Help with Gallipoli Star Maker

[Knight_David]

Hello,

A few days ago I bought this Gallipoli Star:







It´s made of Buntmetall, but has no maker mark. The seller told me that is was from a Turkish maker.

Could someone tell me something more about the maker?

Thanks in advance.

David

[Don D.]

I believe it is a modern fake chemically aged. The enamel doesn't look right and the date box is wrong, something a Turkish maker would not have done.

[Knight_David]

I believe it is a modern fake chemically aged. The enamel doesn't look right and the date box is wrong, something a Turkish maker would not have done.

Thanks Don D. for your answer. To Know more, why the date box is wrong?

Thanks.

David.

[Mike Swan]

I wouldn't be too hasty in dismissing this badge.

IMHO, it may well be a German-made specimen. I've read that German producers sometimes got the exact configuration of the Ottoman cyphers wrong.

The date should commence with a short vertical stroke.

Mike

[demir]

Hi,
It is not a Turkish made Medal as Don indicated, and again as he says the enamel doesn't look good in the photo. The maker is unknown most probably German made.

The date has to be 1333 in Arabic numerals but in this one it is 333. This has been seen in other foreign makers' medals as Mike says, some makers thought the 1 in front of the other numbers looks like as raised edge of the date box in the original Turkish made ones.

Regards
Demir

[saschaw]

Agree with Don this is most likely a recent fake, and not an old wearers copy.

[Knight_David]

Hi,
It is not a Turkish made Medal as Don indicated, and again as he says the enamel doesn't look good in the photo. The maker is unknown most probably German made.

The date has to be 1333 in Arabic numerals but in this one it is 333. This has been seen in other foreign makers' medals as Mike says, some makers thought the 1 in front of the other numbers looks like as raised edge of the date box in the original Turkish made ones.

Regards
Demir

Hi Demir,

Why enamel doesn't look good in the photo?
Do you think, as others, it´s a modern fake?
Better this one?



Thanks.

David.

[peterm]

Hi Demir,

Why enamel doesn't look good in the photo?
Do you think, as others, it´s a modern fake?
Better this one?



Thanks.

David.

IMO this one is NOT the same badge as posted above!

Kind regards, Peter

[Knight_David]

IMO this one is NOT the same badge as posted above!

Kind regards, Peter

Of course, is another one (from the same Dealer) it´s only to know your opinion.

Thanks.

David.

[peterm]

Of course, is another one (from the same Dealer) it´s only to know your opinion.

Thanks.

David.

This one is an original badge IMO, the first one - as Don and Sascha stated before - is a reproduction.

Kind regards, Peter

[Don D.]

Of course, is another one (from the same Dealer) it´s only to know your opinion.

Thanks.

David.

It appears to be a good BB&Co.

[Knight_David]

This one is an original badge IMO, the first one - as Don and Sascha stated before - is a reproduction.

Kind regards, Peter

Hello Peter,

Why in your opinion the first one is not a good one?

Thanks!

David.

[saschaw]

Why in your opinion the first one is not a good one?

I'm not Peter but hope may answer though. It's the bad enemal quality and the fake patina.

These are often offered on ebay by some certain crooks and flood the market.

[Knight_David]

I´m in contact with the dealer and he tell me that I can change the first one by the second one.

Thanks a lot for your opinions.

David.

[Rich G]

David

Unless the second one is very cheap, I wouldn't but it as it has lost all the silver plating to the obverse. As the price is €325 I wouldn't pay that price for a BB&Co in perfect condition.

Tio, no la compra, el precio es demasiado por el estado. Devuelva la otra y solicite la devolución de su dinero. Puedes encontrar un ejemplo mejor en otro sitio.

Rich