Ref Thread: French Made Second Pattern Army DSC

[IMPERIAL QUEST]

I would be most appreciative if someone could give me information on a WW I second pattern  version French-made Army DSC. Also, are there variants within the French example I need to be aware of? Any pointers to help steer clear of a fake? Thanks in advance.

[bobgee]

IQ - To my knowledge all French-made DSCs are fake. They were not authorized by the US Govt. They are not numbered. They were made, I believe in the 1920s as examples or perhaps in a rare case, a wearing copy for a recipient. I think when you refer to fakes, you actually are referring to Fakes Fakes or later copies of these copies. From your posts, I don't think you want one of these in your collection, except as a cheap example.

regards....bob

[IMPERIAL QUEST]

IQ - To my knowledge all French-made DSCs are fake. They were not authorized by the US Govt. They are not numbered. They were made, I believe in the 1920s as examples or perhaps in a rare case, a wearing copy for a recipient. I think when you refer to fakes, you actually are referring to Fakes Fakes or later copies of these copies. From your posts, I don't think you want one of these in your collection, except as a cheap example.

regards....bob

 

 

Bob,

 

Thanks very much for the information. You are quite correct is saying that I would not want one of these in my collection under these circumstances.

[Gary Cain]

There are period photo's (taken before te soldiers came home) of Doughboys wearing French made DSC's.

 

 

Gary

[bobgee]

There are period photo's (taken before te soldiers came home) of Doughboys wearing French made DSC's.

Gary

 

The Very Rare First Type U.S. Distinguished Service Crosses of which 102 were made and numbered at the U.S. Mint in Philadelphia, numbered 1 to 100, 2 were left un-numbered. They were very ornate, covered in Oak leaves. They were sent to France AND awarded. This the medal that the "French Style" is copied from and likely accounts for the pictures of that type medal being worn in France. Subsequently redsigned, there was another set of the new Crosses which also bear the number 1 to 100.

Bobgee

[Garth Thompson]

IQ - To my knowledge all French-made DSCs are fake. They were not authorized by the US Govt. They are not numbered. They were made, I believe in the 1920s as examples or perhaps in a rare case, a wearing copy for a recipient. I think when you refer to fakes, you actually are referring to Fakes Fakes or later copies of these copies. From your posts, I don't think you want one of these in your collection, except as a cheap example.

regards....bob

Bob,

I'll have to politely disagree with you on this one. The Call of Duty actually refers to two differant French made DSCs, one of the first type of DSC one of the second type DSC. French made DSMs are also discussed in C.o.D. This not with out presedent as the French were known to have made ODMs of a very high quality and French made the British Crimea Medal and it's bars for the french recipients of that medal. I have seen french made WW1 British DCMs and DSMs as well. While possibly not as highly valued as a named, numbered US or British made medal I think these should be refered to as legitimate variants not fakes and have a place in a complete collection. Using the trail of logic calling them fakes because they were not made by the US government, the US Mint or one of it's contractors it follows that all the insignia made in theater in either WW1 or WW2 are also fakes and we know that collectors do highly prize theater made variants .

As Gary has posted there are period photographs showing US soldiers and airmen proudly wearing the French DSC.

The french made DSC has been copied with the intent to decieve but IMHO a period made one has a perfectly legitimate place in a collection.

Garth

[bobgee]

Bob,

I'll have to politely disagree with you on this one. The Call of Duty actually refers to two differant French made DSCs, one of the first type of DSC one of the second type DSC. French made DSMs are also discussed in C.o.D. This not with out presedent as the French were known to have made ODMs of a very high quality and French made the British Crimea Medal and it's bars for the french recipients of that medal. I have seen french made WW1 British DCMs and DSMs as well. While possibly not as highly valued as a named, numbered US or British made medal I think these should be refered to as legitimate variants not fakes and have a place in a complete collection. Using the trail of logic calling them fakes because they were not made by the US government, the US Mint or one of it's contractors it follows that all the insignia made in theater in either WW1 or WW2 are also fakes and we know that collectors do highly prize theater made variants .

As Gary has posted there are period photographs showing US soldiers and airmen proudly wearing the French DSC.

The french made DSC has been copied with the intent to decieve but IMHO a period made one has a perfectly legitimate place in a collection.

Garth

 

Garth.....As this forum is a discussion group, it is good to discuss our opinions. Dealing ONLY with the U.S. Distinguished Service Cross of WW I vintage, the ONLY authentic and genuine DSCs were manufactured by the U.S. Mint. Any other variety is a copy. Unless someone produces evidence that a U.S. or authorized foreign recipient was PRESENTED with a French-made copy, I'll stick to my guns. Call of Duty does also refer to these French strikes as copies. CoD also points out the discrepancies in dimensions of the French-made copies. Authentic DSCs are all numbered and in many cases such numbers are traceable. I also again point out that 100 of the ornate First type U.S. made and numbered Crosses were awarded in France. I would strongly suggest that a vintage photo of a Doughboy wearing an ornate Cross is wearing one of these first 100 U.S. awards. See the illustration on Page 96 in CoD and compare it with the French-made copy on Page 97. Now having said all that, if a collector of type medals wants to have one in his collection, and understands that is an UNAUTHORIZED COPY, then by all means, it's his money. Personally, I don't want one in my collection as I will always regard them as copies, not legitimate variants. Take care, Buddy.....Semper Fi......Bob

[Garth Thompson]

Garth.....As this forum is a discussion group, it is good to discuss our opinions. Dealing ONLY with the U.S. Distinguished Service Cross of WW I vintage, the ONLY authentic and genuine DSCs were manufactured by the U.S. Mint. Any other variety is a copy. Unless someone produces evidence that a U.S. or authorized foreign recipient was PRESENTED with a French-made copy, I'll stick to my guns. Call of Duty does also refer to these French strikes as copies. CoD also points out the discrepancies in dimensions of the French-made copies. Authentic DSCs are all numbered and in many cases such numbers are traceable. I also again point out that 100 of the ornate First type U.S. made and numbered Crosses were awarded in France. I would strongly suggest that a vintage photo of a Doughboy wearing an ornate Cross is wearing one of these first 100 U.S. awards. See the illustration on Page 96 in CoD and compare it with the French-made copy on Page 97. Now having said all that, if a collector of type medals wants to have one in his collection, and understands that is an UNAUTHORIZED COPY, then by all means, it's his money. Personally, I don't want one in my collection as I will always regard them as copies, not legitimate variants. Take care, Buddy.....Semper Fi......Bob

Bob,

We have both been around this hobby for a long time and each of us has his own opinion on what he wants in his collection. You have yours, which I respect, and I have mine. I think this discussion has been a good venue for both. I think we are just agreeing to disagree on this one.

Semper fi my friend,

Garth

[erichjr]

Interesting that the french made dsc says E.Pluribus.unum on the front

and the official u.s. made one says For Valor. Whats also interesting is

that you see u.s. dog tags made from french coins, unofficial but

very desirable. Erich

[Garth Thompson]

Here is a nice period French First type and a regular US second type.

Garth

[IMPERIAL QUEST]

Thanks to all of the input here guys. As I said before,. I have been out of the US collecting field for a looooooong time, so it is back to the basics for me. I am glad that some voices of experience chimed in here. I cannot stop kicking myself for selling my cased DCS (#13598) years ago - that one hurts.

[KurtA]

The "French" style seem to be rather plentiful at shows, etc. I don't see them at every show, but have seen enough over the years to make me think either the French made a zillion of them way back then or they were made more recently for the collector market. I'd put my money on the 2nd theory.

Kurt

[Garth Thompson]

The "French" style seem to be rather plentiful at shows, etc. I don't see them at every show, but have seen enough over the years to make me think either the French made a zillion of them way back then or they were made more recently for the collector market. I'd put my money on the 2nd theory.

Kurt

The reproduction french first type crosses were done, if my memory serves me correctly, sometime in the late 70's or early eighties. They are made from a casting done from a period piece. When compared side by side it is quite easy to see the differance. I agree there are a fair amount of those around. Every major show seems to have one or two. A french made one done in the late teens is quite hard to find and stands out with excellent detail and that nice, fine age patina that is impossible to duplicate.

Garth

[USMCRECON]

I guess on this particular subject I have a slightly different view from some of the experts on the "fakes" issue. I have one of these French-made DSCs that has provenance. My view is that, if it was worn on the uniform by the individual during the period, it's not a fake but more of a private purchase, just like a uniform item might have been.

 

Anyway, below are photos of the front and back. The other photo is a rather odd mounting method. It originally had a French "dumbell" mount but the recepient (or original purchaser, if you like) sewed his DSC ribbon bar to the top of the ribbon and used the ribbon bar pin as a mounting device. It's hard to see in the close-up of the back of the mounting device because the ribbon has been squashed down over it from years in a box. I tried to carefully expose it but the ribbon is so fragile that I didn't dare manipulate it vewry much. The stitching is coming loose, as can be seen in the photo and the dumbell is now loose inside the ribbon but still there.

 

[Brig]

I was under the impression that it is illegal to wear a US medal made outside the United States?

[Garth Thompson]

I guess on this particular subject I have a slightly different view from some of the experts on the "fakes" issue. I have one of these French-made DSCs that has provenance. My view is that, if it was worn on the uniform by the individual during the period, it's not a fake but more of a private purchase, just like a uniform item might have been.

 

Anyway, below are photos of the front and back. The other photo is a rather odd mounting method. It originally had a French "dumbell" mount but the recepient (or original purchaser, if you like) sewed his DSC ribbon bar to the top of the ribbon and used the ribbon bar pin as a mounting device. It's hard to see in the close-up of the back of the mounting device because the ribbon has been squashed down over it from years in a box. I tried to carefully expose it but the ribbon is so fragile that I didn't dare manipulate it vewry much. The stitching is coming loose, as can be seen in the photo and the dumbell is now loose inside the ribbon but still there.

 

I agree with you completely. I think a period french made DSC or DSM is a perfectly legitimate variant and has a place in a collection. Your french DSC is is like the one I posted. Mine came from a YD WW1 veterans estate. As I'm sure you know the "dumbell" mounting bar is standard for french medals of the WW1 period as the french had horizontal loops for mounting their medals.

Garth

[USMCRECON]

I was under the impression that it is illegal to wear a US medal made outside the United States?

 

I hadn't heard that and don't know the answer on that one. Do you know if that is something recent or extant in the early 1900s? While I am nowhere near an expert on the wear of medals/decorations/ribbons, particularly early in the 20th century, I think there might have been considerably more latitude given then than there was in more recent years, particularly overseas.

 

I do know that little leeway was allowed in uniform items when I was a Marine at Camp Pendleton. I remember a particular mid-Dec 1966 Saturday morning inspection formation when one unfortunate Marine tried a short-cut and stood to wearing patent leather shoes and "wheel-cover" frame that he'd bought in Oceanside. The Troop Handlers all gathered around him threw his cover on the ground and ground their heels into both the bill of the cover and his shoes (which were still on his feet). At the same time, when I was in Vietnam, almost anything one wanted to wear was acceptable in the field.

 

Back to the French-made DSC.......Many have their own opinions on this issue. Mine is that, if it was a period purchase by a serviceman overseas, particularly if it was worn, it's a legitimate collection item and I'll keep mine in my admittedly meager collection of medals and decorations. At the same time, I respect the opinion of others who hold a contrary opinion. It's one of those "agree to disagree" situations, I guess and I sincerely hope the fact that I disagree with others on this particular issue will not affect further interaction on the forum.

[barker944]

I believe the Capt Eddie Rickenbacker's DSC on display in the Natioinal Museum of the USAF is a French made second version. It is the one that was awarded to him and bears the original "oak branches" for his multiple awards. As I understand it, Pershing awarded the Ferench versions because he could not get the US versions fast enough.

 

Jim

[Jack's Son]

I would be most appreciative if someone could give me a ballpark figure on a WW I second pattern version. Also, are there variants within the French example I need to be aware of? Any pointers to help steer clear of a fake? Thanks in advance.

Hi,

I have resurrected this post because I have recently been offered a first pattern, French DSC.

 

Perhaps there are some members who didn't comment the first time this post came around,

that would care to now. Or, newer members may be interested in the discussion.

 

I am partial to this medal and it's history, and ALL opinions are welcome.

 

Thank you,

[Adam R]

I have one of both the 1st and 2nd pattern in my collection and I'm happy to have them there. I think the analogy to unofficial theater made insignia is a good one. Were these DSCs officially made by the US government? No. Are they contemporary items from the WWI era? Yes. Is there evidence that they were worn by WWI DSC recipients? Yes.

Based on the positive answers to the last two questions, they have a legitimate place in a collection of WWI era medals. I don't think they were made for "collectors" and I don't think they were made to deceive anyone.

 

Just be sure that if/when you buy one of either type that it's an authentic French copy. Fakes of both types have been made within the last 20 years.

[Jack's Son]

I believe the Capt Eddie Rickenbacker's DSC on display in the Natioinal Museum of the USAF is a French made second version. It is the one that was awarded to him and bears the original "oak branches" for his multiple awards. As I understand it, Pershing awarded the Ferench versions because he could not get the US versions fast enough.

 

Jim

Here is a link to the Museum display.

 

Notice the ribbons on the two DSC's. Rickenbacker's at left. (I believe you can adjust the zoom).

 

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/shared/me...F-1234P-005.jpg

[gauthieb3sxz]

Hey guys,

 

Picked up this photo recently and am wondering if anyone can shed some light on it. From what I can see from perusing the forum, the DSC appears to be a French made example. According to the seller the photo came from an Illinois grouping and is unnamed. His patch is circular but I can't make out the details. Any ideas? Anyone recognize the face? I know there are over 6,000 recipients of the DSC, so I'm not expecting miracles!

[Teamski]

Looking at the picture and comparing the medal to my French made DSC with the American made version in The Call of Duty, I aqgree that his is French made. The wings are pointier on the French version and the ribbon lays flatter as well due to a larger suspension ring. Add the French hanger and I think it is French.....

 

-Ski

[BigJohn#3RD]

Yep, I am sure it is a French Made Fist version of the DSC. Great close up picture of the soldier. Too bad we cannot see his unit patch we might be able to identify him. But an early award to an enlisted soldier with a CdeG with a Bronze Oak Leaf. A good start not many of them I am sure. Good hunting.

Regards,

John

[gauthieb3sxz]

Yep, I am sure it is a French Made Fist version of the DSC. Great close up picture of the soldier. Too bad we cannot see his unit patch we might be able to identify him. But an early award to an enlisted soldier with a CdeG with a Bronze Oak Leaf. A good start not many of them I am sure. Good hunting.

Regards,

John

 

 

John and Ski,

 

Thanks for the insight. Does the fact that it is a first pattern narrow down the date of receipt? Would he be one of the first few hundred to receive the medal during WWI?