Ed_Haynes

Just 90 years. Wow. Much to recall, much history . . . .

No, we all HUNGER for the stories that lurk, the history that hides. And you feed us Rick, you feed us.

Speaking of that, I don't think I ever put up the full Supyan

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=3728

research, did I?

Let me see . . .

Luckily for you all there is One-Eyed Free On-Site Ricky from whom you ALWAYS get what you "pay" for!

To be honest, I feel extremely guilty taking advantage of the "kindness of others" and don't feel you (Rick) should have to give it away for free. As the Wise Old Lady (Bessie Smith) said (and sang): "If I can't sell it, gonna keep sittin' on it, never catch me givin' it away."

Your ongoing translation help is MUCH appreciated! But I am very senesitive to not taking advantage of the saintly generosity of forum friends.

When I have 25-30 pages, . . . .

The final Indian order of wearing before Independence (Indian Army Order 752/1947) showed:

. . .

Order of British India

Kaisar-i-Hind Medal

Order of Burma (for good service)

Order of St. John

Title Badges

Albert Medal

Union of South Africa King?s Medal for Bravery, in gold

Distinguished Conduct Medal

Conspicuous Gallantry Medal

George Medal

. . .

(While some of these are irrelevant to India.)

Ahhhh . . . what, in English, is normally called a "Blue Hair".

Will dig out the PRO-exchavated notes and references later today and fill in gaps (pondering an OMRS article on the origins of the WWII campaign medals).

In brief: It was a simple desire to issue the medals as quickly as possible, for maximum post-war morale benefit, and the realization dawned that naming the medals would slow down their distribution. (In India, where most were named, the WWII medals wouldn't be issued until the early 1950s, after India was already a self-governing republic). I suspect that, had they decided to move ahead with naming, economic issues may have kicked in eventually, but the no-naming decision was made long before that stage (though Churchill, as I recall, didn't like it, he was overruled -- as he was on many wartime honours issues).

Thanks for this, Jim. While I am getting NOTHING in the way of new research (not from the Normal Source and not from the two alternate sources that I was testing), I am still sorting out old, untranslated materials. Even the well-known translator I was testing was a terrible disappointment.

A good question. I am sure stuff is being made and invented just to sell to the occupation forces. That is one of the things that people under foreign occupation have probably always done throughout history.

It does, however, have the feel of one of those things that would have been produced after Gulf War II, during the years of ongoing sanctions and bombing, that were intended to boost flagging civilian morale. It also reflects the low quality (= sanctions) of those late-Ba'ath years.

The problem is that we may never know. One of the common casualties of foreign invasion is the archives of the overthrown government, especially those things that are of no interest to the invaders and teh government they set up. I was able to get some copies of regulations and so on from a friend in Baghdad in the weeks just before the commencement of Gulf War III (and I'm sure those packets added entries to my FBI file), but the hoped-for "many more" copies of regulations never came, as his part of Badghad was pretty heavily "liberated" and I suspect he didn't survive the invasion. Getting information on these 1991-2003 civil awards was a particular goal, and they were many and generally unknown.

Maybe all us German collectors are not as dumb as we seem?

Happen to have done a bit of archive diving as well......

I don't think you -- or your ilk -- are dumb at all. (Individuals, not classes of people, are dumb.)

Great! And it is a much later decision that I'd have expected.

Now, the background to this??

You mean the clasps financial reasoning is wrong?

Best

Chris

I tend to agree with that guess. But until someone looks at the records and does the research, it is only a guess. Right now, I agree, but I'd feel better if someone looked at the records to confirm that.

I accepted the common knowledge about the reasons for lack of naming on WWII medals until I looked at the records.

As we know, most of us, there is no substitute for research.

Yes, the clasps are the easy part, I think. But has anyone ever looked at the records to confirm our guesses? I wonder if this guess is like the prevailing undocumented guess as to why WWII medals were not named: Finances (which is wrong, by the way).

The far more interesting question, and where this thread had started, I thought, lies in the decision to instituite the 1914 Star and, then, the 1914-15 Star.

Terrible. Terrible. Perhaps Putin will order the KGb or whatever they are called these days will do something.

Heck, the FSB probably did it, on hire, to make money . . . .

There have been a couple of articles on the OMRS Magazine about these/ this topic. Too bad the navy never implemented the bars. Imagine the collecting possibilities if they had!

But no one has looked at the records from a policy perspective, just a narrow numismatic focus. At ;least nothing I've seen.

It would be really nice if, someday, someone took the time and effort actually to look at the records regarding the policy dynamics that led to the creation of the British medals and clasps for the Great War. So many concoct theories without taking up the effort of looking at the records.

I suspect, somehow, that they already are in the possession of the "collector" who commissioned the theft.

They were probably there within a matter of hours.

It might be useful, though, if possible, to get and publicise the numbers of the awards? Though the distinctiveness of this group (or even of the broken single items) might render this unnecessary.

This is absolutely shameful. Most likely a targeted robbery-for-hire to service a collector's greed? At least there was no accompanying homicide, as is becoming all too common?

Very interesting, Lorenzo. Thanks for posting these.

What possible reference do you have for a 'commander' grade? What your suppliers in Baghdad told you? I have seen nothing in the regulations addressing THAT????

I'm sure they could make it up to order for the occupation troops?

I am sure that if some phaleristically inclined German gefreiter in Paris in 1942 really wanted a pinback L?gion d'Honneur '1st class', then some enterprising chap in Paris could have cooked it up for him? For a price. Ah, capitalism, even under occupation?

Oh . . . those are pretty . . . . . . :orgasm:

Standard sources give this. British Battles and Medals, even Medals Yearbook. What else do you need to know?

Rather complex . . . but thanks for asking . . . .

Until 1923, they were to have been worn around the neck. By then, two problems had coalesced:

-- The wearing of miniature medals had become common in India. Where did these awards fit and where should they be worn? (And the mint had begun selling miniatures and showing a tidy profit from doing that.)

-- The ribbons had been made in China. With the rising tide of the Chinese Civil War, the availability of ribbons had become a problem and ribbons had become hard to procure (a problem which those of us who collect these things can share?).

The decision was thereupon made to allow wear from normal breast suspension as an option. Most did this. Though the circumstances under which they could be worn then became an issue (and the government soon surrendered).

And the ITBs were given their place within the order of wearing, though these were (strangely, or NOT), published only in the GoI and not in the LG notified orders of wearing.

I am writing all this up right now, either for the OMRS journal (who may not be interestesd?) or for the JOMSA (who may not be interested?).

Hope this helps, ITBs are such great fun, such rich history, and so (studiously and intentionally) unappreciated . . . but maybe I shouldn't say that out in public??

Regarding the debate we had a few weeks ago about the need or not to open a Quiz Volume 2 for a more convivial use, saving bandwith, etc...; I propose to take the opportunity of next 1st January (2008) to open a new thread that will be the "Soviet & Eastern Block Quiz 2008" !!!

I'll open this new Quiz on 1st January 2008, in a separate new thread. I hope it will contribute to attract more Members than the present one, that maybe could be now quite "heavy" to consult... Let's see this in a 2 months time.

Thanks to all for your contribution to the success of this little game.

Cheers.

Ch.

Well done, Christophe. 100000% agreement.

And celebrate, also, Christophe's CORRECT ANSWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1- Rai Bahadur -- Rai Sahib Bhupendra Nath Banarji, Deputy Commissioner of Police, South District, Calcutta, Bengal

Not. No. 316-H of 3 June 1931

F&P 94-H/1931

"Rai Sahib B. N. Banarji is an Imperial Police Officer having been promoted to that rank in 1926, and having acted as Deputy Commissioner of Police, Calcutta, since 1924. For the last six years he has held charge of the South District and throughout the period of his administration has been characterised by initiative and thoroughness. He did exceptionally well in the communal troubles in Calcutta in 1926 and has handled the civil disobedience movement in his district with firmness and success. [!] He has throughout his career proved himself a loyal, industrious, and successful police officer. He received his present title in 1927 and has justified his advancement to the higher title for which he is now recommended.

2- Rai Sahib -- Babu Bhupendra Nath Banarji, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Calcutta, Bengal

Not. No. 21-H of 1 January 1927

F&P 71(2)-H/1926

"Babu Bhupendra Nath Banarji joined the Bengal Police in 1905 and secured promotion to the rank of inspector in 1914 and Assistant Commissioner in 1919. Since 1914, when his services were transferred tro the Calcutta Police, his work has been exceptionally good, and has been distinguished by unusual ability, energy, integrity, efficiency and reliability. Whilst holding charge of Calcutta during the communal riots of 1926, during the first phase of which he was seriously injured in the performance of his duty, he displayed great presence of mind, courage, and perserverance. These qualities and the excellent work done by him at every stage of his career render him worthy of the distinction recommended."

3- George V Jubilee, 1935

On roll (p. 58, sl. 459) as "Banarji, Bhupendra Nath - Rai Bahadur - Indian Police, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Calcutta".

While we really should ignore stuff from Other Fora, some problems persist. Nice to be among (mostly) gentlemen here.