TOPIC:

I had a 3rd Contingent (Veterinary Officer) and was told several times that I should sell it since it devalued the quality of my collection due to being wrongly engraved. Naming in running script. I can not see him on Henk's roll but glad to see an explanation as to the aberrant naming.

Hi David
There were 185 "unengraved" QSA's to 3rd NZMR issued. I only showed 2 pages of the roll.
Is your man Vet Lt A C Wilkie?
Henk

H.C yes

Hi David
Will post relevant page tomorrow
Henk

djb wrote: Phil, Stephen,

I learnt a lot from the this thread as I was unaware of the background to how these medals were named. If I had purchased one of these 'officially' named medals and it looked like Henk's example, I would have returned it as a jeweler's naming, unaware of the explanation.

I agree that the catalogue description is not helpful. Perhaps they could have said they medals were named in the usual style for this contingent?

With thanks again
David

Hi David,
Fully agree, that's my point entirely. As soon as you start to see the words 'officially engraved' alarm bells should ring when it comes to these NZ QSAs. The only officially engraved medals I have seen are to officer casualties. These are named in the standard 'officers style' chisel engraved script. Third Contingent non-officer casualty medals are usually impressed with number, rank, name and N. Z'LAND R.R.

There are quite a few Second Contingent non-casualty medals which are impressed - these are impressed with number, rank, name and N. Z’LAND M.R. - it is 'easier' to get a Second Contingent impressed medal than a Third. If you were putting together a complete contingent collection, I'd be hunting these impressed medals in the first instance. Stops any argument about naming.

Henk: Here's a newspaper photo of Jacob Kennington, in case you don't have one.





Cheers
Phil

Hello Phil

I think you are dead right to raise this issue. I hope you have written to DNW.

Catalogue descriptions from respected auction houses and dealers become fact and as David Grant has pointed out can lead to incorrect conclusions about the authenticity (and value) of a medal.

Keep shining the light!

Regards
Meurig