, I may have that one. Most of the OMSA pieces in those days were pretty much written to formula and Dr. K contributed many pieces (usually with pretty good information). A shame most of this is lost. Though Bob Wehrlich "borrowed" some of it for his book. There are some other good sources, but I shall have to exchavate -- and they may be in Farsi. Could you post the group?

Agreed, except for the difference between the flat-back bronze and silver. The screw-post shortening is surely an issue for all Mongolian awards, as is the random variation in manufacturing (some of which we may otherwise want to see as a sub-sub-variety -- colours of enamel and all). But this is something we'd never know until we knew it.

Could be, could be . . . the asymmetical business makes a hard task worse.

Just to update known types/ranges: 1st award Type 1.1 (Screwback; 3 rivets; SN just below screwpost); Low = 50/High = 2794 Type 1.2 (as above, but with Cyrillic ?B? mintmartk); Low = 1871/High = 1901 Type 2.1 (Pinback 3 rivets; SN at 12 o'clock); Low = 3160/High = 4449 Type 2.2 (Pinback 2 rivets; SN at 5 o'clock); Low = 4685/High = 5380 Type 3.1 (pinback, bronze); Low = 5512/High = 5607 Type 3.2 (pinback, bronze, unnumbered, escapee?) 2nd award Screwback; 3 rivets; SN just below screwpost ? perhaps 40 awarded?; Low = 12/High = 398 3rd award Screwback; 3 rivets; SN just below screwpost ? perhaps 10-15 awarded?; Low = 5/High = 200 4th award Screwback; 3 rivets; SN just below screwpost ?perhaps 4-5 awarded?; Low = 3/High = 86

Current SB classification and ranges: Type 1 (screwback ? ~1000 awarded); Low = 2/High = 788; 1945-71 Type 2 (pinback - ~700 awarded); Low = 835/High = 2006; 1971-2002 Type 3.1 (coarse manufacture, numbered??); Low = ??/High = ??; 2002-?? Type 3.2 (coarse manufacture, unnumbered ? or merely unissued - escapee?); 2002?

Some weights, combining Jan's ("J"), Dolf's ("D"), "FJCP"'s ("F"), Bob's ("B") and mine ("E"). More to come, please . . . ??? Type 1.1 (Mongol legend, crude construction, mirror reverse, integral number) - Low = 9/High = 393 E ? 155 = 13.80 g E ? 380 = 12.95 g Type 1.2 (Mongol legend, crude construction, mirror reverse, engraved number) - Low = 396/High = 399 E - 396 = 11.35 g Type 2.1.1 (Mongol legend, mirror reverse, serial number at 10 o?clock) - Low = 32/High = 496 ??? Type 2.1.2 (Mongol legend, mirror reverse, serial number at 7 o?clock) - Low = 221/High = 4100 B - 534 = 15.2 g B - 791 = 16.0 g F - 865 = 16 g J - 1236 = 13 g F - 1507 = 16 g E ? 2932 = 16.65 g E ? 2949 = 16.40 g E ? 3017 = 15.40 g E ? 3035 = 13.50 g B - 3283 = 16.4 g D - 3344 = 16.80 g D - 3345 = 16.15 g B - 3382 = 14.7 g J - 3450 = 16 g J - 3519 = 19 g F - 3537 = 19 g Type 2.2.1 (Mongol legend, flat reverse, silvered brass, serial number at 8 o?clock) - Low = 865/High = 1806 ??? Type 2.2.2 (Mongol legend, flat reverse, silvered brass, serial number at 6 o?clock) - Low = 1124/High = 1958 E ? 1430 = 16.50 g B - 1800 = 15.2 g Type 2.2.3 (Mongol legend, flat reverse, silver) - Low = 4164/High = 4586 F - 4400 = 19.1 g E ? 4546 = 20.25 g Type 3 (Cyrillic legend, unnumbered) E ? 27.30 g E ? 28.55 g

Playing with my new scale today. Some interesting and weighty results on the few RBLs on "home leave". All Type 1 (screwback). 83 - 64.80 grams 198 - 61.90 grams 484 - 62.55 grams 1423 - 60.05 grams All weighed without screw nuts of course. Something to think about?? Tells us something about (1) variability in manufacture, (2) decline in standards over time, and (3) the dangers of expecting too much standardization?

Oh, yeah, oops, I forgot, sorry. Start from the Americas and find Cuba. http://www.coleccionesmilitares.com/cintas/cintasam.htm

See also http://www.coleccionesmilitares.com/cintas/cuba/cuba1.gif http://www.coleccionesmilitares.com/cintas/cuba/cuba2.gif http://www.coleccionesmilitares.com/cintas/cuba/cuba3.gif http://www.coleccionesmilitares.com/cintas/cuba/cuba4.gif and http://www.netdialogue.com/yy/America/Cuba/Castro/Cuba.htm Though -- unusually for Yuri! -- there's not much real information there, just some nice images. Someone with better Spanish than mine (= none) needs to look up "Decreto-Ley #30, de las Condecoraciones, Titulos Honorificos y Distinciones" (Gaceta Oficial de la Republica de Cuba of December 10, 1979). We need a good book on Cuban medals!! (Hint?)

The difference was, apparently, intended to be silver as against silver-gilt. If you squint real hard, even the most faded-out "silver" badge has some traces of gilt in the cracks and crannies. Yes, it is nice to see varieties becoming FEWER. Not many cases of that, I fear, though some things we presently think of "varieties" at present may well be only random variation in manufacturing batches. "Islands" of deviant manufacturing within an otherwise unbroken type. More knowledge, more knowledge, . . . !

Maybe, maybe . . . . 1- Hero Star 2- Orden "M?ximo G?mez" (I); Orden "M?ximo G?mez" (I); Orden "Camilo Cienfuegos" ; Orden "Combatiente de la Guerra de Liberaci?n" (I) 3- Orden "17 de Mayo" (??? - out of order on Lukas' site??); Orden "Combatiente de la Guerra de Liberaci?n" (II); Orden "Combatiente de la Guerra de Liberaci?n" (II); Medalla " Combatiente de la Lucha Clandestina" 4- Medalla "Combatiente de la Columna Uno Jos? Mart?"; Medalla "Eliseo Reyes" (I); Medalla "Combatiente Internacionalista" (I); Medalla "Por la Victoria Cuba R.P.A." (???) 5- Medalla Conmemorativa "40 Anniversario de FAR"; Order of Lenin (?); Order of the October Revolution (?); ??? (fraternal? Angolan??) Just my guesses . . . .

After long discussions on this topic with Bat in UB, I think we can conjoin D03a and D03b into a single Type 1 badge (low 14, high 975). The gilt is so thin (as on the Udarnik badge) that it often fades away. The case seems normal Mongolian. Nice one.

The new flag and formal renaming of the UAR (back) into the Republic of Egypt (though it had really been dead for some time) was 1 January 1972. Arab Republic of Egypt? 4 October 1984. Aren't you glad you asked . . . ?? See http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/eg.html and linked pages to keep the flags and names straight. Egypt isn't as much vexilogical fun as Iraq.

Lovely, all . . . and especially Guy!

No, Arab Republic of Egypt (1984--) is/was not the same as the United Arab Republic (1958-61). In 1972, it would have been just the plain old Republic of Egypt (1952-58 and 1972-84). Maybe the Soviets didn't know that?