Announcement

**steiner68** · 09-28-2012, 01:10 PM

1

Attached Files

CIMG2316-20120927.jpg (85.6 KB, 75 views)

**J C Gray** · 09-28-2012, 01:17 PM

It looks like it was made yesterday by someone who hadn't a clue what they were doing. the order of precedence is all over the place.

**Tom Yanacek** · 09-28-2012, 01:28 PM

Hello,

The order of precedence is way out of whack.

Not even remotely close.

Here is the proper sequence:

Best regards,
Tom

Attached Files

ribbon bar-wrong order.jpg (120.0 KB, 74 views)

**steiner68** · 09-28-2012, 01:30 PM

thank you !

order was suspect

**Tom Yanacek** · 09-28-2012, 01:33 PM

Unfortunately, these slotted tab back ribbon bars are very easy to assemble and therefore are the most common type of postwar put-togethers.

Best regards,
Tom

**JasonA** · 09-28-2012, 01:38 PM

Tom,

I saw this one today as well. Even though the back is not scratched, which is usually the sign that these may not have been messed with, it's still a crap shoot. The order is so glaringly wrong here that I quickly moved on.

That said, is the back artificially aged to cover up mild scratches? Or was it just adroitly reassembled? Perhaps there's no way to reasonably say one way or the other.

Best regards,

Jason

**Tom Yanacek** · 09-28-2012, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by JasonA View Post

Tom,

I saw this one today as well. Even though the back is not scratched, which is usually the sign that these may not have been messed with, it's still a crap shoot. The order is so glaringly wrong here that I quickly moved on.

That said, is the back artificially aged to cover up mild scratches? Or was it just adroitly reassembled? Perhaps there's no way to reasonably say one way or the other.

Best regards,

Jason

Hello Jason,

As you say, it looks really good from the back: No evidence of prying or scratching to the backplate or tabs. Gives me the impression that this was not anything that was taken apart and then reassembled. Must have been a random assembly using unissued/surplus parts. But, whereas we can overlook simple mistakes in order of precedence as period errors, we have to dismiss that notion in this particular case: The placement on this bar is so out of whack that there is no chance of this being a legitimate period assembly.

Best regards,
Tom

**Tom Yanacek** · 09-28-2012, 03:11 PM

We also have three different styles of crossed sword devices being used on the ribbon bar. That is another indication to me that this was just assembled from a hodge-podge of leftover parts.

Best regards,
Tom

**luftkrieg** · 09-28-2012, 03:57 PM

Definitely a put-together but using original parts.

Kind regards
Pierce

**luftkrieg** · 09-28-2012, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by tyanacek View Post

We also have three different styles of crossed sword devices being used on the ribbon bar. That is another indication to me that this was just assembled from a hodge-podge of leftover parts.

Best regards,
Tom

Hi Tom,

There are many original examples that use various types of swords so I would not use that as an indicator of something being messed with, though in some cases it can be a factor but with other factors taken into consideration. I think it is important to dispel this "myth".

Best regards
Pierce

**JasonA** · 09-28-2012, 05:03 PM

Originally posted by tyanacek View Post

Hello Jason,

As you say, it looks really good from the back: No evidence of prying or scratching to the backplate or tabs. Gives me the impression that this was not anything that was taken apart and then reassembled. Must have been a random assembly using unissued/surplus parts. But, whereas we can overlook simple mistakes in order of precedence as period errors, we have to dismiss that notion in this particular case: The placement on this bar is so out of whack that there is no chance of this being a legitimate period assembly.

Best regards,
Tom

Thanks, Tom. That is a helpful, logical train of thought. This is how we learn, and when I say "we," I mean guys like me.

Best,

J-

**Tom Yanacek** · 09-28-2012, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by luftkreig View Post

Hi Tom,

There are many original examples that use various types of swords so I would not use that as an indicator of something being messed with, though in some cases it can be a factor but with other factors taken into consideration. I think it is important to dispel this "myth".

Best regards
Pierce

Hi Pierce,

Of course there are exceptions, like with everything else. But I stand behind my statement. This is (IMO) a very valid criterion for evaluating a ribbon bar and I wouldn't refer to it as a "myth" either. Everything on a ribbon bar/medal bar needs to be evaluated and a determination of authenticity should be based on all indicators. I have always stressed that.

But seeing a ribbon bar having three ribbons with crossed swords devices and all three of them are different styles raises a "red flag" for me. And with the ribbon bar that started this thread, it is just one more nail in the coffin.

Now, perhaps, if I see this very thing on another bar where all other indicators point to the bar being original, then seeing the different styles of crossed swords could be overlooked.

I do believe, though, that assemblers wanted to produce a quality product with the look of uniformity. Therefore, in general, they would want to use the same style of crossed swords devices. I'm sure the assemblers had bins containing a large supply of these devices and it would make sense that the bins contained the same style of devices from the same supplier. I do see the very real possibility of different styles getting mixed together in bins and then ending up with a mixture on a period-assembled bar. We know the same thing did happen with other ribbon devices such as long service eagle devices. But seeing a mixture of sword devices is indicative to me as an assembler that either lacked the eye for detail or didn't care about the job they were doing. Most wanted to create a nice looking product as they took pride in their work.

Here are two ribbon bars with the look of uniformity that most assemblers would want to achieve. They look so much nicer than seeing a hodge-podge of devices.

Best regards,
Tom

Attached Files

**Tom Yanacek** · 09-28-2012, 07:45 PM

Anyone interested in German ribbon bars should read this article by Rick Lundström. The wealth of information presented in this article is overwhelming and without compare. In my opinion, there is no one that knows more about German ribbon/medal bars than Rick Lundström. Do yourself a favor and read this article.

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/rela...bons/index.htm

Best regards,
Tom

**Alan_G** · 09-29-2012, 06:30 AM

Originally posted by luftkreig View Post

Hi Tom,

There are many original examples that use various types of swords so I would not use that as an indicator of something being messed with, though in some cases it can be a factor but with other factors taken into consideration. I think it is important to dispel this "myth".

Best regards
Pierce

I fully support Pierce on this. Swords are NOT an indication that a ribbon bar is a forgery or one that has been tampered with.

Plenty of example out there of original ribbon bars that use mixed variety of swords.

Announcement

feldspange - wiederholungsspangen

feldspange - wiederholungsspangen

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread