Richarddwh Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 I've had this bar for a couple of years it was the Verdienst Den Staat medal on the left that caught my eye, but I overlooked the ribbon of the Franco-Prussian medal, this appears to be the WW1 Widows HK but that doesn't make sense. Can anyone shed any light on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stogieman Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 A Picture of the back would help... However. Is the 1870 in steel? Tough to tell from your image. In reality, both medals have the potential to be correct. The WW1 "widow's" cross is actually a "survivor's" cross that would have been awarded to both, either parent(s) or surviving children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul R Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 It almost seems more likely for it to be a Widow's Cross. It is my impression that most 1871 Beamte Personnel were older men at the time of the 1870 war and it would be unlikely that they would still be in service to be eligible for the Centenial medal. For me, this bar would make more sense to be for a post 1871 vet who lost his son in WW1...What are your thoughts, Rick?Please do place a photo of the back of the bar.regardsPaul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulsterman Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 (edited) um-that is a noncombtnt's ribbon. bronze on a noncombtnts ribbon?bronze on combat ribbon= fighting in Francesteel on combat ribbon=in uniform in Germanysteel on noncombat ribbon=stretcher bearer in combat.....but bronze on nocombat bar? Edited June 19, 2007 by Ulsterman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rick Research Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Yup. Needs a steel medal for a frontline medic. Makes absolutely no sense, but as Ulsterman says, that is how they showed frontline non-arms-bearers. You'd think, logically, that THIS would have been the ribbon for stay at homes, but nope. Mostly white ribbon = frontline officials and medical personnel who were noncombatants even in the midst of battle.Fairly easy to find a correct steel medal.The bronzes like the one currently on there have "From captured guns" impressed on the rim of original issues, and no impressed inscription on replacement private purchase medals. The solder on the suspension rings apparently came apart fairly often on these, even in the wearers' lifetimes.An OLD bar of this type is usually a nasty, messy, exposed horror of sloppy stitching over the nasty tin can (or less often, brass) backings, with ugly soldered on hook. Nice neat ones with cloth backing and all that "sausage" hidden away are usually after 1910-ish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulsterman Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 The bronze medal may well be original to the bar. There was an article a while back somewhere about a Prussian Doctor (MD) who was a combat surgeon in the Union army in the US Civil War and then went back home during the Franco_Prussian war. He was given BOTH bronze and steel medals by the grateful Reich-and there were documents to prove it. it was odd-but odd things happen(ed). I'd leave it alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richarddwh Posted June 19, 2007 Author Share Posted June 19, 2007 Thanks everyone for the responses I've learnt something new. Rick, the medal is indeed the bronze version. Given the different comments, all carrying credence I am still confused. I've posted some pics of the reverse that might clarify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulsterman Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 uh- I don't like that backing. have you blacklighted it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richarddwh Posted June 19, 2007 Author Share Posted June 19, 2007 Not backlighted yet, but will. The reverse does a look a bit on the fresh side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rick Research Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Probably OK and more circa 1910 than 1897. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now