Seadog Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Probably a silly question but I noticed the WW1 MC below on ebay and wondered why the seller has not mentioned the recipient?. Do I understand correctly that such a medal would be inscribed on the reverse but this one is not, I read that the cross is WW1 so I presume there are more details available. Why would anyone pay the sort of money asked for a blank medal?,perhaps members can help me with this question. Link http://www.ebay.co.u...=item19d318b825 Norman Added: I now understand that the medal was in fact issued with a plain back. I bet there have been some fake inscriptions put on these over the years. What a mistake not to officially engrave the recipients name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Owl Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 The Military Cross was always issued un-named. They are, however, often found privately engraved on the reverse. This example is contained in an original case of issue, but has lost its original ribbon and pin for wearing. It is definitely overpriced at £700 and I certainly would not purchase personally, as there are many examples on the market in original condition and for considerably less money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 10 August , 2012 Author Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Thanks for the info, I had added to my post prior to your confirmation. I am in no way an expert in WW1 medals and this particular situation was complete news to me and why anyone would want a blank medal like this with apparently no provenance is beyond me. Regards Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Old Owl where do you do your MC shopping? Overpriced at at 700 quid, they can go for over £800 unnamed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 10 August , 2012 Author Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Bear with me for a moment as I improve my understanding of the motivation for some to purchase an MC such as the new one below, also on ebay. I can quite understand that if such a medal is inscribed or there is sufficient provenance to link it to a recipient then such a medal would be very tempting to have in a collection. Look at this one a Glosters badge on the box and nothing else about the possible holder at all. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/WW1-Military-Cross-M-C-in-Original-Box-of-Issue-Gloucestershire-Cap-Badge-/261078397411?pt=UK_Collectables_Militaria_LE&hash=item3cc97c31e3 Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Owl Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Old Owl where do you do your MC shopping? Overpriced at at 700 quid, they can go for over £800 unnamed! Obviously not the same places as you--but I think that you have to take into account that this medal is not in its original condition--and to be quite honest without closer inspection(which these photos do not allow) this could even be a copy. I would agree that I have seen WW1 M.C.s for sale in dealers lists for circa £800(have you bought one?or indeed do they sell)--but I still see genuine ones on occasion for nearer £600. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Owl Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Bear with me for a moment as I improve my understanding of the motivation for some to purchase an MC such as the new one below, also on ebay. I can quite understand that if such a medal is inscribed or there is sufficient provenance to link it to a recipient then such a medal would be very tempting to have in a collection. Look at this one a Glosters badge on the box and nothing else about the possible holder at all. http://www.ebay.co.u...=item3cc97c31e3 Norman You have to understand that on occasion a dealer or collector will purchase a WW1 BWM & VM pair to an officer with a unique name, initial and rank combination who is entitled to an M.C. The collector can now purchase an un-named example, such as the one you describe on ebay, and thus have a complete group! Although some would argue that this is not the original medal with which he was issued--this is something which it is impossible to say as it could by sheer coincidence be one and the same medal--who knows? I hope this clarifies the matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Owl Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 "I bet there have been some fake inscriptions put on these over the years." Sadly, I am sure that you are quite correct in this assumption. Unfortunately there are always a few unscrupulous people out there who will try and gain through this type of trickery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 10 August , 2012 Author Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Old Owl I do understand your reasoning and my posts are in no way critical of such collections or collectors. It did come as a surprise to me that the MC was not officially engraved with the name of the recipient and on a personal basis if I were a medal collector having an unnamed and unattributed MC in my collection would not be a thing I would consider especially with the prices quoted in my examples. However again many thanks for the information and just one more question if I may, is the Military Medal (MM) officially blank as well?. Thanks Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Owl Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Thanks I do understand your reasoning and my posts are in no way critical of such collections or collectors. It did come as a surprise to me that the MC was not officially engraved with the name of the recipient and on a personal basis if I were a medal collector having an unnamed and unattributed MC in my collection would not be a thing I would consider especially with the prices quoted in my examples. However many thanks for the information and just one more question if I may, is the Military Medal (MM) officially blank as well?. Thanks Norman The M.M is always named, apart from a few hundred(not sure of exact numbers) which were issued to foreign nationals, mainly French and Belgians, although I am sure that there were other nationalities possibly too? This is also true for the D.C.M. Other medals which were issued un-named were the D.S.C.,D.F.C. and A.F.C. although I think that these had a date of issue engraved(WW2) on the reverse. I must admit that as these are gallantry awards, it is hard to see why they were not individually engraved or impressed, unless of course it was a money saving excercise? Robert ps The M.C. also had the year date engraved on the reverse from 1939--but was still issued unamed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 10 August , 2012 Author Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Nice one. my lknowledge of these medals has taken a great leap forward!. Regards Norman PS I made a minor alteration to my post quoted by your good self. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 I find it interesting that when the MC was first instituted it specifically stated that the letters MC couldn't be used after the name- Seventhly: It is ordained that The Military Cross shall not confer any individual .precedence, and shall not entitle the recipient to any addition after his name as part of his description or title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Wilson Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 I find it interesting that when the MC was first instituted it specifically stated that the letters MC couldn't be used after the name- Seventhly: It is ordained that The Military Cross shall not confer any individual .precedence, and shall not entitle the recipient to any addition after his name as part of his description or title. Well spotted, but this restriction did not find favour in the Army and a revised Royal Warrant was approved on 23rd August, 1916 - see L.G. 26th August, 1916 which allowed the recipient to use the letters M.C.after his name. See pages 210/211 of British Gallantry Awards by Abbott and Tamplin. The Military Cross is not a medal it's a decoration - see clauses 3, 5, 6 and 8 of the original Royal Warrant of 28 December 1914 as published in the London Gazette 1st January 1915. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Thanks for the info, I had added to my post prior to your confirmation. I am in no way an expert in WW1 medals and this particular situation was complete news to me and why anyone would want a blank medal like this with apparently no provenance is beyond me. Regards Norman Norman, The WW1 KGV Military Cross was always issued blank without the name of the recipient engraved on it, personally, I prefer to buy medals with a provenance and as part of a documented medal grouping. Attached is a photograph of my WW1 Military Cross grouping issued to Lt. L.C. Sibborn, RFA. who won his Military Cross on 6 May 1918, and after that in WW2, he became a Lt. Commander in the R.N. Only 37,081 Military Crosses were awarded for " Services in the Field " between August 1914 and May 1920, so it is a rare award. After 1938, the year of the award was engraved on the lower arm of the cross. Because of their rarity, documented Military Cross groupings can sell for 2500 pounds and up, depending on the other medals in the grouping. Regards, LF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 I have been searching for the Hansard references to the discussion about using the letters after the name, they were quite interesting, not everyone agreed with the award. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Here is another example from my Collection of a Military Cross grouping in ' miniature ' as worn with Mess Dress or civilian Formal Dress. Miniature medals are one half size of the full size medals. LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Owl Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 I find it interesting that when the MC was first instituted it specifically stated that the letters MC couldn't be used after the name- Seventhly: It is ordained that The Military Cross shall not confer any individual .precedence, and shall not entitle the recipient to any addition after his name as part of his description or title. This is an interesting fact of which I was not aware, did the same apply to the DCM and MM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Owl Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Norman, The WW1 KGV Military Cross was always issued blank without the name of the recipient engraved on it, personally, I prefer to buy medals with a provenance and as part of a documented medal grouping. Attached is a photograph of my WW1 Military Cross grouping issued to Lt. L.C. Sibborn, RFA. who won his Military Cross on 6 May 1918, and after that in WW2, he became a Lt. Commander in the R.N. Only 37,081 Military Crosses were awarded for " Services in the Field " between August 1914 and May 1920, so it is a rare award. After 1938, the year of the award was engraved on the lower arm of the cross. Because of their rarity, documented Military Cross groupings can sell for 2500 pounds and up, depending on the other medals in the grouping. Regards, LF. Hi L.F., An interesting group, but I don't think (and this is only my opinion) that the M.C. can be classed as a rare award. There are certain periods/campaigns for which they could, and indeed are descibed as scarce, but rarely can they be classified as rare. Awards of the M.C. for 1914 are indeed scarce and quite collectible--but rare, I am not too certain about!! An M.C. for the troubles in Ireland may be the scarcest? and possibly rare? or for the Cameroons may be again described as scarce. Please understand that this comes from collecting medals for circa 35 years and is an opinion which I have built up over that period. I would of course be pleased to hear other comments regarding this. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 This is an interesting fact of which I was not aware, did the same apply to the DCM and MM? Army Order No.13 of January 1918 authorised all servicemen who had received the D.C.M. or the M.M. to use the appropriate letters after their names. LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottmarchand Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 A few points of clarification - the MC is not especially rare, value is widely dependant on the individuals actions, unit, theatre, service branch, additional medals or awards in the group etc. They can be had in trios for the RFA as low as 900 pounds and exceed 10,000 for WW I RFC ace's for example. IMO, while a nice group, LF paid the year 2020's prices for the group, and it would be very difficult to sell on any time soon and get anywhere near that sum. There is a reason it languished on epay for many many months. However, nothing wrong with being happy with ones purchase. I wildley overpaid market for a an RFC uniform group in 1992, it took 18 years before market approached what I paid for it, still have it, always will. However, all these prices are really subjective and up to a willing buyer and a willing seller - intrisically the medals are not 'worth' much at all. MC's did not have the year of issue dated engraved by the mint until 1938 as mentioed above. The nice thing abotu WW I grousp is there will always be a named service medal. For WW II officers groups it is a very hairy provenance game as no medals were issued named in WWW 2 except VC's and OR's gallantry and certain orders like th BEM. This was a cost saving measure, the naming of WW I service awards turned out to be enourmously costly and time conusming for the government. The reason for officers gallantry awards (excepting the VC) being issued unnamed is a function of British class values. Officers were automatically presumed to be 100% trustworthy and would never repreent themselves other than properly. Hence they could be trusted with the award when worn as being earned and not fraudulently represented. The enlisted ranks were somewhat circumspect and issuing as named was a measure against misrepresentation if challenged to verify the awards legitimacy. Interesetingly, in the modern era, since the amalgamation and changes to the awards system in 1992, all awards are issued named and there are not distinct awards for officers vs. enlisted ranks, all ranks are elginable for the same awards. There are a number of copy MC's floating around, but original unamed examples are widely availble and prices are variable. Spotting good copies is at times tricky. And not all copies were meant to be fraudulent. Many officers has spare sets made up for placing on the wall, wearing to the pub on remembrance day etc. Companies like Spink made wonderful ones in the 1930's and some of the variations are partially, as I understand it, to avoid confusions with royal mint examples. Anyway, my $0.02 - back to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Hi L.F., An interesting group, but I don't think (and this is only my opinion) that the M.C. can be classed as a rare award. There are certain periods/campaigns for which they could, and indeed are descibed as scarce, but rarely can they be classified as rare. Awards of the M.C. for 1914 are indeed scarce and quite collectible--but rare, I am not too certain about!! An M.C. for the troubles in Ireland may be the scarcest? and possibly rare? or for the Cameroons may be again described as scarce. Please understand that this comes from collecting medals for circa 35 years and is an opinion which I have built up over that period. I would of course be pleased to hear other comments regarding this. Robert Robert, I own both the Military Cross and the Military Medal, and I personally consider the Military Cross to be a rare award, with the numbers of each being awarded between August 1914 and May 1920 as follows :- Military Cross - 37,081 Military Medal - 115,577 When you consider the millions taking part in WW1, those individal acts of bravery which resulted in the award of the Military Cross to those 37,081, were rare events. Other gallantry awards such as the V.C., I consider to be ultra-rare. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 10 August , 2012 Author Share Posted 10 August , 2012 LF, I appreciate you posting the photos of the medals. Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 LF paid the year 2020's prices for the group, ScottM, You are incorrect as to the price you think I paid for this grouping, originally this MC grouping was offered for sale at the seller's then asking price. I was able to negotiate with the seller an excellent purchase price for the grouping, and if you check the completed listings, you will see that I only paid approximately half of the original asking price, and anyone with a knowledge of medal values will know that my purchase price was extremely low, and well below current market prices for such a nice and well documented 8 medal Military Cross grouping. Current market prices for Military Cross Groupings are ranging from 2000/3500 pounds depending on the medals in the grouping, and the market is very strong for nice examples. Regards, LF LF, I appreciate you posting the photos of the medals. Norman Norman, My pleasure. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Owl Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Robert, I own both the Military Cross and the Military Medal, and I personally consider the Military Cross to be a rare award, with the numbers of each being awarded between August 1914 and May 1920 as follows :- Military Cross - 37,081 Military Medal - 115,577 When you consider the millions taking part in WW1, those individal acts of bravery which resulted in the award of the Military Cross to those 37,081, were rare events. Other gallantry awards such as the V.C., I consider to be ultra-rare. Regards, LF Hi LF, You are of course entitled to your own opinion and to a degree I can see your perspective on this, however, if you were to discuss this with any medal dealer or WW1 collector I don't think that you would find one who would agree with your description of the GV M.C. as a rare award, and don't take my word for this, just ask a few!! I hope that you can see this from another perspective, rather than comparing this to the number of men in total who served during WW1, surely you should compare this to the number of officers and warrant officers who were eligible for this award--which you will find is a much smaller total!! Any ideas how many? Probably circa 10% of the total who served. Regards, Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 10 August , 2012 Share Posted 10 August , 2012 Hi LF, You are of course entitled to your own opinion and to a degree I can see your perspective on this, Regards, Robert Robert, I also acknowledge your perspective, and respect your personal opinion. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now