Ed_Haynes

Not in any way an obscure auction house, but some really nice material from an old collection. Surprised to see it coming up, though. But, then, numismatics is not phaleristics.

No problem Ed! I also like the fact that, similar to the VC, these were made from captured guns

Cheers.

Yes, and issued only because Roberts had all his royal friends bring prettly shameful pressure to overcome the legitimate opposition of the government. Originally, they didn't even want the medal, just two clasps to the IGS 54. But because "Bobs" was "Bobs" and unafraid to use his titled chums to twist arms in the Government of India, the campaign was heavily and doubly medalled (and standards for gallantry awards were lowered as well). It all sounds very contemporary.

For you Ed...

Thanks, so many of these are unnamed. All the naming seems to have been done regimentally. I can say a good bit about Indian Army, but know nothing about the patterns of naming to natives (of the British Isles).

Nice, and the paperwork really adds interest. Is the KtoK Star named?

Just gotta love some the names for Mongolian awards.

Yes, "The Order of the Vajra". In English that is. The Mongol name is as yet elusive.

A closely related field to phaleristics, vexology:

http://www.fotw.net/flags/mn.html

In response to a PM, I bump this thread.

Very nice, Ed!

What are they made of, brass? And the stones, what are they, any idea?

Dolf

1- Material - I assume this is some low-end gold or silver gilt. I have not taken it to a local jeweler to test; not so sure I'd trust them. I assume it was made in whatever Bjork (Battushig says Bock ? but were they still in business that late??) of St. Petersburg and other late-Tsarist Russian jewelers used in making their stuff. While some (a very few, post-1917 ones?) were made in Mongolia, this seems to me to be a pre-revolutionary Russian-made piece. Remember, the thing was only awarded from 1913 until the collapse of feudalism in 1924.

2- Stones - Again, I am a historian not a gem specialist (to paraphrase Dr. McCoy). Looks like a real lapis lazuli in the centre (which it should be for this grade) and fake pearls around the edge. See close-up scan below.

Thanks, Kim. While for Folks Like Me, McDaniel and Schmitt remains the source of choice, I do realize that in many ways it has been aging. While I rarely consider ANY on-line source to be up to muster when compared to something published, Mondovor is a good and valued source, from people who do their homework.

Thanks again!

Yes we have indeed slowed down a little have we not.

Well it was to be expected, since this was the first place we could share information we just raced through all questions and answers we had on hand.

Many questions have been answered, many remain, but these are the hard ones, of course.

Some might even need the help of the Mongolian government to be resolved, others are about items so seldomly seen or so prohibitively expensive that thourough investigation and research, are hard.

Anyway, I'm cooking up a few new ideas for new threads, but I have little time recently, and resizing all those pix demands just that, ... but soon

I have been struggling with the various aimag badges . . . grrrrr.

I'm sorry for the outburst that was sheer frustration taking the upperhand.

Just goes to show how hard it is to stop rumours

Jan

No, they have to be stopped. Dead.

See also: http://www.regiments.org/regiments/uk/inf/095RB.htm

(A wondrous site, by the way!)

Looks good Ed, Although I have my doubts about this one:

Type 2.3 (Screwback; no mintmark; Uighur; SN at 7 o?clock); Low = 1562/High = ????; 1937

Probably a year 37 award = 1947

And I'm always very sceptical about one-shots like this.

Jan

Agreed, Jan. We have to be careful not to embrace "mistakes" as "varieties". Personally, given how little we know on any documentary basis, I'd rather keep the door (tentatively) open rather than ignore unique oddities like this. If I had to wager what it was, . . . .

If anybody has any interesst of number of each variation let me know and I'll post.

Please do post that information, Kim. I'm never certain, though, where the Avers series comes up with its easy and overly confident statements. What are their sources?

Does Mondovor deal with this award? I can't recall (and navigating the Russian can grow frustrating for a Russian-illiterate like me).

Badge 1- Badge for the veterans of the 1st Cavalry Army (or was it Division?) from the Russian Civil War. When my contact bought this group from Kravchenko's son (a certain General Major Kravchenko) he was beside himself with this badge. In fact, his first e-mail was something to the effect of: "Look, I got this badge! It came with a nice group to a general, but look at this badge!" I still don't have a clue why Kravchenko had this badge (he obviously was too young to be a RCW vet) but apparently it's quite rare. Avers No 5 lists it as a $15-$20 badge... The price is meaningless really, but consider that it lists the October Revolution as a $30-$40 medal, you get a rough estimate of worth.

And, in The Photo, he is clearly wearing that puppy (though in the infuriating soft focus zone!).

Thanks, Dave!

Help!!

Somewhere along the line, my (OK, my incredibly dumb) questions about Kravchenko's badges got lost. I hope no one minds me bumping this thread in a repeated plaintive plea for help.

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=6207&st=5

Mystery Badge 1 - http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=6207&st=71

Mystery Badge 2 - http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=6207&st=72

Mystery Badge 3 - http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=6207&st=73

Mystery Badge 4 - http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=6207&st=74

Mystery Badge 5 - http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=6207&st=75

Mystery Badge 6 - http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=6207&st=77

Mystery Badge 7 - http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=6207&st=78

Thanks in advance . . . .

See also:

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=5914&st=10

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=5914&st=11

While, in Mongolian awards as for the sibling Soviet awards, non-military awards seem to be consciously underappreciated (with the possible exception of the exotic herders' awards). We may need to ask which contributed more to the "progress" of the MPR: years of service in the army or hard work in developing the economy?

In any event, I thought I'd start a thread on this one, prompted by the new acquisition below. Not only the new "low" but also, apparently, another example of phaleristic recycling (look at 4 o'clock on the reverse).

As I tentatively guess at a typology of these:

X 01 - Type 1.1 (numbered, screwback); Low = 81/High = 4254

X 01? - Type 1.2 (numbered, pinback); Low = 541/High = ???

X 02? - Type 2 (unnumbered)

Much to learn, as always!

Reverse.

Help!!!!!!!!!!!!!

These have been touched on from time to time, but never addressed correctly. And I know there are some really impressive collections of them out there. Frankly, they confuse me tremendously!

All I have is the nasty newest one.

I think of them as:

E 01 - Type 1 (numbered); Low = 596/High = 945; 1940s?

E 02 - Type 2; 1950s?

E 03 - Type 3; 1960s?

NIB - Type 4 (heavy construction, relief reverse)

E 04 - Type 5; 1970s?

E 05 - Type 6; 1980s?

E 06 - Type 7.1 (numbered); 1990s?

E 06 (var) - Type 7.2 (unnumbered); Low = B-5/High = B-1266; 1990s?

This is my 7.2 (by this categorization):

Ok, just to summarize what we think we know on terminology and numbers:

Type 1 (broad numbers); Low = 159/High = 9116

Type 2 (narrow numbers); Low = 10327/High = 20008

Type 3 (for foreigners, on pentagonal suspension); Low = ??/High = ??

Corrections, please.

So . . . are we (the apparently few survivors on this forum?) happy with this structure (until we know more?):

Type 1.1 (screwback, numbered); Low = ??/High = 37

Type 1.2 (screwback, unnumbered)

Type 2.1 (pinback, numbered); Low = 4/High = 574

Type 2.2 (pinback, numbered, made of ?recycled? materials); Low = 77/High = 89

???

Shall we try another nomenclature version? The versions and numbering here get almost as confusing as the order itself!

Type 1 (Screwback; МОНДВОР mintmark; long oval design with two red banners, ~300 awarded); Low = 701/High = 792; 1936-39

Type 2.1 (Screwback; upward-curved МОНЕТНЫЙ ДВОР mintmark; Uighur; SN at 6 o'clock near bottom); Low = 57/High = 2831; 1940-41

Type 2.2 (Screwback; downward-curved МОНЕТНЫЙ ДВОР mintmark; Uighur; SN directly below screwpost); Low = 1151/High = 2878; 1941-??

Type 2.3 (Screwback; no mintmark; Uighur; SN at 7 o?clock); Low = 1562/High = ????; 1937

Type 2.4 (Screwback; hand-engraved МОНЕТНЫЙ ДВОР mintmark; Uighur; SN at 6 o'clock near bottom); Low = 1753/High = 1776

Type 3.1 (Screwback; Cyrillic; slightly concave reverse; SN at 7 o'clock); Low = 2/High = 6952; 19??-??

Type 3.2 (Screwback; Cyrillic; flat reverse; SN directly below screwpost); Low = 5094/High = 9941; 19??-??

Type 3.3 (Screwback; Cyrillic; flat reverse; SN at 6 o'clock); Low = 10007/High = 15000; 19??-70

Type 4.1 (Pinback, silver); Low = 15015/High = 30409; 1970-2003

Type 4.2 (pinback, bronze); Low = 31835/High = 39785; 2003?

Type 4.3 (pinback, bronze, no serial number)

Corrections, please!

To offer a corrected nomenclature:

Type 1.1 (screwback, number prefaced by ?No?); Low = 316/High = 1763; 1941-??

Type 1.2 (screwback); Low = 1795/High = 9263; 1951-60

Type 2.1 (pinback, silver, rotating-tool-engraved); Low = 10020/High = 16999; 1982-??

Type 2.2 (pinback, silvered bronze, enameled ribbon); Low = 18071/High = 23354; 1985-??

Type 2.3 (pinback, silvered bronze, enameled ribbon, unnumbered)

Sorry for helping to keep an myth alive. May that "thump" we hear be a stake going well through its heart?