Mythology of late Kites and Pillars

[JapanX]

The second stable feature (in addition to reverses workmanship) of the allegedly-late-war-Manchukuo-made-pillars is glassier, more transparent enamel in color lines of central octahedron and larger diameter of points along central octahedron perimeter. Just take a look at this compilation.

[JapanX]

Centers

[JapanX]

The third stable feature (in addition to reverses workmanship) of the allegedly-late-war-Manchukuo-made-pillars is suspension in the form of kaoliang. Take a close look at form and diameter of “stamens” …

[JapanX]

General view

[JapanX]

Close-ups

[JapanX]

But nevertheless the quality is still very high if not superb! I couldn’t believe that this “late” piece was created by some mythical “Manchukuo mint” back in 1944 or 1945.

My main concern here is economical rationality of such creation. Why create a new mint? The costs are way too high (just trust me on that folks ). Especially if one will take into account comparatively small number of awards made. But remote (“remote” from my point of view of course) probability is still exists that this pieces were produced by “Manchukuo mint” which was created because of some kind prestigio reason.

Edited December 9, 2011 by JapanX

[JapanX]

Maybe this one?

So where are Peterson late rough unpolished metal pieces?

I don’t know.

Maybe they were produced in such little quantities, that now they are even more rarity than Bukosho badges?

Do they exist at all?

I don’t know.

As I said earlier I’ve never laid my hands on one of these late pieces. But sometimes I meet strange looking 7^th class badges.

Edited December 10, 2011 by JapanX

[JapanX]

Like this one

Edited December 9, 2011 by JapanX

[JapanX]

Is this metal covered with rust?

I think NO.

I think this is one of many tricks that patina has for us. ;)

[JapanX]

This is the end of today little story.

It will be nice to hear your comments dear colleagues.

Cheers,

Nick

[fukuoka]

Not really sure about Peterson's comment. Seems like just a quick almost meaningless statement, not thought out at all.

Anyway, I am no expert on Manchukuo medals, but if I remember correctly the Central Bank of Manchukuo (満州中央銀行) made paper bills but the coins came from the Japan Mint. And although it is possible some cities did make coins and/or medals (Mukden had a press, but it was run by Japanese), I don't know any specifics. I do know the approximate numbers of the Manchukuo orders made by the Japan Mint, though. I have a feeling that most (if not all) Manchukuo medals and orders were made in Japan.

Manchukuo also had a Decorations Bureau, called the Onshou-kyoku (恩賞局).

[JapanX]

I do know the approximate numbers of the Manchukuo orders made by the Japan Mint, though.

Could you post these numbers?

If it is possible of course ;)

[JapanX]

It will be interesting to add that Peterson in his book talked about “late war” pillars too.

Here comes an interesting quote from page 147.

[JapanX]

“The 1^st and 3^rd class badges which lack the M have transparent blue enamel, brighter red enamel, the prongs holding the pearls are tapered and knob is 6,5 mm high. The lower classes without the M are struck from the same dies as those with the M, but the dies are obviously worn. The dull portions are pitted rather than frosted, the collars of the inner beads very low and the enameled beads convexed to compensate for this. Apparently the pieces without the M mark are of later issue.”

Edited December 14, 2011 by JapanX

[JapanX]

Sounds interesting… But I think these observations are wrong …

Allow me to explain why.

[JapanX]

I don’t have measurements for 1^st class knobs, but typical 3^rd class knob has 5,8-6 mm height – not 6,5 mm as Peterson stated. And sometimes you could meet 3^rd classes with polished reverses and with lower knobs.

You can see these differences in the following pictures of two 3^rd classes (piece with “typical 5,8-6 mm” knob is on the right and piece with smaller knob is on the left).

It’s obvious from the pictures that both specimens have practically identical obverses (excerpt for the colors of central octahedron lines).

“The prongs holding the pearls are tapered”… I personally don’t observe any of that “tapering”.

[JapanX]

Obverses

[JapanX]

Reverses

[JapanX]

Now let’s turn our attention to the Peterson lower classes description.

“The lower classes without the M are struck from the same dies as those with the M…”

For openers, we need to find at least one specimen in lower classes with M mark (if such specimens really exist, then they should bear the M mark at the bottom of the reverse or at the 6 o’clock edge, so please check your specimens for me).

[JapanX]

But why Peterson was so sure that these specimens were “struck from the same dies”?

Only because “the dull portions are pitted rather than frosted…”???

But this conclusion is absolutely wrong, as we’ll see a little later.

And what about pieces with polished reverses?

I figure Peterson “frosted” reverse is mine “sandblasted”.

[JapanX]

And then another feature follows “…the collars of the inner beads very low and the enameled beads convexed to compensate for this”.

Really?!

I’ve never observed these “convexed” beads.

Did you?

[JapanX]

Please take a look at following compilation (two 4^th classes and one 8^th class).

[JapanX]

Obverses

[JapanX]

Reverses

[JapanX]

I hope this compilation makes my point more clear.

It’s obvious that only color of the enamel (less glassy for early pieces/more glassier for later pieces) and reverse type (polished for early pieces/ sandblasted or frosted for later pieces) are the only stable features. Although we could say that dull portions of the obverses that are pitted/frosted are more typical for later pieces and dull portions of the obverses that are smooth are more typical for early pieces.

Of course allegedly early and allegedly late pieces. ;)