speedytop

Please compare it: Uwe

Frank Bartel say between 1972 and 1990. Both badges exist in (4-5) different versions (as usual in the GDR ). For example: Uwe

Hi, "There is also a bronze and a gold grade" No, it is one grade in different colours and in different material, differently enamelled and varnished. Uwe

PK: "... my posts have not been censored. I merely edited them to make the English easier for you to understand." You could hear my laughter? PK: "I have read some posts by you on various forums but I cannot recall reading anything that really impressed me. Sorry to be harsh but there we are." There we are, no further comments in this thread from me. Kind Regards Uwe

Ahhh, now I understand it: To ask for proofs for bold statements is rude and agressive! Only for Germans or only for Uwe speedytop? And the deleted parts in PK's comments must be to chary and to polite for a Gentleman's Club? Gentlemen, I have my problem with some of your comments, especially about foreign and WW2 decorations and the quality of post war copies. The first question here had been: "Need to know if they are good or bad." with the attatchment "Even if it's an original 1957 that would be okay." The answers are "fake", "garbage" and "a 1957 issue would not carry a Third Reich era LDO retail code like the L/50 hallmark on these Oakleaves." My short, precise and well-founded answer was: "Oakleaves could never be an original 1957. Only an original (end in May 1945) or a copy/fake. " Now we have nearly 40 replies, several of them against my statement and my proofs for my statement. And than I found on my concentrated and declaring statement: "The definition of "1957 versions" must be precise, and the only way is the acceptance of the (illustrated) decorations in the "Beilage zum Bundesanzeiger Nr. 41" from 1958." really surprising the comment : " I already agreed with you about this". It must be my unsufficient English, that I could not find that before . After that had been clarified, I can now enter the discussion about the quality of post war copies of OL and OLS. It is not the content of the thread, but related. Yes, everybody know, that OL and OLS had been produced as copies or fakes in very different quality from several makers (I think, firms is not broad enough) in several countries all over the world. Copies and fakes of those decorations are not a German problem, it is a worldwide problem. Some final comments. I thought really, that I'm here in a Gentleman's Club. Is it really important, who old a member is? Or ist it more important, what the member know about special subjects? A true Gentleman is able to admit own mistakes also. With it I had no problems in my long life. Kind Regards Uwe

Gordon, I accept, and I think (hope), that we agree in the 1957 versions (1957ers). EL and ELS, made post May 1945, are not originals and not 1957 versions. The definition of "1957 versions" must be precise, and the only way is the acceptance of the (illustrated) decorations in the "Beilage zum Bundesanzeiger Nr. 41" from 1958. When one say, that only a few decorations without the changed design were 1957 versions too, we must and can say consistently, that nearly all decorations of the world, made post 1957/1958, were 1957 versions. A horror vision! Chris, I think, that the most important term is the officially "award period". I'm not fit in foreign (for me not German) regulations, but when I look on the 1914 EK's with the official award period till 1924, it is for me not a problem, to say, that 1914 EK's made in this period till 1924 were originals. But that is not the same e.g. for a PlM, the award period ended definitely in 1918. And if the American, British or French officially award period is longer, till now, for me it is not a problem, to say original, if made by an authorized maker. The "Sauer" and S&L anomaly is not a BDOS anomaly, it is a "Sauer" and S&L anomaly. You cannot combine Kurland and Lappland, the first is accepted official, the second is not official. And please be fair, there had been controverse discussions in the BDOS magazine, especially about the Lappland shield and the corresponding documents! And a magazine like that from the BDOS is for discussions. At the end of the "Begriffsbestimmungen" (definitions) you find the text: "Diese Begriffsdefinitionen wollen einen Beitrag zu einer künftig größeren Klarheit im Gebrauch derselben leisten." It is not the bible, it is open for discussions. But the line above show: Oakleaves... good or bad? Uwe

Hi, must we really talk (write) about basic definitions here? Or do several collectors and especially sellers have their own definition for originals? Is the OMSA definition not accepted? If it is not accepted, it is quite worthless, to discuss it here furthermore. OMSA definition, see Post 20: "Original" - means medals authorized by, or produced under contract to, the issuing entity during the period for which the award was authorized or awarded to the recipients of the medal. BDOS and ÖGÖ definition in German: Originale Alle verliehenen Exemplare sind Originale. Darüber hinaus bezeichnet man als Originale solche Exemplare, die im Verleihungszeitraum im Auftrag von berechtigten Personen hergestellt worden sind oder werden und welche die wesentlichen gestalterischen Merkmale von verliehenen Exemplaren aufweisen. "im Verleihungszeitraum" = "during the period for which the award was authorized or awarded" How could a 1941 produced WW1 iron cross be an original? How could a 1950 or 1957 or 2009 produced EL or ELS be an original? If you can not live with the word copy, then please say non-original or whatever you want, but never original. Hi PK, Not one of my requests had been answered. Please ("please" is not an order), show me the sections or the sentences, where I can find the answers: "1957 BRD legislation reauthorised the production ... of every grade of the 1939 Knight's Cross" [here exclusively for EL, ELS, ELSmB] "... a cased EL or ELS ... can fairly be described as a 1957-issue award" "A veteran ... who bought ... a set of solid silver EL from the Kleiderkasse ... was buying officially approved revised and reproduced decorations..." Hi Gordon, You know, that the most of the Third Reich decorations had been produced post May 1945, before the "Ordensgesetz" from 1957. Let us take one year, e.g. 1953. What is a 1953 produced EL or ELS? An original 1953 version (pattern)? "However, the manufacture of these was permitted and they were made alongside the "true" 57ers" Please, where I can find the permission for a EL or ELS in the regulations? And yes, it is not surprising, that especially the sellers of copies try to name their copies a "1957 version", because they can meanwhile expect more money for a 1957 version than for a copy. Hi Chris, "Using ... logic, should all our LDO production WW1 awards be considered "copies" Yes! But don't lump together LDO marked WW1 and WW2 decorations. That is really worth a thread of its own. In the "Ordensgesetz" from 1957 you cannot find award regulations (Verleihungsbestimmungen, Statuten) for a specified decoration! The "Verdienstorden der Bundesrepublik Deutschland" and other German decorations have their own award regulations. Please see here for example, "3.3 Statut des Verdienstordens der Bundesrepublik Deutschland" together with the "3.4 Ausführungsbestimmungen zum Statut des Verdienstordens der Bundesrepublik Deutschland"on page 23 (25) ff.: http://www.bundespra...Deutschland.pdf For the denazified decorations of the Third Reich "Verleihungsbestimmungen" or "Statuten" does not exist, because there was nothing to award, there was no issue and no re-issue. It was not an official new created decoration, there was and is only the allowance, to wear it in a denazified design. That was and is the key: § 6 "Sie dürfen nur ohne nationalsozialistische Embleme getragen werden; für ihre Form sind die von der Bundesregierung bestimmten und im Bundesministerium des Innern verwahrten Muster ... maßgebend;" Denazified in a defined design (Muster = specimen) Kind Regards Uwe

Dear PK, Please show your primary and official sources for your bold statements: "1957 BRD legislation reauthorised the production ... of every grade of the 1939 Knight's Cross" [here exclusively for EL, ELS, ELSmB] "... a cased EL or ELS ... can fairly be described as a 1957-issue award" "A veteran ... who bought ... a set of solid silver EL from the Kleiderkasse ... was buying officially approved revised and reproduced decorations..." I'm not interested in French, Austrian or Japanese regulations, we are writing here about German regulations. I'm not interested in LDO or PKZ or whatever, we are writing here about post WWII regulations. I'm not interested in Meybauer, Steinhauer & Lück, Anneliese Klietmann or whoever, we are writing here about 1957 versions and about copies of post WWII "Not 1957 versions". Here is nothing grey, and yes, it could be a language problem; but I think, not for me. Please not 100 lines text, only short and traceable proofs of your primary sources. Kind Regards Uwe

Pk, please read my comments completely and carefully, already everything has been written on this subject. A copy is a copy and could never be an original. OMSA definition: "Original" - means medals authorized by, or produced under contract to, the issuing entity during the period for which the award was authorized or awarded to the recipients of the medal. "during the [award] period". The award period for the "Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes in seinen Stufen" ended in May 1945. "authorized" in the "Ordensgesetz" from 1957 to produce something were only the decorations in the "Beilage" from 1958, and authorized connotes here exclusively, to produce, to sell, to buy and to wear them. But that is correct only for the decorations in the "Beilage" from 1958, see the link in Post 10! If you cannot understand the admittedly very specific German regulations, it is pointless for me to discuss this furthermore. And if you have other knowledge, please prove it with the corresponding paragraphs in the "Ordensgesetz". If you cannot prove it, please accept my knowledge. I can prove all this, what I write here. Uwe

PK, "... several firms ... started reproducing EL and ELS ..." Why not, really everybody could and can produce copies at any time, in Germany, in Japan, in the USA, in Canada, in ...! Whoever and wherever. And several firms did it long before 1957, for it they needed no law, no "Ordensgesetz". "This makes those EL and ELS 1957 reissues." In the "Ordensgesetz" from 1957 I can not find one piece, that had been reissued! Please show me the paragraph, where I can find such a regulation. In § 6 (Former awarded decorations) I can only find: "... Orden und Ehrenzeichen und Ehrenzeichen dürfen getragen werden", ... orders and decorations may be worn. That's all. And now to your listing in Post 14. If it is as logical as my interpretation, that you look only on the Ritterkreuz and its classes, please don't forget for example all the Imperial and all the foreign decorations: ... Orden und Ehrenzeichen für Verdienste im Ersten Weltkrieg in der Reihenfolge ihrer Verleihung ... Ausländische Tapferkeitsauszeichnungen (foreign war decorations) Sonstige ausländische Auszeichnungen (other foreign decorations) In your logic the OL and the OLS are 1957 versions, reissued. They are not listed in the "Beilage" from 1958. Then, also in your logic, all the other decorations (allowed to be worn), and not only OL and OLS, must also be 1957 version, reissued. All the Imperial decorations, all foreign decorations, all new post May 1945 (really) issued decorations, nearly all decorations of the world; without some NAZI decorations. Then there is a 1957 Prussian Pour le Merite, a 1957 Prussian Red Eagle Order, a 1957 Bulgarian Order of Merit, a 1957 Romanian Order of the Crown of Romania, et cetera, et cetera, ... They are now all 1957 versions? Reissued? That is not my logic. "Only the decorations with the changed design were and are 1957 versions" Uwe

PK, I don't know, where to start and where to end. And it is not easy for me, to explain all that in English. Please, is it not possible for you to accept, that only the decorations with the changed design were 1957 versions? And that the allowance in the "Ordensgesetz", to wear decorations, is not the allowance, to produce copies/fakes. It was and is not of interest for the German government, what sort of decorations the people wear: originals, copies or fakes. It was and is of interest, that the people don't wear not allowed decorations, no more and no less. "... anyone could take a reproduction set of EL or ELS and claim them to be "official 1957 awards." No! A copy of an original decoration, awarded before May 1945, could never be a 1957 version. "... the BRD government authorised the production of denazified awards to be worn by WW2 veterans enlisting in the Bundeswehr" That is correct. The 1957 versions. "... the Bundeswehr [] approved a new "Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes in seinen Stufen" on 26.7.1957." No! The Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes in seinen Stufen still exist, what you see there is only the approval to wear them. EK 2, EK 1 and RK as 1957 versions, all the other higher classes (not the Großkreuz:blush:) as originals (or copies/fakes). Please accept, that nearly all the Third Reich decorations had been produced, as copies, before the "Ordensgesetz" from 1957. You could buy copies of the OL and of the OLS for example in 1954. "... what on earth was the official retail outlet of the German armed forces doing selling them?" Here is a list of the "Kleiderkasse für die Bundeswehr" (in extracts) from 1970. There is a mixture of 1957 versions ("Originals") and copies. There you can also see copies of the EK 1 and EK 2 from 1914. Do you really believe, that the German government must new "approve" these old decorations? If you don't understand it now, I don't know, how to explain it better. "Only the decorations with the changed design were 1957 versions" Uwe

PK, "In other words, the postwar EL was officially approved. It was not forbidden" "It was not forbidden" is correct. "... the postwar EL was officially approved", that is absolutely not correct! Why should the German government officially approve copies/fakes? Sorry, but that is nonsense. That is not splitting hairs, it is the reality. Regards Uwe

PK, "Recipients of any military or sports decoration unadorned with the swastika and other NSDAP-related heraldry could wear their original versions of the award in Bundeswehr uniform" No, not the sports decorations from the Third Reich! "Yet here, you seem to be arguing that the 1957 pieces are not official" No, not and never! We are writing here about Oakleaves and Oakleaves and Swords, not about 1957 versions . 1957 versions and Oakleaves and Oakleaves and Swords are absolute different parts, in particular and just under the official aspect! There is something to combine, but nothing to compare! The link in Post 11 in that older thread does not work, therefore once more. Only these decorations in the official "Beilage zum Bundesanzeiger 41" are 1957 versions, with pictures and award names in an official document from the German minister of the interior (Der Bundesminister des Innern), based on the official "Ordensgesetz" from 1957: http://www.ordensmus...16Jan0857er.pdf All other decorations are not 1957 versions, only these decorations with the changed design. You cannot find there in the "Beilage" Oakleaves and Oakleaves and Swords, because there was no change in the design. It was allowed, to wear the originals. "Here is an example of the 1957 rules governing the Ritterkreuz. I expect similar rules were issued regarding the EL and ELS." No similar rules for the EL and the ELS, because they are not included in the "Beilage". No specimen (Originalmuster, see page 1 in the link) in the ministry of the interior, and hence no regulations/rules (Herstellungsvorschriften). Uwe

Hi PK, "some EL-Träger and ELS-Träger certainly wore them as replacements, along with the 1957-pattern RK. " That is Ok, but they could wear their awarded originals too! "They are certainly "copies" or "reproductions" but of an official nature ..." "But of an official nature" is not correct. There is no "official nature" for a copy (reprocuction) or a fake. See above, they could wear their awarded original EL and ELS, without any problems! And some did it. Uwe

Hi larsb001, you are on the wrong way. Your mini don't have an "Erinnerungsband". It is the ribbon for the "Verdienstkreuz für Kriegshilfe" (the left one). It is the same ribbon, but not the same importance. See the "normal" blue ribbon for the Crown Order. Regards Uwe

Hi, it is not a fake, it is a copy! It is the "same" set in Post 187 and in Post 194. You can find this set three times! 300346044296 300338231985 300332416571 But he always write: mit dazugehörige[r] Urkunde (Replik) with appertaining document (copy) mendofroad: please, you must always look for "Replik" "Kopie" "kopiert" or other words like that in his auctions! Regards Uwe

Mervyn, thank you for your comment. The reverse of the badge in Post 23 is complete white, a white plate and white threads: Uwe

Hallo mike, "maybe it is dark, dark, dark blue" It is definetely dark, dark dark green, without any doubts. We can now chose between medals for Ostvölker, old medals from Sachsen-Altenburg, Sachsen "Wissenschaft und Kunst" and Nassau "Landwirtschaft". But I think, that we can rather follow Rick, for example with Anhalt, long service medal, OEK 88 or 89. Uwe

Hi Catroonman, the regulations say "dunkelgrün" dark green! Uwe

Hi Dan, "Even if it's an original 1957 that would be okay." Oakleaves could never be an original 1957. Only an original (end in May 1945) or a copy/fake. Uwe

Hi, I don't see black, it is dark green! It could be for example: Brunswick, lifesaving medal. Uwe

This is my last one in this section, and I think, it is an older one? Uwe

Hi Tim, I will make it short. I'm only interested in the historical truth. And I can see a bright bronze version. Could it be, that the seller had the wrong colour configuration? I never heard something about a silver version. Regards Uwe

Hi Tim, please excuse, but I say once more, that it is bronze and not silver, also the left piece is even more bronze than silver, it is just playing a little bit with colours : Uwe

This is a newer WO1, with a pin: