Pour Le Merite (Blue Max)

[Les]

Andreas said this piece was/is a Rothe. It's similar to one, but wasn't made by them. I'd agree with him saying this one was and is bad.

(1) The presence of silver solder marks along the feet of the eagles, etc, is a sign of being made AFTER WWI, and isn't an Imperial era piece.

The usual way gold and silver items were soldered together, was to use filings from the same material of the medal itself, and mixing them with another metal that melted at a lower temperature. Prior to the 1930's, most solders used by jewelers was made in house, not bought from commercial sources. The alloy mix in most cases, closely matches the color of the pieces being joined, and the result would be an a seam line that would be hard to see when the excess was filed and smoothed flush.

During WWII, the use of commercial solders appeared, and were often made using lead or other low melting alloys. The resulting seam lines are often easily seen because of the different metals used.

If the solder used has any traces of lead, it wasn't made before 1945. Silver solder was used on some gold pieces after WWI and prior to 1945, however, the underlying silver would likely have oxidized over the years turning dark or black. Usually, silver soldered pieces made after the Imperial did not have the solder lines gilded over.

(2) The eagles are far too large for any known PlMs made after 1870. If you look at any/all of the Johanniter style crosses with their over large eagles, the piece shown here has eagles that are in the same size range.

(3) The weight of the piece is far heavier than any hollow gold PlMs (which are more likely to be roughly 20 - 23 grams in weight), which suggests without even handling the piece in hand, that it may be solid, or even solid bronze gilt. Even solid silver pieces from the later part of WWI are not as heavy as yours.

Jim's comment that heavy gold plate can not be differentiated from solid gold without relying on non-destructive means is not correct. Heavy plating over the core material or formed blank, will obscure details (particularly fine ones), and is difficult to plate evenly over the entire outer surface. In the past, it's been very difficult to plate pieces and get close to the density of pieces formed by stamping/pressing or even some casting methods.

There are a few simple tests that can be conducted on pieces to determine plating versus pieces made mostly of coin grade metals or better. All metal pieces can be measured to determine density. Plated materials will have different densities than something made from one metal only. Two related methods are to heat the item in hot water and measure the rate heat spreads from one point to another. In upper crust English society, women often took note of how quickly heat moved along silver teaspoons in their hot tea cups and cold tell the difference between a plated spoon and a spoon made of stamped silver. Different metals and alloys react differently to heat: some conduct heat quickly, others slowly depending on their purity, etc. Also, electrical currents move through metals at known rates, and that can be used to suggest whether pieces are "pure", the amount of alloys, etc.

XRF (xray florescence ) may indicate areas where plating is thin in certain spots, and according to the claims of some, is accurate enough to measure the (elemental) content of gold and other metals. XRF is said to be able to penetrate metals to a depth of 3mm, which is more than enough to examine the eagles and suspension system which isn't -that- thick.

( http://www.niton.com....aspx?sflang=en )

There are other problems that come to mind, however, I'll leave things by saying the presence of clearly visible whitish looking solder indicates a piece made after the Imperial era, and the overly large eagles is anachronistic on PlMs made after 1870. The weight of the piece is another problem. These are all major negatives, regardless of the maker name, details of the eagles (the uncut areas around the tail feathers) etc.

Edited July 25, 2011 by Les

[Zepenthusiast]

Les advances a strong case for skepticism of it being Imperial, to be sure. Having in the past tried unsuccessfully to find a local lab which could answer the plate vs. solid question (usual answer was "sure we can....long as it is less than 2.5 microns--classified as "heavy plate"), I had to cross-check on that 3mm claim. Les wins: an outfit called "Advanced Plastics and Material Testing" in Ithaca, NY (for instance) confirmed a laboratory XRF can determine plate "in excess of 8 microns." That would encompass most any likely plating. That kind of capability is not possible with the portable scanners (such as the Niton), as I found out all too well, but I stand corrected nonetheless. If you don't mind travelling to, or shipping it to a capable lab, it looks like they could non-destructively answer the question of composition. Density would seem to be a help re the metal content, but can you get around the effect of the enamel on a PlM, without having precise knowledge of volume and expected mass of the glass? Enamel actually ends up taking up quite a bit of volume on these things.

One other thought: is that definitely silver solder at the eagles? It looks like it to be sure, in some images (see post #22), but does not in others (post #21). Reflection of the camera flash may be inducing artifact ? (or perhaps is revealing the silver presence)--I find it hard to be sure from the available shots. Perhaps Sioni can clarify it by description or better close ups (or better yet a hi-res scan, as Les once taught me).

One other thought on the high weight. The eagles are unusually very large. If they were hypothetically solid gold (which can be verified after all, as noted above), could that move the weight of the whole piece up closer to 30 grams and still allow for a hollow body? Presumably, a lab able to do deep XRF could also ultrasound test it for hollow construction.

Edited July 25, 2011 by Zepenthusiast

[medalnet]

www.medalnet.net has the correct pieces listed. Whatever does not fit the list is out.

[saschaw]

One idea, and just an idea - are orders pour le merite known which are made from overworked Johanniters? In more modern days, of course...

[Daniel Cole]

There was once upon a time a discussion on another board about a PLM with the same hallmark. It went on for a long time. I would think that to find some "new " variant is way too unrealistic. My first opinion was a Rothe. I think there was also a single sided piece that was engraved on the back by a bunch of folks with this same hallmark.

Anyone else remember this?

[erickn]

There was once upon a time a discussion on another board about a PLM with the same hallmark. It went on for a long time. I would think that to find some "new " variant is way too unrealistic. My first opinion was a Rothe. I think there was also a single sided piece that was engraved on the back by a bunch of folks with this same hallmark.

Anyone else remember this?

Perhaps this single sided Meybauer is what you are thinking about.......http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=239695&highlight=Study+PlM

Hope this helps.

Erickn

[Daniel Cole]

Yep that was it.

[erickn]

The Beautiful Single Sided Engraved PLM featured was a Godet type attributed to General Major Paul Krause in Andreas Collection.

[Zepenthusiast]

There is a very nice qualitative aspect to the cross body and the eagles which is simply not borne out by the lettering and quality of the enamel. Not an original observation in this thread, but as a synthesis of some of the above comments: is this an older/quality Johanniter (perhaps made by JH Werner?), crowns and original enamel carefully removed, and "remade" as a kind of pseudo-PlM? It would explain the coarser aspects of the lettering, the enamel finish and substantial "spill" in places, the size and better quality of the eagles (which are both substantial). It may have been done for personal/private reasons and not as a deliberate attempt to trick anyone (especially if pre-WWII, per Sioni).

[Zepenthusiast]

In keeping with the Johanniter conversion theory, each of the eagles has an additional "layer" atop their brow feathers--variable to some extent--and in the top view seen to have some width (it is not just the flash from being pressed during formation, for instance). It may very well be the base of the now-removed crowns.