Any chance this 1914 star is good??

[SirHarry1]

Hello everyone,
I found this 1914 star recently. Ribbon and bar are repros anyway, but what about the star itself, any chance ist a good one?
Thanks
Harry

[SirHarry1]

reverse

[peter monahan]

I'm not sure the back of the suspension ring is meant to be flat as this one is, but I could be wrong. More importatnt, I think, an unnamed original would be worth more than many named examples so it would odd to sell it as part of a 'repro.' set. But that's just my two cents worth.

Does anyone know of a good site comparing the originals and the repops?

[nickn]

An original that's had the name removed??

[Bond]

An original that's had the name removed??

Indeed, back is too flat for an original unless it has been ground down but otherwise it seems correct.

A shame that someones history was erased in this way but it happened and probably continues to happen, I have one renamed to a man who was not entitled to the star so probably done by him as he thought he deserved it or perhaps by his family who assumed he should have had a trio.

[peter monahan]

That makes sense. I have certainly seen groups in which someone has added the medals he thought he was entitled to but didn't get for various reasons, some good, some bureacratic. Yes, a name erased Star would make sense in the context, especially if it was added to a broken set by family or collector then removed by subsequent owners.

I once got myself in trouble selling - in a hurry - a framed trio, having forgotten over the years that I'd added a replacement for a missing medal, so the frame held badges and 2 of 3 medals to a British Indian Army officer and one to a Sowar. [embarassed icon here].

[SirHarry1]

Well gents, thanks for all your comments. Seems the problem remains unsolved

[ROBB]

Looks like a repo star to me . Rob

[welrod_man]

I agree with Robb, It looks like a Duffer. The image is not clear enough to be genuine.

Obvious differences compare it to this one.

[leibregiment]

repro, sorry to say