1914 star

[deejay]

Hi,

I am wondering, why is this medal so valuble (special)

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...6447&rd=1&rd=1

Curious,


DJ

[Mons 1914]

Hi,

The 1914 Star "Mons Star" was awarded for the early part of the first world war - 1914, a clasp was authorized, to be eligible for this persons had to be "In range of enemy artillery" during a period between 4 Aug - 22 Nov 1914.

The reason is - around 400,000 were issued, compared to around 2,500,000 1914 - 1915 Stars for the year 1915.

He was an officer! & and collectable Irish Regiment.
I haven't cheacked his Gallantry awards are correct, but this also helps!

Hope this helps
Scott

[deejay]

Thanks Scott,

I could not imagine a better answer.

Take care,

Dirk J.

[byterock]

form the ebay sale

'Looks like the back of the star has been in a fire or something because it shows pitting'

I think this should read.

'This is a cheap cast that has been stamped with a known soilder name.'


I am no expert of fake 14 starts but with the bad photos and the above description I would think we should raise the red flag here.

Any-one else have an opinion?

[Mons 1914]

The "Lieut" part looks like you would normally see it, I can't comment on the rest of the naming, because the pictures arnt to good.
But I must admit it does look a little shallow.



Scott

[leigh kitchen]

Strange looking reverse - looks like an original couple of inches of ribbon for your money though.

[Greeves]

I'd really want to see some good up-close photos of the obverse, and the reverse too - showing where the ring meets the rest of the medal. Don't like the pitting...too similar to a poor casting job. This is precisely the type of medal that a criminal would want to fake - collectable regiment, officer, gallantry recipient. Not saying it is a fake...but the possibility is definitely there!

[Greeves]

Thought this medal rang a bell. It was discussed on the British Medal Forum not too long ago. The general consensus was that it was not fire-damaged (a couple of members who posted are serving firefighters and said it would not look that way having been damaged by fire).

[Brandenburger]

Hi,

Just to add my two cents worth, I wouldn't touch that medal with a barge-pole.

As 'Greeves' says "Don't like the pitting...too similar to a poor casting job. This s precisely the type of medal that a criminal would want to fake - collectable regiment, officer, gallantry recipient." Its an out and out fake in my opinion. Why sell such a desirable star on ebay? it would go for far more at a proper (reputable) numismatic auction.

I had a 1919 victory medal that was in a 'fire' (believe a bit away from the actual flames) and it looked completely different (just a bit tarnished).

The naming also is truly awful (inconsistent depths, the 'IR' bit of the 'R.IR' looks horrid) and IMHO this medal would probably never been allowed to leave the workshop (I've not, in over 10 years of collecting British medals, seen a genuine one this badly named).

Pity, the guy paid a lot ($313) for that piece of c**p.

Interesting bit of info from the BMF: (quoting from "GRI7188")

Copper melts at @ 1900degF / 1037degC

Brass melts at @ 1450 - 1650degF / 787 - 898degC

Iron starts losing its structural integrity at 600degC

So how is it this medal didn't melt????

Regards
Tom