JapanX Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Allow me to remind you how the inscription on China Incident War Medal wrapping paper looks like
JapanX Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) Well, now we know that this medal had wrapping. This is its packing minimum. Maximum could be a cardboard box (it should looks exactly like the box for China Incident War Medal – only the inscription on the cover will be different and (possibly) color of the box). But since (closer to the end of war) even the lower classes of orders sometimes were only wrapped, the probability of box existence is pretty low. Regards, Nick Edited July 5, 2012 by JapanX
Dieter3 Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Well, now we know that this medal had wrapping. This is its packing minimum. Maximum could be a cardboard box (it should looks exactly like the box for China Incident War Medal – only the inscription on the cover will be different and (possibly) color of the box). But since (closer to the end of war) even the lower classes of orders sometimes were only wrapped, the probability of box existence is pretty low. Regards, Nick Fascinating! Excellent my friend. I have never seen the wrapper This certainly lends even more credit though to there possibly having been a minimal case, as you suggest. I would find it odd, but not impossible, that these would be issued without a case. But then again, until one surfaces, I suppose we must make that precarious assumption that one does not exist.....
fukuoka Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 The item description in that auction also said 'According to one source [unnamed], theses medals were awarded with just the medal wrap, no case.' And we still have the mystery of the absent documents, which lends credibility to the 'collaborators medal' theory.
JapanX Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) The item description in that auction also said 'According to one source [unnamed], theses medals were awarded with just the medal wrap, no case.' These descriptions are relevant sources of info ... And we still have the mystery of the absent documents, which lends credibility to the 'collaborators medal' theory. Lends credibility?! Are you serious? I wonder if you are thinking about this scenario. "All documents were destroyed by collaborates to hide their treacherous behavior. But they kept the medals as souvenirs, since they were unsigned ..." Looks like ... ... his theory about being for Chinese collaborators seems correct, Nick, and has been re-iterated by some Japanese medal enthusiasts. Edited July 5, 2012 by JapanX
Dieter3 Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 So.....is the mystery getting deeper? It's like the more we know, the more we don't know. The truth is out there.
Dieter3 Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Yep, nice specimen with 1500$ "buy it now" price Still no takers. I see a few offers, but looks like gunjin is holding his ground!
JapanX Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) So.....is the mystery getting deeper? It sure is Next time I'll stop posting right after post #7 :lol: Edited July 5, 2012 by JapanX
JapanX Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Still no takers. I see a few offers, but looks like gunjin is holding his ground!
fukuoka Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 (edited) These descriptions are relevant sources of info ... Lends credibility?! Are you serious? I wonder if you are thinking about this scenario. "All documents were destroyed by collaborates to hide their treacherous behavior. But they kept the medals as souvenirs, since they were unsigned ..." Looks like ... Well, as theories they have yet to be disproven. I never said these comments and ideas were true--just that these are floating about. It is important to at least consider the things being said about various medals, but that doesn't mean accepting them without further proof. N. Komiya's explanation seems perfectly plausible; however, the complete lack of extant documents and cases means that something is a bit different about this medal. I mean, we have the 1874 War Medal with only 3,000+ awards, yet we can find documents and cases. The 1944 medal was never awarded (according to the Japan Mint), so that explains no docs/cases. Was the 1942 medal ever awarded? Were all medals minted just sitting at the Mint and then trickled out at the war's end? Doesn't seem likely, but again, it is worthy of consideration. My Japan Mint histories all mention this medal as an established commemorative, so it seems quite likely they were awarded to some people. And if they were awarded, why hasn't anyone even found a photo of a civilian (or soldier) wearing one? No photos, no documents, no cases. Strange... Perhaps someday something will pop up. Edited July 7, 2012 by fukuoka
JapanX Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 ... but that doesn't mean accepting them without further proof. Further proof ... I was under the impression that "Nick Komiya comes through with fantastic stuff" Anyway, why don't you simply ask Komiya for these proofs? You know where to find him Rich ... however, the complete lack of extant documents and cases means that something is a bit different about this medal. Probably. But why collaborators? Could you please explain to me why "... absence of documents lend credibility to the 'collaborators medal' theory"? P.S. Looks like the absence of documents for Golden Kites (awarded during the same time period) doesn't borther you that much
fukuoka Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 (edited) Mr. Komiya does indeed have a wealth of information. You can see a lot of his work on the Wehrmacht forums. Excellent stuff on medal documents, soldier handbooks, etc. And I do give his research a lot of weight. However, the fact remains that no proof of these ever having been awarded to Japanese nationals is puzzling. If it was a home front award and it was established in 1942, where are the cases? Docs? Photos? I cannot imagine every single award document and case to have disappeared, especially if it was awarded domestically. One possible theory: there were no cases nor award documents, just the paper wrap. But again, that is just a theory. As in science, we need proof to either dismiss the idea or to establish it. The GK documents are lacking, true, but there is a rich history of the GK and even so, we have cases, right? We have photos (I imagine)? There is no reason to doubt the reason GK was awarded and to wonder about who received them, despite the lack of documents in a certain period. That is an apples & oranges comparison. The rescript states clearly that anyone eligible for the 1939 China War medal could not receive the 1942 medal. So who would receive it if there is no proof that Japanese nationals did? I guess people who contributed to the war effort who were not Japanese. But again that is merely a theory. To dismiss it without proof is not intellectually sound. To claim it is true without proof is just as foolish. To repeat, I do not know to whom this medal was awarded. There seems to be a dearth of documented information and a surplus of opinions. Have you seen any photos of people wearing the medal? Or any proof at all that these were awarded to anyone? I do not retract my opinion of Mr. Komiya. However, there are other factors here that must be considered as well. Cheers, Rich Edited July 7, 2012 by fukuoka
JapanX Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 (edited) The GK documents are lacking, true, but there is a rich history of the GK and even so, we have cases, right? We have photos (I imagine)? There is no reason to doubt the reason GK was awarded and to wonder about who received them, despite the lack of documents in a certain period. That is an apples & oranges comparison. Apples and Oranges are fruits. Kites and China Inc. Com. Medal are japanese awards. Previous history has nothing to do with period 1940-1945. Same factors that were responsible for disappearances of Kite docs, may be responsible for absence of docs for Inc. Com. Medal. This is logic 101 The rescript states clearly that anyone eligible for the 1939 China War medal could not receive the 1942 medal. So who would receive it if there is no proof that Japanese nationals did? Most likely there was no documents and cases. In 1942 japanese buses already have no seats Another variant - there were some "light", practically unrecognizable version of documents (something that gonna looks like docs for Bukosho badges) So who would receive it if there is no proof that Japanese nationals did? Do you really think that medal with initial name "China Incident Home Front Service Commemorative Medal" could be exclusively intended for "not Japanese people" But again that is merely a theory. To dismiss it without proof is not intellectually sound. To claim it is true without proof is just as foolish. And again I will ask you to explain why "... absence of documents (or/and boxes) lend credibility to the 'collaborators medal' theory"? :cheers: Edited July 7, 2012 by JapanX
fukuoka Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Nick, I do not want to go round and round with you when it is obvious neither of us knows what the answers are. Apples & oranges are fruit, but different kinds of fruit. GK & 1942 medal are medals, but different kinds of medals (one is an order; the other is a commemorative). That's Logic 101. Was there a sudden lack of cases for GK awards in this era? And still the fact remains there have been ZERO documents and ZERO cases known for the 1942 medals. We KNOW the GK was awarded; we do not know the same about the 1942 medal. As for the Bukosho medal, that badge was awarded in the field, which explains the hand-written documents. But even with those, we have seen the documents (though rare). 1942 buses had no seats? Cannot even imagine the connection. ST awards had documents in these years. And...? Buses and medals? That is an extreme apples/oranges comparison. Maybe I missed Logic 102... I have just re-read the info Mr. Komiya gave you, and if all that information is correct, perhaps the most probable reason for its rarity is that none (or very very few) were ever awarded. Collaborators? I cannot defend that theory but the absence of the other things as stated ad nauseum makes it possible. That's all: possible. Not probable, not likely, not even the best theory. Just possible. Those who donated money to the war effort presumably received the medal, right? Couldn't foreigners abroad who did the same as N. Komiya describes have received it as well? Those people were collaborators by their active participation in donating money. So let's replace the weighted term 'collaborators' with 'donators.' Cheers, Rich
JapanX Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 (edited) Apples & oranges are fruit, but different kinds of fruit. GK & 1942 medal are medals, but different kinds of medals (one is an order; the other is a commemorative). That's Logic 101. 1942 buses had no seats? Cannot even imagine the connection. ST awards had documents in these years. And...? Buses and medals? That is an extreme apples/oranges comparison. Maybe I missed Logic 102... Rich, you really have a very strange idea what logic really are Trust me on that ;) Edited July 7, 2012 by JapanX
JapanX Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 (edited) Nick, I do not want to go round and round with you ... All I really wanted is this simple (well not really ) answer to my simple question Collaborators? I cannot defend that theory but the absence of the other things as stated ad nauseum makes it possible. That's all: possible. Not probable, not likely, not even the best theory. Just possible. Those who donated money to the war effort presumably received the medal, right? Couldn't foreigners abroad who did the same as N. Komiya describes have received it as well? Those people were collaborators by their active participation in donating money. So let's replace the weighted term 'collaborators' with 'donators.' Hmmm... "Donators Medal" Sounds cool! Edited July 7, 2012 by JapanX
JapanX Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Was there a sudden lack of cases for GK awards in this era? And still the fact remains there have been ZERO documents and ZERO cases known for the 1942 medals. We KNOW the GK was awarded; we do not know the same about the 1942 medal. As for the Bukosho medal, that badge was awarded in the field, which explains the hand-written documents. But even with those, we have seen the documents (though rare). Don't you remember the amount of manufactured Kites in 1941, 1942, ...? Maybe that's why they were boxed Not to mentioned that we are actually talking about 1943 + (!) medal.
JapanX Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 By the way I still don't understand why "... absence of documents (or/and boxes) lend credibility to the 'collaborators medal' theory"? :whistle:
Gunjinantiques Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 Still no takers. I see a few offers, but looks like gunjin is holding his ground! SOLD! Buyer has a medal that he'll treasure for years.
JapanX Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 Buyer has a medal that he'll treasure for years. $ 1500 I bet even his heirs will ... Gongratulation John :cheers:
fukuoka Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 Could've treasured it for hundreds less... but that is what happens on ebay.
fukuoka Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) SOLD! Buyer has a medal that he'll treasure for years. Nice sale, John Edited July 20, 2012 by fukuoka
fukuoka Posted July 22, 2012 Posted July 22, 2012 My own attempt: ebay item number 360475134965 Of course, starting at 99 cents with no reserve--not as smart as John's auction. Leaves me at the mercy of ebay buyers, notoriously unpredictable.
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