Tim B

Phil, It should never be a problem asking for opinions on any item prior to purchasing, that's one of the benefits of belonging to a forum IMO. It's when the person asking never seems to even try to learn or research items on their own, or my pet peeve, ask the continual "What's this? Is it real? What's it worth" type questions only to turn around and make a quick buck. I have no time for those guys and usually ignore the threads entirely. A suggestion, if asking questions or requesting authentication on items currently for sale by a dealer; Leave their name out of it completely. IF you stumble across something that is genuine and rather a good deal, it might not be there when you go back to tell them you want it. This hobby can get cut-throat at times. On the other side of the coin, if the dealer sees his wares being discussed and most of the time the items are given the thumbs down, you could find yourself "out" with that dealer completely, permanently. It's a business to them pure and simple. Additionally, there are good dealers, bad dealers, and sometimes great dealers, but they all sell "questionable" items from time to time. Nobody gets it right--all the time. Some of these guys have a following and some have their protestors and mentioning the dealer's name can sometimes skew opinions on the items in question. Now, some sell these items not knowing, while others know fully well what they are doing. It all comes down to the buyer doing the research and asking questions first. Bottom line; the item should sell on it's own merits and not the story, the sales write-ups, or dealer's reputation. I hope you can still get your money back on the those two shields. Best of luck and welcome to shield collecting! Tim

Phil, No worries and please let Peter confirm my thoughts on the Narvik 1st. PM sent on the Kuban and IMO, it's a good one. Tim

Hi Phil (Peter), No worries, Peter and I are used to hearing differing opinions and you're correct, we don't have all the answers. Keep in mind that we have been collecting these shields for awhile and after a bit, you get used to what to look for and what to look out for. On the Krim shields, yes I thought the upper left shield might be the one in question as the details are flat compared to originals; assume you can tell the differences now. I could not tell the backing color with your scans, so the one with the flat details (upper left) is the copy of the original style. The one on the lower right gets questionable as these specific shields normally are seen with either a lime green or black paper backing. As your shield has an off-white/light tan color backing, many will question it. It has been seen that some of these backings are actually the inside of old period books that had the cover's inside backing removed, cut to size and then glued to the back of the shields. As you get more of these in your collection, you'll notice some makers use a specific type of backing consistently. On the next three; IMO: - The Kuban is good; a known original but the maker is unknown. - The Demjansk may be good; is it a "missing log" version? I can't quite make it out in your PIC's. I'll post one of mine at the bottom for comparison. - The Narvik is a known copy. You'll get it, don't get discouraged. Tim

:D Hi Christophe, Yes, my point exactly. Very cumbersome to walk around in. I remember having to walk around wearing full size medals (we have a max of five in one row) and that was bad enough. I've seen some Imperial photos and am amazed these guys could even move their arms! It's all good! Tim

Hi Phil, Mine surely weren't ruffled at all. I think those that feel the way they do are not actually participating in this specific thread. I got an earful sometime back when I linked one of my threads (different sub-forum) to one over there in hopes of finding out more information and ... Anyway, its all good IMO. On the Panzer shield you said might be questionable, which one is it? Upper left?? I would need to go back and review that thread. There are copies of original shields that look very good, however the details are a lot flatter than originals. Anyway, post that one here and we'll take another look. Peter and Chris are very knowledgeable on shields as well; never hurts to get more looks on an item. Tim

:cheers: Excellent bar Gunner! I never understood how a person was supposed to wear these large bars in a single row; do they go from armpit to armpit? Really a beautiful example; do you have the full story with this officer? Tim

Hi all & Merry Christmas!! Yes, the example I posted in post #65 above, is a genuine CdG with an (currently unknown) unofficial commemorative/unit? badge attached. Here are some other ones I have seen over the last year or so. I also own and posted the one with the Aisne pin. Completely unofficial but, interesting! Tim

Emanuel, That is a great looking bar; 1st Serbian bar w/CdG I've even seen! Thanks for adding this one to the thread! Tim

Hi Chris/Peter, Yes, I would agree that this should be the way but, there are those over here that do not like WAF called out at all, so I just avoid the issue all together. Thanks for all the comments thus far. Merry Christmas guys! Need a Christmas icon! Tim

And the smaller silver-gilt piece. Same details Tim

Really an intricate design with various articles of fighting. Note the airplane on top of the reverse; you can actually see the pilot!! Tim

Here's the edge stampings; both have the Monnaise de Paris cornucopia. Tim

Hello everyone, Does anyone have more specific information on these medals? I know they were minted my the Paris mint in 1911 and issued by the Ministry of War. Basically, if you want peace, you have to train for war. But, who received these and for what service or act? Usually I see the bronze pieces in 50 MM size and know there are silver versions as well. Now, I see these in the smaller (36 MM) size and wonder what the significance might be between the two sizes, if any. Additionally, I assume the silver versions marked (Argent) are not really solid silver, but either silver filled or silvered metal. The smaller (gilt) coin is marked "2 Argent". Appreciate any help or information. Tim

Not sure why this double-posted, but disregard this thread...the other thread of the same name has the information. Seems very slow to load tonight, maybe a server issue. Tim

Hi Peter! Yes, you probably seen those "over there" in a larger format, but I haven't taken anymore PICS recently. Nice unknown maker you show; wish those were still 1,60 RM! Tim

Hi guys, I haven't seen too many suspicious British medals and the only ones that I hear are being faked are the WWII Star Medals/groups. I honestly haven't collected in that area, so I don't know. Tim

Justin, Nice start! I missed my chance at a mint Cholm a few years back that Carsten Baldes had offered me; it was $900, complete with backing and all--MINT!! I said, too expensive for me, especially for a "shield". Forgot what I got instead, but I'm sure it was worth it. Tim I don't have all my shields in one PIC, so you'll have to settle for just some of my Krims for now. :beer:

Nice looking Deumer there Justin! Tim

Beautiful! I want one of these so damn bad, just can't afford them anymore. Very Nice!! Tim

Here's another example of ones I watch out for as IMO, they have been played with, possibly to add clasps. Note the stitching above the top clasp (under the attachment pin). I used to see these more often a few years ago. Shame really; never understood why they didn't open the ring, but then again, I have seen medals where the bars did not slide on the ribbon, so... Tim

George, No pissing contest, but here are the facts: A sailor (no officers) in the Navy received a new Good Conduct Medal for each honorable enlistment completed. During times of war, the Good Conduct Medal may be awarded for one year of faithful service. The Good Conduct Medal may also be awarded posthumously, to any soldier killed in the line of duty. Of all the Good Conduct Medals, the Navy Good Conduct Medal is the oldest, dating back to 1869. There have been a total of four versions of the Navy Good Conduct Medal. The current version dates from 1961 and is issued to every active duty sailor who completes three years of honorable and faithful service. Prior to 1 January 1996 (I got my last one in 1997, so mixed that up), four years of honorable and faithful service was required. Don't take my word for it, look it up. R, Tim

The Navy issued their Good Conduct (GC) Medals on a 4-year basis up until 1997 when the award structure changed to coinside with the other branches. Interesting to see the setup in post #5; only one bronze star on the GC. Must have had some recurring discipline problems. Also, with so many stars on the Navy Achievement Medal, I am guessing he must have been someone that wasn't "politically correct" as they could have given the guy another Commendation in place of at least one of those I bet. All comes down to who you know and what they want to do for you; never changes. Also, if you look over the various service's awards manuals, you'll see that the award critieria of the Navy/Marine Corps Commendation Medal is different and more demanding than that of the Army or Air Force. That's why you don't see many in enlisted ranks (other than RM', CT's, etc.) and virtually never below the rank of E-6. This has always been a sore spot for enlisted guys in Navy/Marine Corps. Tim Oh, another person that was never "politically correct", nor did I want to be.

Hi, Yes, I am familiar with the Navy 1650 regulations. I'm a retired Master Chief with 23 years of service. I disagree with your assessment though. With twenty years service, the man would have been at least an E-6, probably E-7 or above and would have been "required" to have his medals mounted for personnel inspections, etc. The cost of mounting medals does get expensive, however, as you move to more than one row (after five medals), then depending what you earn, you may not have to shift everything; trust me, I know. Besides, most of these guys that stayed in, loved their fruit salad! Tim

Despite the specific combination of clasps, in this case with the medal unnamed it would be difficult to actually pin it to a specific recipient unless it also came with any associated award paperwork, service records, and maybe a State award. Unless there is specific information to indicate provenance, including the award of the Silver Citation Star, it will be quite difficult to accurately determine the recipient. I think anything else would be a bit speculative or supposition. Regards, Rob Completely agree, unfortunately, we may never really know at this point. I have several pieces that "talk" of heroic actions, but the who, what, and where details are lost to history. Add to that, you have to watch for made-up items embellished to sell for higher amounts. Without proper documentation and history trail, it really is no more than a story or speculation at this point. See it all the time in German collecting fields that have groups made up (sometimes impossible groupings) with fantastic stories, but in the end, nothing more than pieces of metal and colored ribbons once the details show the truth. JM, I was watching this one and feel it's original; also believe it to be someone wounded out of the 3rd Div, but again, without a paper trail, the price was beyond what I wanted to pay for it. Still, nice to look at! Here's the back of the issue card to that Jos Meyer cased VIC I posted above (post # 255). In this case, a member's name can add some information to the history of the actual medal. This is the best way if you can't get verified groupings or items directly from veterans or families IMO. Tim

Don't forget that family members researching family records can request replacement medals that the service member was entitled to. That would add to the replacement sets seen on the market today. Tim