Ed_Haynes

Document - 2

Document - 1

1- Order of the Polar Star (tytpe 3.1), # 5401, 20 October 1956

2- Honorary Medal of Labor (type 1.2) # 2614, 11 September 1946

Award information for the Order of the Badge of Honor.

Award information.

Document for the Order of the Red Banner of Labor.

1- Order of the Red Banner of Labor (# 537864, 1971)

2- Order of the Badge of Honor (# 1362077, 1976)

Award information for the second Medal for Valiant Labor.

Award information for the Order of the Red Banner of Labor.

And the award information.

Booklet for the first Medal for Valiant Labor.

1- Order of the Red Banner of Labor (# 1061929, 1976)

2- Medal for Valiant Labor (not numbered, 1973)

3- Medal for Valiant Labor (not numbered, 1982)

Absolutely, Dave! I fear Rick hit the nail on the head when he said:

Nice uniform jammed full of holes so not nice any more.

Plus some random medals.

I have been told that the Russian govermnment is bringing pressure, "Southebys-style", on this auction and that thr Soviet pieces may be pulled. Does anyone know?

Uhhhhh, given the MINISCULE numbers of VCs awarded to date, and especially recently, this doesn't seem... rational to me that Commonwealth countries which must (sniff) not forebear to continue with "British" awards would keep the same system and the same names BUT boondoggle Separate-and-Distinct local versions--with whole new bureaucratic procedures and wildly different standards, one can only anticipate-- thus making a further mockery of the "same" decoration.

It's either a VC... or it ISN'T.

And Good God-- how many Victoria Crosses is Ottawa ever intending to hand out, given the squelching of combat decorations existing NOW?

Part of what is happeniong is the struggle to retain ties to tradition even while asserting some degree of independence and autonymous control. While India and Pakistan (who, constitutionally, had no choice) came up with new top awards, places like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand want to "have it both ways".

Indeed. Except for:

Why would a Soviet officer receive a Polar Star - mostly civilian award?

It was more complex than this, and the Polar Star was an award for both civilians and the military.

I think the general sense was that it was an invented set.

That is what he told me, Bob. I think he regrets it now, though.

Thanks, Rick.

A really interesting one!!

The qualifications for these WWII medals was unbelievably complex, open to interpretation, and written and applied differently dependending on the force involved. Just focusing on India, I have been trying to sort the qualifications out for some time and am close, after several years and a lot of time in various archives, to getting the WWII medals under control (except the Defence Medal, which was especially complex for Indian troops).

Short version: Nothing is as simple a sit appears at first glance!

No, this seems to be the standard naming style for WWII Stars (in India, post-1947 meaning). While most "British" collectors ignore this fact, most (around 85%) WWII medals to Indians were named. The medals were made in the Calcutta Mint and named and awarded beginning in the mid-1950s.

Yours seems a pretty standard specimen. Unfortunately, not much information is available, especially as he is artillery.

Nice.

Not the best scan, but here my privately Indian named Burma Star

5236 GNR. Tokh Ram R.I.A.

As far as I can tell from this scan, this is not "privately named", but is the normal official style of naming for WWII Stars. What makes you say "privately"?

And, if we can ever crack into the records, this could well be a "someone".

(Ask me in a few weeks.)

And we have . . . <drum roll> . . . a new record low number.

(Amazing how easy we are to please?)