peter monahan

Soldiers and sex? Perish the thought! The Canadian Army Medical Corps in WWI in what I strongly suspect was an attempt to make their nursing sisters less 'accessible' to the ordinary soldiers, made them all officers. Over, it need hardly be said, the strong protests of much of the officer corps. It would be naive in the extreme to think that young women in the kinds of situations these found themselves in would not have formed both romantic and sexual liasons at times. Their very presence at and near the front already broke many social taboos and sex outside of marriage, contrary to what today's young people seem to think, is NOT a new phenomenon!

Interesting indeed. According to an earlier post by Ed Haynes - who would know - and a quick scout round ebay, the 'MANIPUR' bar is actually for the Samanya Seva medal, not the Tanggh. It was awarded for counter terrorism operations in 1980, according to this old post on our site: Odd that the bar appears on this medal, but then medals from the sub-continent abound in oddities: tailors copies, wearing two of the same, wrong ribbons and so on. Intriguing.

I agree that it is probably an ID, not a sweetheart. Of course, bracletes were private purchase, so there were no rules as to form or size. The serial number prefix 'B' means an enlistment from Military District 2, headquatrered in Toronto and extending up through central Ontario, so could be Ontario Reg't or one of the other central Canadian armoured units. Or not: I'm not at all clear for WWII how much moving around recruits went through between basic training and assigment to their units. The serial number does not turn up in the CWGC list of casualties for 1939-1947.

I'd still go with Rifle's. it seems awfully 'restrained' for a civilian band item, unles they were trying to mimic the Rifles.

I haven't seen Cdn medal ribbons produced in this form of enamel before. It reminds me of some of the Eastern European 'enamelled' ribbons but I suppose the sterling mark makes that unlikely'. odd and intriguing.

Lovely work, Brian.

Indeed. It's clearly too well made to be a theatrical piece and may well be from someone's army. I'm by no means an expert on all aspects and periods of the British and Imperial Armies but it doesn't look quite right to be English 19th century. I may be wrong! Can you tell whether it is hand or machine sewn? I assume you'd have mentioned any labels or marks. BTW, when I said 'may be Indian' I meant that it could conceivably have been a unifrom for one of the Indian princely states which were incorporated into British India. OTOh, as I say, it may be non-military. One effect of having a large and successful empire is the tendency for people to ape one's fashions and fraternal groups were very strong in the late 19th century.

The crown on the button, if that is a button, is a bit blurry but could be either a 'naval crown' or a 'mural crown', usually associated with cities and towns. The style similar to the British military 'frock coat' of the Victorian period, though the row of very small buttons down the front is unusual, I think. Also what I take to be slits down the sides [?] are unusual and thre braiding is very elaborate. I wonder if it might be a garment made for, just as an example, an Indian [South Asian] or some fraternal organization, but modelled on a British style. Hard to say without more information on the sewing and other details. Interesting item!

Interesting indeed. While truth is stranger than fiction, and two men with identical names and ranks is not at all improbable, especially such a common surname, the two having died on the same date would be quite a coincidence. I suspect that they do refere to the same men and that either he was attached to the Buffs for some reason or that two men of simlar rank and name have been conflated by War Graves. It isn't possible to tell from the CWGC site whether the two documents shown - the Register and the Graves Registration report are compiled one from the other or from a common source. If the latter, a clerical error may simply have been perpetuated. Other than that, I have nothing to offer other than the obvious: look elsewhere for evidence that this S.A. soldier was attache dto the Buffs when he died.

Thuis is a long shot admittedly, but as he was a Private in the Royal Marienes, might there be a connectiion to HMS Deal castle, which I believe was an RN shore base, named after a frigate which was lost in a storm in 1780? As I say, a bit of a long shot and RN is not my field, but I've never seen this kind of prefix on a WWI medals before.

Indeed! More than just a little challenging for a gunsmith to restore. Where was it dug up, do you know?

Ah! yes, a European tour would explain that lot, and I can see how eager the Europeans would be to welcome a 'cvivilized' monarch from one of the more benighted corners of the world. And there are probably odder combos than a Hawaiin in a Haube out there. The kilted regiment of the Afghan Army comes to mind! 'Like that' would explain it. The last version of the movie Vanity Fair has some truly horrendous uniforms in it, between 17 year olds apperaing on Major General's uniforms and an art dierctor who used plum, burgiundy, pink etc instead of the proper red, which apparently he disliked. My comment on first seeing it was that a lot of them looked like what one got when Native States rulers pointed at pukka outfits and said 'Like that, only with more bling!'

OK, I see that now. The 1st Cdn Corps used a red/white red rectangle with a gold maple leaf on it but that seems unlikely, to me, to be on a helmet. I'd expect a regimental or corps marking.

I suspect that the this explanation is the correct one. The other, far less likely possibility, is that someone deliverately mixed the medals before sending the two groups to two destinations - perhaps two branches of the family?

That insignia is very faint! I'm afraid I can't make much of it except that it appears to be red / dark / red. A close-up shot of that bit of the helmet might help others make more useful comments.

Huzza. Excellent find. Congratulations. A dozen gongs is not to be sneezed at and reflects the service this gent put in. Well done, again. A tribute to your patience, indeed.

Nice!

Ray Here are two accounts, one bog standard and the other highly entertaining and perhaps, if your mind works that way, thought provoking. Enjoy! http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/lawrence-of-arabia-dies http://www.criminalelement.com/blogs/2013/04/the-murder-of-lawrence-of-arabia-tony-hays

Still fascinated by your avatar. Did he collect all those European orders BECAUSE he re-introduced the Hula-Hula? And who on God's green earth decided that a Hawaiian monarch would look good in a pickelhaube? Really? Lovely work on the colourizations though, Alex. I wish I had the patience!

They will ot be forgotten.

I tend to agree with Alex and when I still had the cash to buy medals would at times replace ribbons for display but always kept the old 'originals' safely stored for just such eventuallities as he described. But it is, as he says, a bone of some contention among collectors and partly informed by why one collects: if its ALL about the 'history' then original ribbons might be preferred but then what does one do with those which arrive ribbonless? Clearly that is a [small] part of their history and the least important part. So, if it's ok to replace missing ribbons, why note replace worn ones too? I tend to do that but keep the originals as a bow to tose of the other viewpoint. A topic which bears re-examining periodically! Thanks for the question. Peter

Nice collection, Lancer. Thanks for sharing.

Lovely bit of work, that.

Nice find, indeed!

Amharic speakers to the fore! Sadly, both the problem - 'mix and match merchants' and the solution - identifying and finding the correct ribbons - may be beyond the scope of this group, though one can always hope that someone actually in Ethiopia will be moved to do the research and publish something useful for we dabblers.