Stogieman Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 I will allow your imagination to infer what I meant by "POC"
Stogieman Posted April 14, 2006 Author Posted April 14, 2006 More.....To my eyes it looks too "soft" and indistinct to originals I have studied so far...
Stogieman Posted April 14, 2006 Author Posted April 14, 2006 It was the last photo that really made me say YUCK!
Riley1965 Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 Are you referring to the medal being"soft" in detail? The missing enamel doesn't help.Doc
Guest Rick Research Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 I've NEVER seen a 1938 "Jubilee" Medal award book that never had a photo and was not signed.The serial numbered screw disk does NOT match (perhaps just as well) the serial number in the book.The suspension ring on the medal has been clipped, meaning that it was moved to a M1943 suspension and this has been "retro-fitted."
Stogieman Posted April 14, 2006 Author Posted April 14, 2006 So my best guess would be a total sham here... I just don't think the detail and crispness of this medal, especially the reverse, is consistent with an original. At best, a terribly worn, terribly messed with piece. As my cousin in France would say... "Not in my collection"
Riley1965 Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 Gotcha!! I see what you mean. Not in my collection either.Doc
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