Les

Andreas, always good to have imput from you, and I'm not disagreeing with anything you've said. I don't have Nimmergut and can't readily look up the medal in question. Germans might try to follow the regulations closely, but many of the early pieces awarded to Russians during the Napoleonic era might have been PlM and later the same person being awarded the oaks. Some of those Russians lived a long time and were not necessarily required to follow Prussian regulations. I don't know. Les

Mike, There is one specific flaw that shows up on all of the original later war silver-gilt Wagner -and- Friedlander marked PlMs. There is at least one other flaw that I don't care to advertise since it helps protect the originals. This one appears to have a very observable flaw that appears on all of the orignial Wagner/Friedlander pieces from later in the war. This flaw would be very difficult to reproduce exactly except from having been produced from the same die(s) used during the war. Casting details might get most of the flaw but I doubt it would be all that close. I haven't seen and examined any electro-formed pieces....yet. I've only looked at a very small number of eagles with cross-hatching, and if memory serves me correctly, none of them had hatching on all of the eagles, front and back. That alone doesn't mean I'd disqualify the piece you've shown. Les

I haven't seen anything in the pre-1918 regulations, but Osterkamp in the 1960's during the "50th" anniversary of several WWI era awards deprated from the strictest interpretations of the "regulations." If Nimmergut provides provenance/documentation to his example, I'd be more inclined to accept some measure of documentation over what might be nothing more than a position based on opinion and guesswork when the regulations don't specifically cover the cracks. Les

Ok...someone mentioned my name..... The piece Mike shows in his photos, there is what appears to be a specific "die flaw", although the photos aren't clear enough to tell if it is the only one, -and- if the piece was struck or cast. Also, you didn't mention whether there was a silver content stamp or if all markings were lacking. In the thread Tim Tezer started, mentioned by Mike, the subject of post WWI (but pre-WWII) Wagners was discussed. What was not covered in the thread was there are and have been cast copies of original pieces that have turned up on the market. At least one of the castings I've know about even had what looked like some of the die flaws, although the "crispness" and sharpness of the details were not as good as they'd have been if the piece was struck from dies, rather than cast in a mould. Mike, if you can (1) get better photos of the obverse (a flat, straight on view with details of all of the eagles), that would be a big help. If the piece was struck, and not cast, this one might not be war-time, but very likely made shortly after the end of the war. Pending further information, this one has some characteristics the fakes don't usually have, and I'm leaning towards classifying this one as closer to being real than not. Les

"Red" You don't need to scratch the surface. Gold and silver in contact with each other can work like a battery. Put a little bit of lemon juice (Zitronensaft) on the surface with a silver coin on top of it. If you can measure the electrical current, a solid gold center can be enough to give you a slight shock to the touch. A surface layer or plating won't do much at all. Les

GMU, nice oneand better than the one in my collection! "Mine" is a steel that's came as part of a group. The recipent was credited with his first, and only "kill" during the fall of 1916. He should have had a silver one, but the one he "left behind" was a thin steel one that rusted enough that there are tiny holes go entirely through the metal. The worst of the pitting and holes are along the welded seam opposite the eagles design. The recipient ran into a couple of legal and financial problems during the 1920's, and I suspect he might have sold his original and picked up a cheaper steel one as a "replacement." Considering how tough the economic situation in Germany was during the inflationary period and through the late 1920's, I can understand that some vets might have sold them off to put food on the table. Les

Charles, I read an old "Time" magazine special that was made about the time the movie was originally released. The article reported that tidbit but whether it is true"....I don't know for certain. Movie studios aren't necessarily bound by ethical considerations when hyping films, actors, etc. http://gmic.co.uk/style_images/gmicfinal2/...icons/icon8.gif Les

This is a side issue, but does directly relate to Rommel's awards. I've never seen any decent and highly detailed photos of his awards that are "still in the family." It's interesting to note that no one seems to have managed to include them as part of publications on the EK/RK or PLM, -particularly- since he was received awards from both categories. The family is "approachable" on this matter, although the "politics" involved may require gaining the confidence of the family, etc. During the filming of "The Longest Day", the German actor portraying Rommel is said to have been loaned Rommel's actual awards for the purposes of filming. Les

Chris, I met Ramcke's son not quite two years ago. He's now an American citizen living in the U.S. I asked him about his father's medals, documents, etc, and he told me they are "still in the family" and the intention is to keep them that way and the items will eventually go to -his- son. Les

The early pieces had lettering that was applied and/or painted on by hand. The lettering was not formed at the same time the cross itself was. The hand work of each and every jeweler (or shop worker) applying the lettering ought to show differences and they should not be identical. I haven't examine one of the "Hamburg copies" "in hand" so I can't say much about how these specific copies were made. It's possible that these were cast, not struck or die-rolled. Depending on the specific molding methods used, there are ways to make relatively easily modified molds/masters which can be modified and used for electro-forming (as opposed to older molding methods) of gold objects, etc. The modern electroforming process can be down-right dangerous unless you know specifically what to look for as tell-tale signs. A clever forger can remove or modifiy some of those signs. The guys making the repros/fakes are good, but sometimes they are "too good" and what gives them away is when "twins" start turning up. The "economics" of passing off fakes usually means batch production of more than a "few." When a relatively scarce item shows up, caution is always advisable. When more than one or two of the same scarce item start turning up....it's time to take a very hard look at that "rare" item. Les

The WWI era ones are pretty easy to sort into the period made pieces, and the fakes. For those of you who want to venture into the really deep end of the shark pond with few life-guards on duty, check this one out. http://cgi.ebay.com/Prussian-Pour-le-Merit...VQQcmdZViewItem Item number: 190112910783 Sorry for not down-loading and posting the photo here, but if someone else wants to do the honors, feel free to do so. Les

Ferg, Theis has an on-line site where you can look at past and present auction catalogues, and also a section where he posts auction results. I recall the air gunner badge selling, but won't venture to rely on memory in quoting a price. Les

Jim, Yes, the cleaning kits sold in jewelery departments of chain stores, and the kits sold by dentists operate on the same principle. You put the item into a small cup-like container, add a water-based solvent which usually contains ammonia as it's active agent, and turn the machine on. Depending on the strength of the solvent, the item comes out "clean" in about five or ten minutes. Les

Gold generally does not tarnish or oxidize if it's "pure." If your medal shows signs of tarnish, etc., it is either alloyed with another metal and less than 80% gold. The medal might be mercury gilted or plated over another type of metal. What you could be seing is the gilt or plating wearing thin and the base metal starting to show (and tarnish or corrode). If you absolutely, positively, -have- to clean the medal to halt corrosion, one way to remove oxidation or tarnish (and any post-maufacture patina it developed over the years) is to use a sonic cleaner of the type used for cleaning jewelery. Sonic cleaners are cheap, and available at many large chain stores for less than US$10. Les

The PlM in the photo looks a great deal like the S&L copy made after 1957. Also, the Udet "grouping" was sold at auction not so long ago and the subject of a thread on this forum. The Udet items are, and this is putting it politely, of "doubtful origin".... http://gmic.co.uk/style_images/gmicfinal2/...icons/icon9.gif Peter obviously can afford to buy items he likes, although how much of what he buys is real is another matter. Les

Dave, Good eye. I noticed the "placement of the badge" but didn't comment on it. Badges were often worn by sewing two loops onto a tunic, and the pin being passed between the loops and tunic, rather than putting holes into the tunic material. Rumey might have worn the badge by "holing" the tunic, but in either case, it's positioning on the tunic (along with other badges) probably resulted in semi-permanent locations either through permanent holes with their resultant wear and tear, or sewn-in loops which more or less fix the location of a badge. The badge does appear to be in a different position on the tunic, but that could be explained: the "span" between the sewn loops could come closer together due to Rumey slightly changing his body position by leaning inwards, etc. If the body position changed and the loops were temporarily closer together that would result in the badge's position moving up/down a small amount. Les

There are enough comparative details that strongly suggest all of the preceeding photos were taken on the same day. Rumey's uniform details are consitent throughout all of the three photos (the Sanke, group of 3, and squadron photo). The "details" of the badge might look different, but that enlarged photo taken from the squadron shot suggests that the badge is not cut-out, nor is it a retired pilot's badge either. Let's not forget that cameras and films used during the WWI era and considerably different from modern cameras and films. The lenses have changed consequently, images can appear different from what they were/are, not only then but today. While images might look the same or different, it's always best to use caution when looking at old photos and remember what cameras (and lenses), and film properties of the times were. One thing about the close-up of the enlarged image of Rumey from the squadron photo, is that the pilot's badge appears to be almost "solid" and not cut-out at all. Unless Rumey had more than one tunic, and more than one badge ("wearing copies" is a term that comes to mind and not in a good way), -and- if the photos were taken on the same day, Rumey in all probability was wearing the same tunic and badges in all of the photos. If you look at the breast tunic pocket flap (the pocket with the EKI on it) note how the edge of the pocket seems to stick up a bit and not lie flat against his chest. This detail shows up in all of the photos, enforcing the probability the images were all taken the same day...and that has implications regarding the specific details of the badge. What we are seeing in all probability is nothing more than the effect of shadow (and some tarnish/patination) in the Sanke card, and the group of three photo. Any rebuttal comments from the opposite point of viewers? Les

Hey! That's Rumey second from the right, and what's he got on his tunic? Enlarged in this photo (along with the pixellation from the printing process in the source book it came from....in this case, Neil O'Connor's second volume on aviation awards) you can see the badge....and it looks nothing like a cut-out badge.

Now....it would appear that the photographer took the "Sanke card" photo of Rumey at the same time he took the group photo of Rumey, Koennecke, and Mai. None of them are wearing their later awards or officer shoulder straps. I'd guess the photo was taken in the interim between the period when they'd been nominated for the GMVK, and were awaiting officer commissioning. That said, there is a squadron photo in existence that was probably taken the same time the individual shot of Rumey, and the group photo of R, K, & Mai was taken. Here'tis!

A close up view of Rumey from the previous photo....

In the photo, Rumey isn't wearing the GMVK, nor does he have officer's shoulder straps. That places the photo before June 1918. Also, note the Sanke card number, which is another way of providing a rough index of when the photo was taken. Other details such as the relative lack of fullness (or leaves) in the trees in the background suggest spring-time rather than summer. While looking through some of my sources at home, I found another photo which appears to have been taken at the same time (same day, same photographer) of Rumey, Koennecke, and Mai. If you compare the following photos with Rumey's Sanke card, and the one on this post, there are some intersting details that are the same. Note the crease on the upper part of Rumey's tunic, being present in both photos. The badge appears to be the same in both photos. Also...pay attention to the background details, as these will be compared to some additional photos. Les

Someone mentioned my name in another posting here? Ok... I pulled some of my books out of storage. There's a well-known photo of Frankl, seated, and facing the camera at an angle. In the photo his pilot's badge can be seen. Here's the interesting part. The flat background part of the badge appears to be tarnished, not cut-out. The higher parts of the badge were probably polished by wear with his overcoat, flight jacket, etc while the recessed areas developed a tarnish. Perhaps Rumey's badge isn't in shadow, nor cut out, but tarnished? That thought then led me to wonder if a "poor man's cut out badge" might be simply to let the background of a badge tarnish, while keeping the wreaths and raised parts of the "earth" and "Taube" polished. Allowing a badge to tarnish would be a simple thing to do, and even hastened by using anything with sulphur in it (dissovled match heads or ashes disolved in water, etc). 90 years on, anything with a high silver content will show signs of tarnish, and if there was a "poor mans cut out" we'd never see it on surviving badges; only photos would hint of this. Lastly, this effect would be a trendy thing to do with backed badges and not require having someone cut the badge out and the effect that would have on a badge with a ribbed back plate, etc. Maybe...maybe not. Les

I received the following from a forum member concerning copyright concerns. <quote> Les, I would advise that you AT LEAST extend the courtesy to request permission to reproduce images from copyrighted material on the internet. I worked thousands of hours and traveled tens of thousands of miles to capture the images in my books. I paid a high price in time away from work and my family. These images aren't free! What right do you have to simply scan them and post?! None. It is called breaking the law, and you have documented all the evidence for everybody to see! What should I do now?! For your part I strongly suggest you add an addendum to your thread NOW stating all images are copyright Stephen Thomas Previtera anad Winidore Press, Inc.. I would follow that with an apology. Now these images can be downloaded by the world! PLEASE THINK man, before you get yourself in hot water! Stephen <endquote> I thought I had referred the source of the photos used, but if I haven't clearly done so, my apologies to all. The owner requests an addendum stating the images are his, and that request is acknowledged. Again, my apologies to all for any misunderstandings. Les

I'll summarize, and at this point wrap it up. Eagles made seperately from, and applied after the cross was made might look similar but if "cut and pasted" could be deceptive. Look at "non-moveable" elements of the cross part of the design. Some features might be subject to hand-finishing and possibly removed during the phase in which the cross is being trimmed from the die-pressing process, etc. That could result in finials being present on some crosses, and absent on others. What it doesn't account for is the lack of overlapping "Po" letters in the usual Wagner made pieces. If there is significant "overlap", I suggest that any piece said to have been made from the dies used to make hollow gold (or solid silver gilt wartime W/Fr pieces) can not have been made from either of the dies used to make the hollow gold, or solid silver gilt Wagner PlMs. Les

Mackensen's..