Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Calling the White Ribboned Iron Cross 1914 a "Non Combatant`s" cross is an error

It WAS a cross for non combatants... but not in the same way the 1870 White ribboned cross was....

You can break the 1914 Cross down into 4 categories.... three of which were for non combatants, only one of which had a white Ribbon....

More to come.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, here we go....

http://www.kaiserscross.com/286801/640801.html

I think a very good cross section of documents showing that what we read about the white ribbon cross is mostly wrong. It is not an award for non combatant soldiers like medics... it is not even an award for soldiers on the homefront... It is basically a civilian award for service on the home front.

 

All arguments and opinions welcome...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly wouldn't argue with your analysis.  Well done.  This could warrant a published article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris, 

Excellent work as always.  Nice to see that your think enough of this subject to allow the "evidence" to lead to a proper conclusion regarding the white ribbon.  Keep it up!

Also, the Oberstlt. who signed Lagerdiener August Breitling's award on 27 August 1921 was Georg Gr. zu Waldeck u. Pyrmont  

the Major who signed Hptm.d.L. Clauditz's document on 5 Sep was Bruno Rüthling 

the  Generalstabarzt who signed the document for Kriegs Assistenzart Dr. Wahn. was Dr. Friedrich Doebbelin

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some nice award documents out there. I have had some of them - but normally i do not collect "papers".

There are a lot of versions esp. after Nov. 1918 made by Ämter, Abwicklungsstellen and Einheiten.

Sometimes you can find "Kanitz" versions without "G.O.K." seal.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Blog Comments

    • Thanks for your reply Patrick, just in case some might not know what the Belgian WW1 Medal you were referencing looks like I have included one here. I understand that the small crown on the ribbon denoted the recipient was a volunteer.  
    • Brian, Thanks for initiating this discussion. For me, it’s a combination of the thrill of the chase, the history behind the item, and the aesthetics, although this latter factor may seem a bit strange to some. To illustrate this, the very first thing I collected as a kid in the 1950’s was a Belgian WW1 medal, for service in 1914-18, which is bell shaped, with a very striking profile of a very dignified soldier, wearing an Adrian helmet which bears a laurel wreath. It was the image that
    • Thank you for sharing your story, it was most interesting and greatly appreciated, it makes this blog well worth the time to post. Regards Brian  
    • Hello I started collecting when I found my first Mauser cartridges in a field next to my parents' house next to Armentières. I was eight years old.  Then shrapnel, schrapnell balls, darts... That's how I became a historian. When I was 18, we used to walk through the fields with a metal detector to find our happiness. It was my time in the army as a research-writer in a research centre that made me love the orders of chivalry. I've been collecting them for 24 years now. Christophe
    • Thank you for your most interesting comment. The thrill of the chase didn't interest me in the beginning but over time it started to overshadow the act of simply adding yet another medal or group to the collection. Regards Brian  
×
×
  • Create New...