![](https://gmic.co.uk/uploads/set_resources_32/84c1e40ea0e759e3f1505eb1788ddf3c_pattern.png)
John1919
-
Posts
18 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Store
Posts posted by John1919
-
-
Hi,
1) Did they also produce for the civilian market?
2) For the military, did they not go for functional and cheap? i.e. Designs hand painted usually raises the cost of an item, something the military tends to avoid.
3) Most military barracks have many items that are not "Issue", Our regimental bar and company clubs had glasses, plates and dishes bought on the civilian market as I am sure do similar things on base all over the world.
I dont doubt that this was found there... I just wonder if it can be seen as "Official issued item"
best
Chris
Chris,
I am not sure after the acquisition of Bohemia by the SS, how much commercial production was devoted to its domestic market. On pages 37 and 38 of Gabriele Huber's Die Porzellan- Manufaktur Allach M?nchen GmbH, she indicates (as best as I can translate the really technical German language text of this reference) that Bohemia's export production (which was a very significant portion of its pre-1940 capacity) was substantially cut back to supply the Wehrmacht, Waffen SS and Rote Kreuz with tableware.
On the basis, I would suspect that supplying the Wehrmacht, Waffen SS and Rote Kreuz with tableware was probably also a higher priority for Bohemia than suppling the local population. Consistent with this inference is Huber's statement on page 38 of the same reference which states that (after 1941 as best as I can translate) utilitarian items were to be produced at Bohemia and decorative wares were to be produced at Allach. Accordingly, I would not rule out some of Bohemia's production finding its way into the civilian population, but it seems to me that Bohemia's primary mission after acquisition by the SS was to supply functional items for the Wehrmacht, Waffen SS and Rote Kreuz. Thus I would infer that more Bohemia's production wound up in Wehrmacht and Waffen SS barracks than in town.
As I stated, Huber's book is very difficult for one not fluent in the German language to translate. Accordingly, if there are any forum members fluent in German interested in helping to translate the corresponding text to insure that I have extracted its proper meaning, please feel free to contact me.
Best regards,
John
0 -
These mugs were in use as standard mugs in the SS Guard Barracks. there were many of them but just the one I have survived.They were not picked up by an SSman in town, as one Gentleman stated-
regards
J?rgen
I just also wanted to mention that there is substantial documentation [see Grabriele Huber's book (dissertation) on PMA] that Bohemia under SS control produced tableware for use by Germany's Red Cross and armed services. To me, it appears very plausible that this mug could have been issued to an SS unit.
0 -
If anyone is interested. I am quite surprised at how much discussion both good and bad has gone on regarding this particular Vase. As I told the potential owner a few weeks ago, this Vase will bring a tremendous amount of scrutiny due to it's markings so if you like the Vase purchase it, but don't expect to sell it very easily because most people will stay clear of it. But that doesn't mean it is not authentic. Like most other pieces of Militaria (dagger, medal, etc.) that comes out of the woodwork and never before seen, there will always be suspicions of its authenticity. The top dealers and collectors in their particular field will all look at it and decide if the piece looks good or not. If the consensus is that the piece looks to be good then the majority may accept it. Obviously these experts will follow certain criteria's as to how to ascertain the authenticity of a particular item. They may not know why it was produced or for whom but they will know that it is a period piece by using these criteria's. I believe this is what we have in this particular Vase. I have handled more Allach than most so I am comfortable in forming an opinion on this Vase. This Vase is correctly marked with the green Allach in the raised octagon that is an undisputed makers mark of Allach. The impressed # 503 is also correct for this type vase as 84 total Vases were produced in 1938-39 with an additional 22 Vases produced in 1939 that were painted. The application of the Bohemia markings over stamping the Allach markings is in itself puzzling but was done correctly. The glaze is applied over both markings before the final firing of the Vase. I've seen pieces of porcelain with both the Allach and Bohemia marks present but they were usually side by side not overlapped but I believe these also to be authentic. Oswald Pohl, head of the economic enterprises of the SS, ordered to acquire the porcelain manufacturer Bohemia in mid 1939. The defeat of Czechoslovakia in June 1939 was the political and military precondition for such an economic activity by the SS. Particularly since Bohemia was once a factory that had been in Jewish possession. Now we have two entities, Allach known for it's porcelain and Bohemia which is known for it's cut glass artistry. Obviously there had to be a transition phase between the two manufacturers. This particular Vase has both of the makers markings as well as the manufacturing strengths of both companies, porcelain and cut decorations. Allach had never made this type of decoration before so it is plausible that this Vase has the combined artistry of both manufacturers during this early transitional period. Let us not forget that pieces of Allach porcelain were not allowed to leave the factory because of flaws of one kind or another. This dual overlapping makers mark could have been considered a flaw and left on the shelf only to be taken by the liberating forces who plundered the Allach factory. One will never know the reason for this peculiar mark but with all else considered, I believe this Vase to be authentic. This is only the humble opinion of one man. Dennis R. Porell
Gentlemen,
A while back I purchased Gabriele Huber?s Allach book (German language).
Since receiving it I have (with the kind assistance of friends who speak
fluent German) initially reviewed the books discussion of the relationship
between the expansion of Allach (PMA), the relationship Allach between
Bohemia, etc.
Interestingly, Huber states on page 37:
?Dabei war das Verh?ltnis zwischen PMA und Bohemia prima facie nicht ganz
eindeutig, Innerhalb der DWB bzw. des HAVW hat die PMA ebenso wie die
Bohemia die Stellung einer Tochtergesellschaft bzw. bilden beide ein
gemeinsames Amt; gleichzeitig stellt sich die PMA "im Innenverh?ltnis" als
Hauptunternehmen dar, dem in der Bohemia gewisserma?en eine "Filiale" zur
Verf?gung steht. So wird beim Abschlu? der ?bernahme der Bohemie- Aktien im
Monatsbericht der PMA f?r Mai 1940 vermerkt: "Der Betrieb in Neurohlau
[bohemia] wurde am 16.5.1940 ?bernommen?; ebenso vermittelte die
Gesch?ftsf?hrung der PMA Gro?auftr?ge an die Bohemia - etwa
Kantinengeschirre - wie in den Gesch?ftspr?fungsberichten 1940/41 belegt,
und ?berlie? ihr "Mutterformen f?r Vasen" zur Herstellung?
This text indicates that in 1940 Allach (PMA) provided ?mother forms for
vases? to Bohemia. To date, this is the only reference I have found in
Huber?s (or any other book) book to Allach providing its molds to Bohemia
(or any other porcelain factory). Huber cites a reference to the document
NS 3/vorl281 (Werkbericht des Amtes III B f?r Januar 1940) to substantiate
this information.
Interestingly, Huber?s text and this reference is VERY specific to Allach
providing VASE (and, by inference, possibly only vase) molds to Bohemia on,
or before, 1940. I have not yet been able to determine if the full
connotation of the word ?mutterformen? in German might extend to include
molded, but unfinished (undecorated) pieces. Irrespective of the exact
latitude of the meaning of ?mutterformen?, Huber?s book and the
corresponding cited contemporary German document unequivocally indicates
that Allach and Bohemia had a very specific (and possibly unique)
relationship to cooperate to JOINTLY produce vases for the SS. Given this
additional information, at least for me, it is not much of a stretch to
conclude that Allach and Bohemia, at least in the beginning, cooperated
closely to jointly produce prototype or presentation examples of vases.
Moreover, I think it is fair to also infer that despite Bohemia?s acquiring
?Mutterformen f?r Vasen" from Allach, Bohemia never produced (or finished)
vases using Allach mold designs on a large scale as otherwise other
surviving examples of ?Allach Bohemia? vases would have come to light.
The above text from Huber?s book also indicates that there seemed to, at
least initially, some confusion regarding the corporate relationship between
Allach and Bohemia. Accordingly, it seems that Allach producing vases that
might be finished (decorated) at Bohemia might have been a business model
that the SS explored through limited joint production of prototype vases,
etc. that was abandoned as the definition of Allach?s and Bohemia?s became
better defined.
Best regards,
John
0 -
I would expect that if "Bohemia" had been used at all; it would have been used on items manufactured strictly for export. Sort of like Hummels marked "Germany" as opposed to "Deutschland" during the 1930's. Same with after the war... Items were marked "US Zone Germany", "Occupied Japan" and eventually "Western Germany"... but for export as at the time US law (at least, I cannot comment on other countries) required the country of origin to be clearly marked on imported goods.
Pre-WW2 items were marked "Germany"... sometime in the 1950's "Made in Germany" started to appear. These marks have been useful gauges to manufacturing eras in porcelain, bisque and other wares whether china or children's toys for some time....
Bohemia (in the context of the Bohemia Ceramic Works) is the name of the company (short for Bohemia Ceramic Works), NOT the designation of country of origin required to comply with import (export) laws.
Pre-war china, etc. manufactured by Bohemia Ceramic Works for export also contained a designation such as "Made in Czechoslovakia". I have attached a pre-war BOHEMIA export marking to exemplify.
I have also attached a second SS Bohemia marking for reference.
Best regards,
John
0 -
Thank you John.
again to clearify the matter. These mugs were in use as standard mugs in the SS Guard Barracks. there were many of them but just the one I have survived.They were not picked up by an SSman in town, as one Gentleman stated-
regards
J?rgen
PS I am puzzled by the word Bohemia, whereas in German it would be Boehmen. I doubt if the SS used the english word for B?hmen.
J?rgen,
The SS Bohemia maker's mark drawing I posted above was from a reference source but I can not actually remember seeing an SS Bohemia maker's mark with "BOHEMIA" or "B?HMEN" except for the one present on my Bohemia Allach vase discussed in an earlier thread that appears to either be a prototype, presentation or transitional piece.
I have attached to this post a more typical SS Bohemia mark that is present on a German Red Cross cup that appeared on ebay several months ago. The mark on this cup is very similar to the mark on your mark.
If anyone has any other SS Bohemia maker's marks of validated authenticity it would be very helpful if you could post them for reference as I have not seen any examples in Huber's or Passmore's books.
Best regards,
John
0 -
Yes gentlemaen, but the mark on the underside clearly shows the SS mark in the letter B. How s that?
The maker's mark is very similar in design to the Bohemia porcelain factory mark that was used after the SS took over administration of the factory. Bohemia produced mostly tableware during its tenure under the SS (consistent with the mark appearing on a coffee mug). Typically, however, the SS Bohemia mark was, as I recall, green and had BOHEMIA above the B. In this case, I would say provenance is everything if you are indeed sure of the history.
Best regards,
John
0 -
Base...........
Hi Robin,
Thank you for posting the photos of your example. I think the Allach workers were also a little more careful in applying the dark glaze to your example than mine (hence my comment that mine might be a late war example)!
One of the reasons I thought the back version of the No. 89 might be a presentation piece is that black is not listed as a finish option for the No. 89 in the 1938/39 Allach catalog-only the white and white/gold finishes are listed as options.
Do you have a feel for the value of the black Allach No. 89 or are there so few examples there is not much previous sales history?
Best regards,
John
0 -
-
-
Gentlemen,
I had read several threads (on several other forums) regarding the supposed significance of the Diebitsch No. 89 BLACK Kerzenhalter. I'm not sure if all the available information I've read is consistent and whether there is a consensus on this issue or not.
I have recently obtained one from a direct heir of a recipient (see attached photo in this post). The quality of the glazing on the bottom would imply to me that the piece might be late war. Accordingly, this would conflict with earlier stated opinions that the BLACK version of the Diebitsch No. 89 BLACK Kerzenhalter was simply the FIRST version of the No. 89.
Are they any other theories with regard to the significance of the BLACK versions of the No. 89? Were they awards or presentation pieces? What determined if you received a BLACk No. 89 vs. a WHITE No. 89 vs. a WHITE/GOLD No. 89?
Also, does anyone have a feeling for the market value of the black versions in mint condition?
Thank you for your opinions and comments,
John
0 -
Gentlemen,
I posted some additional comments on this topic on another forum but I thought there might be interest so I am inluding them below as well:
I just wanted to compliment Kris on his excellent summary of how to identify real vs. reproduction Allach marks-very professional!! With this work I think we can all agree Kris has, and is contributing immensely to our hobby and helping to keep us from spending our hard earned money on fakes and reproductions. Kris, I just hope the forgers aren't tuning in
As I mentioned to some of you in PMs, I used to collect Third Reich pistols. After a while I did not feel it necessary to disassemble a pistol (remember towards the end of the war authentic guns were created with mismatched parts and finishes due to the haste in production) to determine whether a piece was "good" (or not). Rather I would step back and look at the piece in total (tone of blueing, wear patterns, mill or polishing marks, etc.). Taking this "totality" approach, recognizing pieces that were not original (or "messed with") became easy after gaining experience in the field. I became more confident of conclusions I reached on this basis than any other indicator. On this basis, I never got burned on a gun but some pretty unique and interesting items did come into my possession that I might have not purchased had I taken a no risk, go by the textbook approach. Kris is taking such a "totality" approach in his critical (and fact based) assessment of the veracity of this vase under discussion.
I therefore strongly agree with Kris that the strongest argument for the originality of the piece is the "totality"of the piece itself (i.e. the total sum of the the artistic design, the marks, the quality of the execution, etc.). After the destruction of many of the Third Reich's records (in many cases intentional) and more than 60 years of time past we will probably never understand WHY a particular piece may have been produced. It is therefore difficult, if not impossible, to have an objective argument about the WHY a particular piece may have been created unless the appropriate documentation has survived. It therefore seems the best we can do is have a objective argument on the veracity of the piece based upon the artistic design and physical characteristics of piece itself .
On the above basis, the questions I would then ask myself are:
1) IF Allach and Bohemia, decided to jointly create a piece, would this piece meet the high technical and artistic standards of both individual companies (and the overseeing SS)?
2) Would the artistic contributions of each company in the work be consistent with the individual company's expertise and would the piece, in total, be artistically unique and better than either company could produce by itself? Otherwise why would two companies (or the SS) choose to do a joint project at all? Should not the offspring of Allach and Bohemia contain the DNA of both parents?
3) Does the piece possess markings that are period and technically correct for both companies?
I believe in the case of this particular vase the answers to these three above questions are "yes":
1) In my humble opinion, the quality of this piece does not only meet Allach's high standards of design and execution for vase production and design, it EXCEEDS them (please see original photo posted above). The cut decoration clearly requires a different (and probably higher) skill set than that used on typical Allach vase production and is typical for Bohemian artisans.
2) Allach is unsurpassed for its porcelain quality and the clean, modern design of its vases. Similarly, Bohemia (as a region) is well recognized for its high level of skill in creating cut designs. Together, the two companies produced a piece that unquestionably unique, very high quality and could not have been as well by either company independently.
3) Kris has very professionally addressed the veracity of the Allach markings on the piece. Based upon Bohemia reference markings available with firm "time stamps", the Bohemia marking is correct (can be discussed more if desired).
Then, WHY was this vase created? I don't think we will ever know. Do I none the less objectively believe (as opposed to wishful thinking) that this vase was the joint work of Allach and Bohemia Ceramics Works as its markings indicate? Based upon all the totality of the facts surrounding this piece and the piece itself, I do believe it is original and authentic.
Because my wife and I don't intend to sell this piece, our peace with the veracity of the vase is its most important validation. From an historical perspective however I would hope this piece is not easily dismissed based upon dated reference works as in doing so we might lose some clues to the past and impede our advancement of knowledge in the future.
Best regards to all,
John
0 -
Gentlemen,
My reexamination of the photos indicates that the green BOHEMIA mark was placed over the green Allach mark. Thus the process to produce this vase seems to be:
1) Production of an Allach #503 vase (including the "503" impressed mark and the raised Allach octagon)
2) Application of the usual period Allach green markings inside the Allach octagon
3) Application of the usual period "Bohemia" Ceramic Works AG marking over the usual period Allach markings inside the Allach octagon
4) Application of glaze over both the Allach and "Bohemia" Ceramic Works AG markings
I'm sure most of you noted my error but I just wanted to explicitly clarify.
I apologize for any inconvenience. Apparently, exicitement and advanced age are not a good combination
Please send me a PM with tyour email address if you wish a high resolution copies of the markings.
Best regards,
John
0 -
-
Note the presence of the Allach octagon
0 -
Dear Forum Members:
I thought it might be of interest to post the mark present on an Allach/Bohemia vase I recently purchased (see photo in this post). Both the Allach and Bohemia markings on the vase are present UNDER the glaze (see photo in second post).
The Allach mark on this piece looks near identical to the standard Allach marks present on my other Allach pieces. Moreover, the standard raised Allach octagon is also present (see photo in second post), surrounds the runes and is UNDER the glaze. The Bohemia mark with the large "B" surrounding the lion is proper for the 1938-1945 time frame during which German occupation of Czechoslovakia occurred.
It might be that the mark on this vase is an early version of the 1941-1945 Allach Bohemia mark with runes inside the large "B" (see photo in third post). There seems to be quite a resemblance between two markings (with the exception of the omission of the word "Allach" and absence of the lion in the more common marking). Perhaps artwork for the final Allach Bohemia marking was not immediately available (or its design was not yet approved) so early pieces were manufactured using an improvised over-stamping of Allach over Bohemia marks.
In addition to the above-described Allach and Bohemia markings, the number "503" is also impressed into the base.
I welcome your comments and discussion!
Best regards,
John1919
0
Obersalzberg coffee mug
in Germany: Third Reich: Other Collectables: Standards, Allach Porcelain & Non Portable Awards
Posted
Chis,
In order to honor the book's copywrite restrictions, it would be better for me to work with a translator on a personal basis that complies with these restrictions.
John