Backhanded Marks: Special Markings on 1930s and 40s Rating Badges
When visitors read the entirety of the articles published on The Veterans Collection, It may seem as though I favor Navy items with my militaria interest. Though all branches of the armed forces are represented within my collection, being a Navy veteran, I suppose that I pursue mostly what I know. Within the area of naval militaria, tend to prefer the enlisted uniforms above those from the officer ranks. An even deeper dive into what has been published on this site indicates my level of interest within the sphere of rating badge insignia.
This Fire Control Technician 1/c shows the script, “Liona,” the trademark of Lion Brothers on the reverse side.
For me, collecting rating badges amounts to a walk through history. As one can select virtually any current rating and begin to trace its roots of development back to the beginning of the naval service. With my own rating, I constructed such a lineage – a family tree of sorts – that resulted in what is today the Operations Specialist (see: Tracking U.S. Navy Specialties: The History of Radarmen). The designs of the rating badges themselves have been taken through a progression that commenced with sailors hand-embroidering their own directly from an ink-stamped fabric pattern to today’s mass-produced (and quite sterile, in my honest opinion) rating badges (see: Navy Enlisted Ratings Eliminated: What are the Impacts on Sailors and Collectors?). Though I have spent a bit of effort researching and sharing my results in this collecting focus, a recent question submitted to our Contact US form revealed that there is still more to share in regards to rating badges that will help collectors, family members (who, like me, inherited pieces from a veteran relative) and folks who are simply interested in navy uniform history.
“As I was flipping through my father’s uniform patches, I noticed that the woman who embroidered them had also embroidered her name on the back (and) I was wondering if anyone else had noticed that?”
While all of the articles that are published here have dealt with what appears on the front, I have yet to deal with the information that appears on the reverse of many rating badges. With markings applied in different manners (chain stitched, woven or ink-stamped) and with varying information, the meaning of some of the information is self-evident while others are rather cryptic leaving collectors to only speculate as to who applied them and why.
For a few years leading up to World War II extending to well in the 1960s, many rating badges were marked on their reverse sides (though a larger percentage of them were manufactured with blank backs). One expert, John A. Stacey, a preeminent U.S. Navy rating researcher and collector has narrowed down many of the embroidered details and provided the details in his book, U.S. Navy Rating Badges, Specialty Marks & Distinguishing Marks 1885-1982.
Perhaps the best way to approach the marks is to group them by the two types of marks: Manufacturers and Dates.
-
- These Fire Controlman rating badges were made by Blumberg Bros. in New York.
-
- From the bottom: 1944, 1945 and 1946 dated New York Emblem Company rating badges.
-
- This Molder 1/c is marked with “N Y” and is most likely made by the New York Emblem Company.
-
- This still unknown “C” mark (slightly obscured by the red embroidery stitch) is located at the bottom-most chevron of this first class petty officer rating badge.
-
- Although it seems to be a white rating badge, this chief radioman on khaki features the embroidered anchor mark on the bottom point of the upper chevron.
Manufacturers:
While this list indicates a handful of rating badge suppliers, in reality there were countless manufacturers providing the Navy with millions or rating badges though the large majority left their work unmarked. Some of the manufacturers’ marks that I have on rating badges within my own collection (indicated below with bold) are the more commonly found varieties. Two of the marks (“C” and the anchor symbol) remain a mystery as their origins or, perhaps what the marks represented. While I do own a confirmed GEMSCO rating badge, it was manufactured in the early post-war years and lacks a physical embroidered mark (it is sealed in the branded cellophane). The wartime GEMSCO, Danecraft and Vanguard marked badges are embroidered in similar fashion to the Liona-marked badge (seen in the first image shown above).
- “B (with a year)” – Blumberg Brothers (of New York)
- “Danecraft” – Danecraft, Inc., Providence, RI.
- “GEMSCO” – General Merchandising Co., Milford, CT.
- “Liona”– Lion Brothers, Baltimore, MD. (pre-war Lion Brothers badges had the Liona on both sides of the V of the chevron (one is mirrored – reversed)
- “NYEC” – New York Emblem Company
- “N Y” – Possibly the New York Emblem Company but not definitively known.
- “Vanguard” – Vanguard Inc. of New York. Current supplier of rating badges for the U.S. Navy.
- “C” – Unknown manufacturer
- Marked with an anchor symbol – Unknown manufacturer
Besides the maker’s marks being embroidered onto the backs of badges, collectors may also find ratings with what appears to be dates affixed in various locations.
-
- These Torpedoman 1/c and Chief Boatswain’s mate rating badges have the dates placed in the apex of the top chevron.
-
- Two 1944 and one 1945 dated rating badges.
There is debate among collectors regarding what the date information refers to. While preeminent rating researcher John Stacey has determined that the four digits mark the date that the badge was made. Other prominent collectors with years of experience believe that the date pertains to the year that the contract was awarded (by the Navy Department) for the manufacturing of the badge. If it is a contract date, it is possible that it also coincides with the manufacturing date. However, it could have been made within the contract year or in those that follow. It is not precisely known when the dates began to be applied to rating badges but I have seen some (displayed in others’ collections) dated as early as 1936. Embroidered dates are consistently located in a few places on the reverse sides of these 1930s-40s rating badges.
Dates:
- Stitched; Top Chevron (located in the “V”)
- Stitched; Lower Chevron (left of “V”)
- Woven – “BeVo*” style.
- Ink stamped – Locations of the date stamp placement can vary widely from directly on the back of the chevrons, above or below the eagle or even directly upon the backing of the embroidery.
While I have several hundred rating badges, the majority of them with back embroidery carry the Liona markings. The earliest date mark that I have is from 1941 and I only have one or two of the C and Anchor marked-badges. I will always be on the lookout for other rating badges with these specialized markings but only if what is on the front aligns with what I collect.
See also:
- Discerning Birds: U.S. Navy Rating Badges from WWI to WWII
- Rare Bird – Outside of Uniform Regulations
- Navy Enlisted Ratings Eliminated: What are the Impacts on Sailors and Collectors?
- Silver Eagles: Navy Bullion Rates
- Tracking U.S. Navy Specialties: The History of Radarmen
- Chiefly Limited: Space for Uniforms is at a Premium
- Militaria Bargains to be Had
- A Temporary Break From Tradition: Navy Shoulder Sleeve Insignia
* BeVo weave is a machine-woven process developed in the early 1800s by a Frenchman named Jacquard. The manufacturing process used a roll of material that was fed into a weaving machine synchronously as a card strip (that had a series of holes forming the design pattern used as a guide) was fed in. The mechanical elements would extract the information from the card and weave the design into the base material. In the late 19th and early 20th century, European military uniforms were adorned with rank and insgnia manufactured using this process. “BeVo” is a combination of words (“Be” from the German word for partnership: beteiligung and Vo from vorsteher: derived from the merging of two German firms – Lucas Vorsteher and Ewald Vorsteher).
Focused on Niche Areas of Collecting: USS Washington
What is the difference between a collector and a hoarder? It is a fair question that I often ask myself, especially when I am at a decision point before pulling the trigger on an acquisition. Some folks may decide to move forward with a purchase based upon a single element while others employ a matrix of factors that guide their choices. As many of these factors are subjective and are unique to the individual, it is impossible for one person to answer a the aforementioned question. Psychology professor Randy O. Frost (of Smith College) wrote a fantastic piece, “When Collecting Becomes Hoarding” that is rather insightful in guiding collectors in avoiding the entrapments that lead to the devastating condition of hoarding.
My (simple to suggest yet difficult to adhere to) advice to those who are interested in collecting militaria can be summed up with just one word: FOCUS! To some, focusing on a national military is focus enough. However, I can only imagine what their homes or storage areas (of someone who collects US Militaria) must look like as they gather pieces from four branches of the armed forces. In my estimation, the level of focus that makes the most sense is one that aligns with several criteria. For me these are:
- What story am I trying to uncover and convey with my collection and does the piece align with it?
- Does artifact meet with my primary interest?
- Does the piece meet my budget constraints?
- Do I have the space to preserve and protect the artifact from further decay and damage or to display and enjoy it?
My collecting has a few, very specific focuses and perhaps the most broad of those resides with baseball militaria. Thankfully, this category is extremely limited in terms of available artifacts which, if I pursued even 50 percent of what arrives on the market, I would still be very limited in what actually landed into my home. Being a Navy veteran, most of my collection touches naval history in some manner. Within this arena, I also pursue artifacts related to a few specific ships (the two that I served aboard and the one that my grandfather commissioned and served aboard during WWII). In total, there are about a half-dozen U.S. Navy warships from which I possess related artifacts.
A cabinet card photograph of the USS Washington that has been hand-toned (colorized) shows the white-and-buff color-scheme of the day (before the Navy transitioned to haze gray). This image has some moisture damage on the right side.
This real photo postcard of the USS Washington (taken while she lies at anchor off of Seattle, her future namesake) is one of my favorite photos of the ship.
One of those warships that I collect is the USS Washington – which is comprised of a few vessels beginning with the Tennessee class Armored Cruiser (ACR-11) that was commissioned in 1906. I also collect items from the three vessels that have carried the name (BB-47, BB-56 and SSN-787) bringing the total pool from which to draw collecting interest (with this ship) to four. Well, let me make a slight correction; The armored cruiser Washington experienced a reclassification and corresponding name-change due to the rapidly advancing technology and the Navy’s ship-naming policies. In 1916, the ship was renamed USS Seattle in order to free up Washington to be used for a new class and in ship-of-the-line-category. Just 22 days following congressional approval for four Colorado-class battleships (coincidentally, the USS Washington would be the only one of the three to not be finished due to terms of the 1922 Washington Naval Treaty).
As I have been able to secure a modest array of pieces that are associated with the earlier USS Washington/USS Seattle (see: Sound Timing and Patience Pays Off and Naval Heritage Commemorated in Silver), the artifacts that arrive to the market for this ship are scarce. In addition to a few homefront pieces and the cruise book, I have managed to assemble a small collection of original vintage photographs (including CDVs, RPPCs and a cabinet card) from this vessel.
It isn’t often that pieces surface onto the market from (or are associated with pr attributed to) a ship that effectively existed for a decade more than a century ago. Artifacts that actually came from a ship can be difficult to prove in the absence of rock solid provenance. Depending upon the time-period, the ship’s name is seldom, if at all, emblazoned onto a equipment or crew-used items aside from wardroom china or silver service elements. Enlisted uniforms (flat hat tallies before WWII and uniform shoulder UIC patches from the 1950s-on), depending on the era, can bear the ship’s name. In my collection are pieces that fit into a different category: ship-associated. These artifacts range from folk/trench art to sweetheart or family (homefront) pieces that serve as reminders of the sailor’s service rather than being derived from the ship itself.
Distracted by the fantastic blue and gold colors along with the name of the ship, I initially believed the pillow dated to the early decades of the 20th century (source: eBay image).
One such piece, associated with one of the ships that I focus my collecting upon, was listed at auction several months ago and caught my attention for several reasons. Brightly colored and adorned with felt-applique lettering and naval adornments, a homefront pillow that bore some similarities to another navy piece that was already in my collection (see: Dream of Me When You Sleep: Homefront Military Pillow Covers). As I reviewed the listing, I began to focus on the similarities shared between my 1918 Navy pillow and this one that was being listed with the initial thought that it might pre-date 1916 (when the USS Washington ACR-11 was reclassified and re-named). I set my bid amount and waited for the auction close as the date that the pillow was made was quite secondary to my desire to have a piece associated with the Washington, regardless of the era or specific hull.
-
- The stitching of the lettering and the design of the interlocking “USS” hinted that the pillow might have been associated to the USS Washington (ACR-11) hull (source: eBay image).
-
- More focused on the stitching, I overlooked the CPO insignia design (source: eBay image).
The only original image of the WWII battleship, USS Washington (BB-56) that I have in my collection, shows the bow of the most-decorated non-carrier of WWII slicing through the slightly rough seas of the Pacific. Her two forward mounts of her main battery appear almost diminutive in the absence of objects of scale.
The pillow arrived a week after my successful auction bid secured win, and I spent some time carefully and gently cleaning the artifact as the felt fabric, though not brittle, could easily tear. The backside of the pillow shows considerable fading having been exposed to a constant light source for years (perhaps placed on the back of a sofa near a window). My assumption of the date of the pillow continued as I overlooked a very obvious indication of the true age. It wasn’t until I began to truly examine the pillow while making descriptive notes (just prior to authoring this article) that I finally recognized the most obvious indication of the artifact’s age. On the bottom corner is a felt applique representation of a chief petty officer’s cap device. The “U.S.N.” lettering was near-entirely horizontally aligned adhering to the pattern used by the device’s WWII design.
Despite my “discovery” of the USS Washington pillow’s actual age, it is a rather unique piece for the WWII-era considering that most of the WWII homefront pieces were silk-screened imagery on satin fabric.
-
- Though this CPO device is very early (second pattern dating to 1910), had the pillow been associated to this period, the CPO device would be more aligned with this style.
-
- This CPO device was made and used during the early years of WWII. By the war’s end, the “N” was no longer slanted as seen here.
-
- This CPO emblem affixed to the bottom corner of the pillows face is modeled after the then current design of the hat device worn by chief petty officers. The most glaring difference between a WWI and WWII device is the lettering and the orientation of the chain.
Regardless of the age, the Washington piece fits nicely into this narrow niche of my collecting while keeping me selective with what is added to my collection. Finding the balance in collecting, as with life, helps maintain my sanity, keeps the hobby enjoyable and helps me to avoid cluttering my home and making life miserable for my family.
A Century Removed from the “Great War”
Throughout most of 2017 and continuing through nearly the remainder of this year, the people of this country are honoring the sacrifices made by Americans who answered the call to go Over There. More than a century has passed since Congress declared war on Germany (April 6, 1917) and the Central Powers (December 7, 1917). By Armistice Day (November 11, 1918) nearly five million Americans had served in the Great War; nearly 2.8 million of which had been deployed to Europe.
“GREAT War?? There’s nothing GREAT about WAR!”
When I saw this comment written out on a recent social media post that was focused upon honoring veterans who served and particularly those who gave their lives during what later became known as World War I, it struck me how little our society truly knows the conflicts that this nation participated in during our history. The author of the comment (that was intended to stir anger among that person’s crowd of similar-minded people) had no hesitation in demonstrating the sheer ignorance of the harsh realities of history, the reasons wars are fought (or ended) nor the personal sacrifices that are made. While striving to remain entirely devoid of the politics and gamesmanship of social media discussions, I chose to abstain from shedding light on the “Great” term or delving into the dictionary definitions and applications of the word itself.
Similarly, The Veterans Collection is apolitical as the intent here is to learn about the residue that has been left behind by military veterans following their service regardless of participation in a conflict or during peacetime. As I ponder the aforementioned angry commenter’s remarks, I am left wondering how that person arrived at such a thought. Is it due to the notion that governments (political leaders) are callous and uncaring about both the people within the opposition nation and their own servicemen and women (and their families) that they can, with ease and a pen, commission the deaths of human beings? Are we to believe also that those who put on a uniform (either voluntarily or by conscription) inherit such a mindset that to follow orders as they take the life of another person is done so without personal cost to themselves? While am in full agreement that there truly is nothing great about the damage and destructive results of war, I do not agree that all war is unjustified and without worthy cause.
The War to End All Wars began in Europe following the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and quickly escalated as old alliances were enacted as sides were split and fighting escalated. As more nations joined the fight, the scope and scale of the fighting spread beyond Western Europe and became a war of global proportions. The First World War was monumental in technological advancement – humanity had new and more impressive tools with which to kill greater numbers and with considerable ease. The loss of life was considerable as was the damage and carnage inflicted upon those who survived the technological terrors. The expansive destruction to the geography, towns and cities was large-scale and very impressive.
Great:
- notably large in size;
- of a kind characterized by relative largeness;
- remarkable in magnitude, degree, or effectiveness;
- long continued
Greatness isn’t a celebratory or term of praise when paired with this massively devastating war. In roughly four years, more than 8,000,000 combat deaths (nearly five million of which were suffered by the Entente Powers (the allied forces which included France, United Kingdom and the Commonwealths as well as the United States) making the losses not just massive but considerably GREAT.
I don’t doubt that people stumbling upon a site such as this that proudly honors the legacy and sacrifice of those who served their nation through the preservation of military artifacts is viewed upon as the glorification of war. I have even been accused of such glorification solely due to me possessing items that were seized from the vanquished enemy by my uncle. No combat-seasoned veteran or currently serving service member that I have ever encountered was or is eager to enter into war. “It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it,” though uttered by General Robert E. Lee upon witnessing the carnage the Confederates inflicted upon Union forces at Fredericksburg. No, I do not glorify war but rather, I am repulsed by it. However, it is necessary in the extreme times to confront extreme human ills. If the likes of the Third Reich and the murderous Imperial Japanese forces were unopposed and left to continue their destruction of millions of people, where would we be?
-
- My uncle’s overseas cap from WWI shows his standard “US” disk worn on the left side, forward portion.
-
- My uncle’s WWI army uniform blouse. On the right sleeve. the shoulder insignia (the “A”) denotes First Army. The red chevron signifies an honorable discharge and the three inverted chevrons indicate 1.5 years of overseas service (each represents 6 months). On the left sleeve, the artillery shell and underline represent that he was a Gunner First Class and the single inverted chevron is a wound stripe (the precursor to the Purple Heart which was established in 1932)
Yes, I collect artifacts of war. These pieces are not symbols of violence but instead, are pieces of history that help to illustrate the narratives of personal sacrifices made by millions of my countrymen up to and including my father, grandfather, uncles and many preceding generations. Within my collection are several pieces of militaria that originate from the Great War with most of them having been inherited or are associated with one my relatives who enlisted to fight Over There.
-
- My grandfather’s older brother (seated at left) enlisted into the artillery (CAC) and was sent to France in the summer of 1918. He was wounded by artillery shrapnel and hospitalized until the spring of 1919 when he was discharged.
-
- My uncle Nill enlisted into the Navy and served his entire career aboard battleships. As far as my research has provided, his ships never left the Pacific and so did not see enemy action.
BL 8 inch Mk. VII or Mk. VIII British Howitzers weer borrowed by the AEF and employed by my uncle’s artillery regiment.
Two of my uncles – my paternal grandfather’s twin elder brothers – each concealed their age to enlist into the U.S. Armed Forces (one went into the Navy and the other as an artilleryman in the Army) at the ripe old age of 17. Two of my maternal great grandfathers also served during WWI. One of them, my great grandfather, first enlisted into the Canadian Expeditionary Forces (CEF) as a Private and was discharged several months later (he immediately enlisted into the Royal Naval Canadian Volunteer Reserve and served the duration of the war, domestically). My 2x great grandfather enlisted into the CEF just 19 days shy of his 48th birthday. A housebuilder and carpenter by trade in both his hometown of Leicester, England and his adopted home of Victoria, BC, my great great grandfather volunteered for the Canadian Forestry Corps and was sent to Europe to fill the need for lumber (used as trench materials such as duckboards, shoring timbers, crates) in the war effort.
My WWI collection isn’t large by any stretch of the (my) imagination. In addition to the pieces that I inherited as part of my family’s military history, I have been adding pieces to enhance or to fill in where I notice gaps and to be able to create a better display when I have such an opportunity.
-
- One of my uncles enlisted into the Army and was assigned to an artillery regiment (under the Coast Artillery Corps) and served in France from 1918 until late 1919. I purchased this well-worn pillow cover as a reminder of his service during the war.
-
- Homefront pieces such as this 1918-dated U.S. Navy pillow cover helped to remind family of the service of their loved one as they openly displayed their patriotism in their homes. When I acquired this several years ago, there seemed to be several listings over the course that year (2011). I haven’t seen any listed in several years, since then.
-
- Since one of my uncles served in the Navy during the Great War, I wanted this pillow cover to compliment the Army Artillery cover that I acquired (in honor of his twin brother). The detail in the embroidery is subtle yet ornately executed.
-
- This close-up reveals the detail of the cover with the hand-cut lettering and insignia and the needlework on the naval crest and chain.
Other pieces of my WWI collections range from edged weapons, books and publications and many photographs. Some of the collection, besides my familial focus, has local a connection. I have been slowly gathering pieces that originate from navy warships that were named for local cities, features or were stationed at any of the naval bases, locally.
Over the next few weeks, I will begin pulling everything pertaining to the first world war, taking stock of each piece and preparing it for a few upcoming public displays. I need to determine how I want to arrange the pieces in order to allow the artifacts to tell a story, not of war and suffering but of personal sacrifice while recognizing the prices paid by so many Americans a century ago. My goal with my displays is to avoid the glorification of war while allowing viewers to leave with a slight taste of what others endured in order to secure and preserve our freedoms.
“What a cruel thing is war; to separate and destroy families and friends, and mar the purest joys and happiness God has granted us in this world; to fill our hearts with hatred instead of love for our neighbors, and to devastate the fair face of this beautiful world!” – Robert E. Lee, December, 1862
The first global war was horrible and terrible and it was truly great in the human (and monetary) cost.
“Bluestar. Put all your clients in it”
“Bluestar. Put *all* your clients in it.” – Charlie Sheen as Bud Fox in the 1987 20th Century Fox film, “Wall Street.” ((Initial theatrical release December 11, 1987. Screen capture. © 1987 Twentieth Century Fox. Credit: © 1987 Twentieth Century Fox)
One thing I am sure of, I am glad that I don’t have to compete against the likes of Gordon Gecko (or Bud Fox’s insider trading) when it comes to purchasing militaria. But something about this blue star interests me.
While the film, Wall Street was a blockbuster hit in the late 1980s it certainly isn’t the subject of this article. As I sought to reconstruct the decorations that were awarded to my uncle, a 30-year navy veteran who served from 1932 to 1962, I spent a fair amount of effort for accuracy not only in the awards but also with the period-correct specificity. One such award, when it was instituted was slightly different from what it is today.
With the signing of Executive Order 9050 on February 9, 1942, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt approved one of the most recognizable and most-senior (in order of precedence) unit awards for the United States Navy and Marine Corps, the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC). The initial criteria for this award read:
“The Secretary of the Navy is hereby authorized and directed to issue a citation in the name of the President of the United States, as public evidence of deserved honor and distinction, to any ship, aircraft, or other Naval Unit and to any Marine Corps aircraft, detachment, or higher unit, for outstanding performance in action on or after October 16, 1941.”
Just twenty days later, President Roosevelt extended a branch-specific version of the award to be available for the United States Army (Executive Order 9075).
This Marine was awarded but a Navy Presidential Unit Citation and Navy Unit Commendation NUC). A star on the NUC denotes a second award however this one is oddly a PUC blue star (image source: U.S. Militaria Forum).
Both forms of the PUC were created as ribbon-only devices (meaning that there is no associated medal pendant), intended to be presented to a unit that distinguished (Merriam-Webster defines this as “marked by eminence, distinction, or excellence”) itself in combat against an enemy. Though this criteria would be further defined in 1957 by President Eisenhower’s Executive Order 10694, the awarding of these ribbons remains limited with very few units receiving the distinction since World War II.
-
- A single PUV with the blue enamel mostly-worn away (image source: U.S. Militaria Forum).
-
- Showing the flaking blue enamel on a Navy PUC (image source: U.S. Militaria Forum).
-
- This Pacific theater veteran (Navy or USMC) was awarded an early Navy PUC with a blue star device (image source: U.S. Militaria Forum).
-
- A custom, fully-embroidered ribbon rack that was made after the Korean War was worn by an aviator features a blue star on the PUC (image source: U.S. Militaria Forum).
When the Navy’s award was initially instituted in 1942, it was done so with a unique appliance added to the ribbon. With most Navy and Marine Corps decorations, a star is representative of additional awards received. A single bronze star device added to a ribbon indicates that the wearer received the award twice while a silver star affixed would show five of the same award. In the case of the Navy’s PUC, when it was initially presented to the personnel of the decorated unit, it was done so with a single blue-enameled star device. Subsequent awarding procedure then followed protocol by affixing additional blue stars, departing from the standard procedure for other ribbon decorations.
My Uncle s award letter for the Presidential Unit Citation ribbon shows the specific mention of the blue star.
These examples of the Army Presidential Unit Citation demonstrate the differences between the two. The Army’s version features a blue ribbon with a gold metal frame. Subsequent awards are denoted with an oakleaf device (source: eBay image).
Collectors understand that it is typical for scarce, exceptional items to be highly pursued and the Navy PUC ribbon with the blue enameled star falls right in line. For the last two years, I’ve been seeking to complete a ribbon “rack” for my uncle’s display with this early variant of the Presidential Unit Citation ribbon. During that span of time, I have only seen one ribbon and star listed at auction. As I watched for my moment to bid on the ribbon, the price exceeded my threshold three days before the close, ending up more surpassing my budget fivefold.
Something tells me that Charlie Sheen’s Wall Street character, Bud Fox wasn’t referring to this wonderfully scarce ribbon device in his efforts to burn Gecko.
References:
- Sea Service Medals: Military Awards and Decorations of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard May 1, 2009 by Fred L. Borch and Charles P. McDowell
- A Complete Guide to United States Military Medals, 1939 to Present: All Decorations, Service Medals, Ribbons and Commonly Awarded Allied Medals of the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard
Affordable, Quick and Easy Display and Storage for Your Collection
Sadly, many collectors spend more time acquiring items and less organizing and displaying their pieces, leaving them to sit in bags or boxes, tucked away (source: All Experts.com).
One of the challenges for collectors of militaria, besides trying to find space for storage, is the art of showcasing and displaying these precious artifacts.
Sadly, many collectors spend more time acquiring items and less organizing and displaying their pieces, leaving them to sit in bags or boxes, tucked away (source: All Experts.com).
Most collectors lack the expansive spaces to construct elaborate display cases that allow for propping up mannequins and life-sized dioramas. I’d imagine that the average militaria enthusiast is very similar to me in that their collection consists predominantly of small items. The lion’s share of my assemblage is made up of shoulder sleeve insignia (Army, Navy, Marine Corps and US Army Air Force), navy enlisted rank insignia (crows) and several, various naval devices, among many other pieces which include medals, ribbons and ribbon bars and a few other pins and devices.
One of the most popular display and storage tools that collectors employ are the inexpensive and easily storable two-sided boxes known as Riker cases or mounts. These simple cases are available in a wide array of sizes and dimensions providing collectors with the ability to both store and display smaller pieces, laying them flat against a cushioned polyester fill material.
The simplistic yet functional aspects of Riker cases and mounts provide collectors with the ability to display large numbers of pieces held firmly in place (source: Cowan Auctions).
For the display of items like medals, especially vintage pieces that have become delicate due to decades of decay, placing them in a shadow box with their planchets hanging from the ribbon suspension only serves to accelerate deterioration of the threads of the ribbon. With a Riker case, the medal lays flat and is held in place, keeping the load of the medal firmly against the polyester fill material.
Displaying patches, such as these Vietnam War-era pocket suspended pieces, is easy (source: Beezman | Wehrmacht Awards).
One added benefit of incorporating Riker mounts into your collection storage and display plans is security and theft prevention. If you intend to show your collection in a public forum, sticky fingers are invariably going to find their way to your displays. Leaving valuable patches, medals or pins sitting on a tabletop only guarantees that you will have to replace something. Leaving your precious items displayed inside a Riker case offers your audience easy viewing yet shields you from suffering loss. Due to the case’s diminutive sizes and flat dimensions, they are easily transported between home and the show.
One downside to using Riker cases for your display is that they tend to be rather bland and ordinary, and lack the ability to hang on a wall or prop up on table. Fortunately for collectors there are crafty entrepreneurs who recognize a need for something more stylish that addresses these deficiencies. Home-Museum.com offers these beautiful yet subtle hand crafted wood frames that wrap around Rikers, providing a touch of sophistication.
This Riker case contains a nice collection of WWI Imperial German medals and decorations. The collector added a more decorative backing material to add some character to the display (source: Mike Huxley | Pickelhaubes.com).
Bear in mind that while some Rikers incorporate glass (instead of plexiglass), it more than likely lacks UV protection for the contents. Exercise caution when hanging or displaying your Riker-mounted collection, protecting the valuable pieces from the damaging effects of light.
