sorry
-
-
-
-
In comparing this piece to the “standard” (BB&C0) pieces,I see several obvious differences; but first I would like to say that most other examples, such as those by Godet, which are considered to be legitimate conform much more closely to the BB&Co pieces.
Now... where to begin. Let’s list them in random order.
1. The general shape of this thing is all wrong. Because of the proportion (the shorter, fatter arms of the star) it looks more like a redone Soviet Order of he Red Star.
2. The pin arrangement is, uh, different.
3. Sure, maybe they have been polished down over the years, but let’s be honest - the Arabic symbols look like bad, very bad, castings.
4. The massively built up enamel, while impressive, is unlike anything I have ever seen on any other Gallipoli Star - good or bad.
All things considered, unless you are into collecting very interesting, unusual and questionable variations of the Gallipoli Star, I would suggest that you pass on this and let it go to someone who is.
Best wishes,
Wild CardComment
-
I, too, concur with all of the previous responses on the eBay star--it's an interesting attempt at copying the finer cut-out (ie, 'luxury') version of the star, but has shortcomings in several areas, as Wild Card, et al, pointed out.
To underscore what jumped out at me, the enamel is too 'globby' and should be translucent enough to make out the finer etched patterns below it, and the rivets shouldn't be 'cratered' on the back (sorry for all of the expert technical jargon)
The Arabic script is also too rough with imperfections; I own two of these luxus versions, so here's my Wagner for comparison:
Star closeup.jpgComment
Comment