Is this bar real or a put together

[Dueppel]

My intent with posting the above bar is to illustrate two specific points in regards to evaluating medals and determining if the bar can be traced and if the bar is real or a put together. In my opinion we do not need to know if the seller is good or not. Of course if it is an ebay seller with a bad reputation then stay away from him. However if you at at a show and have the bar in hand and we can evaluate it then it is a different situation.

This bar is a put together for the following reasons:

1. With the Crown Order 3 with swords there should be a China or SWA campaign medal. You can be 99.9999% sure that the KO3X or KO4X was not given out in WWI.

2. The Order of the mounting in grossly incorrect. A peace time Red Eagle Order 4 would never be in front of combat awards. The correct order of mounting is wartime awards, peacetime awards, foreign awards.

Hallo Paul,

when you reason that the bar is put together the incorrect mounting is a substantial argument. But the existence of the PKO3X without China, SWA or the Colonial campaign medal is an invalid argument.

Reasons:

108 Officers were decorated with the PKO3X in WWI in 1917 and 1918. 45 of those have been germans.

The PKO3X of the bar is doubtless silver gilt. That stands for the potential existence of 45 bars without campaign medals.

If the PKO3X should be gold the number of potential bars is 15.

Best regards

Dueppel

[Guest Rick Research]

Yes, Daniel has been working very hard on ALL Prussian Orders with Xs, on either Iron Cross ribbon... that new volume should be printed in the spring 2009 awards rolls batch.

I have a ribbon bar to a recipient of the K)4X for Africa in 1913 for action never recognized by a Kolonialdenkm?nze with bar. There was also a KO3X awarded for action agaiunst Chinese river pirates in 1913... so ther ARE odd, freaky exceptions.

Whether THIS bar is original==or not-- I am afraid is completely ruined by the nature of the so-called quote-unquote seller--who does not own it-- and should not be used as any sort of example for that reason.

[Paul C]

Agreed. There is always the exception to the rule.