Changes

[Wild Card]

Gentlemen,

Occasionally we encounter a piece which just doesn?t look quite right. Is it good or not? Why is it not exactly as we expect it to be, what we have come to accept as correct, what we consider to be the standard? Going with the premise that the piece is perfectly genuine, the answer is most often - time. Over time the look and characteristics of pieces changed.

Sometimes, such as with the center obverse medallions of the Prussian Crown Order and the Saxon Albert Order, these changes are official and immediately recognizable; other times, they evolve and are much more subtle. With medals, dies often broke and replacements were not always 100% identical to the originals.

As the result of a discussion on another thread, I would like to present a brief study of changes as they apply to the Brunswick Order of Henry the Lion. Although I am concentrating on Commander?s badges, the changes illustrated generally apply to the Grand Crosses and Knight?s badges as well.

The first example is of a very early Commander?s badge which is as basic as you can get. I would date it between the founding of the order in 1834 and some point during the early 1840?s. This piece would have been made by the jeweler August Lemme who produced 98 Commander?s badges between 1834 and 1847. The distinguishing features of this badge which will see changes over time are:

A. The solid narrow white border on the obverse medallion. The 1834 statutes show a very faint hint of ?feathering? on the inner line of this border; but other examples are consistent with the piece shown. The feathering is faintly evident on the Grand Crosses of this period.

B. The separately applied gold star on the obverse side of the 12 o?clock arm.

C. The smooth finish on the reverse of the crowned monograms between the arms of the cross.

D. No star at 6 o?clock on the reverse medallion border.

[Wild Card]

First example.

[Wild Card]

Details.

[Wild Card]

This next example picks up nicely where the first left off. Here we see the beginning of the changes. Most obvious is the engraving on both sides of the crowned monograms; and we are also beginning to see subtle changes with the feathering of that inner line of the white border of the obverse medallion.

Also, where suspension rings throughout tended to be oval, this one, as seen from time to time, approaches being round. I would date this piece from the mid forties to early fifties.

[Wild Card]

Next example.

[Wild Card]

Details.

[Wild Card]

Our third example, which, with an early Siebrecht mark, probably dates between 1880 and 1900 presents yet more changes. First, we see that that white border has progressed from the feathered to the more widely known ?saw tooth? pattern. The star on the obverse arm at twelve o?clock is no longer separately applied; but is now painted - and usually lost among the feathers. Also, the star at six o?clock on the border of the reverse medallion has finally appeared.

Now, two things about this. Exactly when this came into being, I can not say; but what is really interesting is that the statutes, at least up to 1902 do not appear to mention or illustrate it. If anyone out there has any information on this point, it would be most welcome.

[Wild Card]

Third example.

[Wild Card]

Details.

[Wild Card]

With regard to our last example, I must open with an apology and explanation. While I had hoped to present this thread using Commander?s badges exclusively, I was not able to get the right piece for this last part back home in time, so I will be substituting a Grand Cross badge, with swords above, which resides closer to home in its place.

Here we see the final two changes. First is the change to the white border of the obverse medallion which in 1907 was changed from the ?saw tooth? to the ?sickle? pattern. The second change addresses that perennial question as to whether the horse?s tail should be up or down. Well, here it is - the answer is - (drum roll) - both!

As we have seen, since 1834, the horse?s tail has been in what is referred to as the ?down? position. In 1912, the firm of Hermann J?rgens succeeded Siebrecht as the Brunswick house jeweler; and it was at this time that the change to the horse?s tail was made.

I hope that this information has been useful.

Best wishes,

Wild Card

[Wild Card]

Last example.

Edited January 10, 2006 by Wild Card

[Wild Card]

Details.

[David Gregory]

Wild Card,

While purely academic considering the budget I allow myself for collecting purposes, this is a fascinating insight into the way that "accepted standards" evolved over the course of time and as court jewellers changed.

For many more frequently awarded items, such differences often give cause for concern. With such rare items as these, I would hope that the precise numbers and types are more carefully documented.

Judging by what you have shown us here and elsewhere, I understand your concern about keeping much of your collection locked safely away. You are lucky to have several examples of rare awards of which many other collectors simply aspire to obtain one piece for their humble collections.

Without wishing to dilute the subject matter of this thread too much, do you also have examples of award documents for these or other awards that show how the documents evolved and varied?

Many thanks,

David

[Stogieman]

Excellent observations Wildcard and well illustrated. Thanks

[medalnet]

Shouldn't mavery post his commander badge, too? Last model Siebrecht (Zimmermann made) with the silver mark * S? This would complete the circle.

[Wild Card]

Shouldn't mavery post his commander badge, too? Last model Siebrecht (Zimmermann made) with the silver mark * S? This would complete the circle.

Absolutely! His piece is a beautiful example of an important transition - post 1907 medallion border change with the pre 1912 horse by Siebricht.

I hope that he will oblige us.

Wild Card

Edited January 11, 2006 by Wild Card

[Wild Card]

Hi David Gregory,

To answer your question, yes, I do have a number of award documents related to this order. Please understand that what you have seen here represents a part of twenty-five years of collecting dedicated to this order. I have expanded my interest to a couple of other areas; but remain rather narrowly focused.

With regard to your question/comment on documentation, my experience is that this varies greatly dependent upon existence and accessibility of archives and related materials.

I thank you for your kind comments and am sending you a PM with some explanations.

Best wishes,

Wild Card

Edited January 12, 2006 by Wild Card

[David Gregory]

Hi Wild Card,

Thanks for the reply and your PM, both of which are highly appreciated.

Even if that represents just a part of your collection, I wish I had your self-discipline in maintaining focus on any aspect of Imperial militaria. Unfortunately, temptation rears its ugly head more often than my financial resources will realistically allow.

Best wishes,

David

[Claudio]

Hi Wildcard,

Just for your comment; this is my Commander grade cross.

ciao,

Claudio

[Wild Card]

Hi Claudio,

A beautiful example! This has to be a spectacular badge. From the picture, my guess would date it around 1850-60. Am I close?

Thanks for sharing and best wishes,

Wild Card

[Bob Hunter]

The workmanship is breathtaking in close-up!

[Stogieman]

I think The Brunswick House Order to be one of the most visually-pleasing of all the Imperial Orders. From the merit crosses on up, it's just a stunning piece. Thanks WC for pointing out the development and changes! Great thread!