EK 1939 Diamonds Maker ?

[Robin Lumsden]

And fake reverse ....................

[Robin Lumsden]

The real thing ..................

[Robin Lumsden]

Reference comparison .....................

[hagahr]

thanks Robin,,,,,,,,

hmmm

the reason WY I ask

I was looking at Stephan Previtera's book at page 445 the Erik Hartman dublo oak;s

and noticed that he had a mark with a clear full circle around the K ,,,

also ,,,,,that particular mark looks a bit smaller as these one shown here ,,,,,(who are also in S,PR book present by the way) .

don't know I am allowed to show the pictures off it here ?

(its Stephan 's book )

regards kay

[Robin Lumsden]

.................and noticed that he had a mark with a clear full circle around the K ............

Also seen on the set attributed to Graf.

[hagahr]

Stephan Previtera allowed me to use pictures from his EK Book ...........IRON TIME .....

fore comparing ,,,a clear circle around the K

Edited January 17, 2012 by hagahr

[hagahr]

maybe I am mistaken

but I see two different circle K markings .

[Robin Lumsden]

Yes ............... they are different.

[PKeating]

Interesting thread. The initial question is easily resolved by recalling that the Circle-K hallmark on the reverse of the Type 2 Brillanten or ELSuB made by Otto Klein was always accompanied by a hallmark consisting of the Hanau town symbol.

Otto Klein (1885 - 1969) was a master goldsmith and jeweller whose work was on a level with other masters at Tiffany's, Mappin & Webb and similar firms of the era. His firm reflected his skills and talents, which is why the discerning Hermann Göring was a customer and why he pushed to have Klein replace Godet as the authorised supplier of this grade of the Knight's Cross to the German government. When one looks at just the hallmarks alone on some of the examples shown in various reference books, one sees a level of precision that fails to inspire confidence. And when one has handled one or two known originals, there is no comparison to be made. The workmanship is second-to-none.

As we know, Klein made copies of the Type 2 Brillanten for the collecting market after the war. These items were openly sold as such and were quite different, on purpose, to the wartime sets. However, it seems likely that the firm, like several other firms that had supplied insignia to the NS regime, produced perfect copies of the wartime award to order. If so, this renders any Type 2 ELSuB open to question except in cases where the provenance is unassailable. Some people have suggested that the silver 'dress copies' or B-Stück pieces are postwar fantasy items made by Klein produced for supply to dealers intending to defraud collectors and this is fiercely debated in some circles. By the 1960s, because of the space race, the value of platinum had risen exponentially, making the production and promotion of silver copies of the ELSuB an option worth considering from the viewpoint of any small group of top dealers plotting a scam along the lines of, say, the infamous "Rounder Knight's Cross" conspiracy. So perhaps the silver Type 2 ELSuB described as B-Stück sets for everyday wear and identical to the platinum award pieces in all respects bar the silver hallmark and the quality of the stones are indeed postwar fantasy pieces, legitimised by reference books, bent dealers and by Brillantenträger who bought them as replacements in the 1950s and 1960s. However, the mists of time have a habit of obscuring the facts.

If Klein were involved in supplying identical copies to order, it is not inconceivable that they might have made copies in platinum as well, rather as the reconstituted firm of Godet under Dr Klietmann's 'guidance' produced perfect reproductions in the 1960s and 1970s of their Oakleaves and Oakleaves & Swords using wartime tooling in the hands of craftsmen who had worked for the original firm before and during the war. And then there are the outright fakes, some good, some bad, produced in Britain in the 1960s and 1970s by some-of-us-know-who as well as the copies made in the United States, particularly in California. So it is quite a minefield, especially with authors of reference books including pictures of such fakes either out of ignorance of the subject or for nefarious reasons. Some have even suggested that the platinum Klein pieces are the postwar fantasy items but this indicates an ignorance of jewellery of the period; platinum was not worth much more than silver and was preferred by jewellers setting stones for its comparative robustness and its resistance to tarnishing. Platinum would have been the natural choice for this award for these reasons. And platinum set with inferior stones or even spinels rather than silver would have a logical choice for the so-called B-Stück pieces.

Were I in the market for a set of Brillanten, I would be very, very careful in making my choice. I might even opt for a Type 1 set by Godet, given the unfortunate fact that the Type 2 Klein award is as unsafe as, say, a Klein & Quenzer Knight's Cross or a flawed-rim Knight's Cross by Steinhauer & Lück or, for that matter, the S&L KCs bearing mid-1944-on PKA codes and 935 hallmarks. Even then, the set said to have belonged to Adolf Galland bears the firm's LDO code, which is a tad worrying for reasons any serious student of the topic can appreciate and might explain why it remains unsold. Given that only three Brillantenträger received the Type 1 ELSuB, Dr Klietmann and the dealers who fronted his products would have been hard-pressed to explain more than a handful of Godet ELSuB, even in pre-Internet times. So stamping the firm's LDO code into any examples they might have made would be logical, as it could also allow them to explain the inferior quality of the stones they would have used. Not that the quality of the stones inlaid in the award pieces seems to have been impressive to begin with, as the famous anecdote Galland recounted in his memoirs of Göring's reaction to his Diamonds reminds us.

Anyway, I am not about to sell a couple of Vincents or a painting anytime soon to buy something whose originality would always be open to question. It was OK when prices were still reasonable but now that they are insane, thanks in large part to collectors from relatively new markets like China and the former USSR who are prepared to pay six and seven figure sums for Nazi VIP relics, it's just not worth the trouble. I did buy a set of Swords a while back, made by Meybauer. Sure, it's a retail copy by an unauthorised maker but it is a period copy predating May 1945 and I prefer it to a set of Godet Swords that could date from 1943 or 1973.

PK

Edited January 18, 2012 by PKeating

[hagahr]

thanks PKeeting fore the lay out off the situation at the moment ..

it helps to understand the general situation ?,,, a bit ? ....or not ?

the odd question about the Schriftzeichen off the firm WA Keune & co remains intriguing .

coincidence ? a mistake ? ,,,or maybe a link between the two ?,,,,,

I am looking fore original reference ( official documents ) to the Otto Klein marking ,,,,that is fore sure .

lets see from there

regards kay

Edited January 18, 2012 by hagahr

[Chris Boonzaier]

thanks PKeeting fore the lay out off the situation at the moment ..

it helps to understand the general situation ?,,, a bit ? ....or not ?

regards kay

Hi,

Prosper has a lot of issues listed there, some maybe a bit contentious.

The Flawed Die S+L crosses is a science in iteself and as we know cannot simply be dismissed out of hand. I used to be a big believer that the flawed ones were all postwar, but that argument has long been pounded into the ground. Some of us (me included) still dislike them, but mostly out of habit, kind of like, still disliking spinach after your mother proves it does not really taste that bad.

As for the diamonds. Most modern references confirm that recipients attest to getting A and B pieces, and that there are differences in these. Rommels are displayed at Stuttgart. Museum well worth visiting.

Many references state the PKZ numbers were from 1944, but I have had a totally unscrewed with DKiG group where the guy got it earlier, and it has the number. I think the DK is the stone in the shoe to the accepted 1944 date.

Anyone with the dosh to buy KCs and/or diamonds needs to hit the books, deciding what is wrong and right, and deciding if he wants to avoid pieces about which there may be contention.

The whole KC thing has maybe become LESS of a minefield over the years, we have left the "it is great quality, so must be original" behind many years ago, the "rounder" (IMHO less of a conspiricy, but simply a fake that was "there" for a time) has bitten the dust... a row of authors have dealt with the subject, building upon each other as they go.

I am keen to get Geisslers new book, which seems to be 3 times as thick as his old one... for me a symbol as to how the research progresses.

Andy Hopkins once said something that struck home... he said, Nowdays he fells securer buying a KC than an Infantry assault badge, the KC is now so well documented, there is little margin for argument or error. A simple Infantry assault... there is huge potential for fakes as the subject is too broad to research in detail.

Anyway, I cannot afford any of the stuff above, about a decade ago I calculated how many Imperial docs I could afford if I flogged my 2 KCs, and sold em, .... and never regretted it. Too much money for one piece... even if you get one in a group, and there is a residual doubt that it was really that persons, it is just (IMHO) a bit of expensive metal.

Best

Chris

[Robin Lumsden]

Just to show that there can be anomalies with maker marks.

Here is a DK I have.

It's a Deschler to all intents and purposes .................... but has a Zimmermann stamp.

The only reasonable explanation I have ever had for this is that the pin could be a period replacement ............... but it looks original to the DK as far as I can see. No signs of reattachment.

[PKeating]

Hi,

Prosper has a lot of issues listed there, some maybe a bit contentious.

True.

Like you, I got out of the Third Reich field but not so much because of the cost of the stuff. I had one of the two largest collections of SS-Fallschirmjäger material in the world, as well as other exotica, if you recall. It was more out of an increasing belief that the majority of people involved in it were objectionable as well as terminally and willfully ignorant. In the old days, one could avoid these knuckledraggers when one saw them lurching along at shows but the Internet has given them all a voice and the means to impose themselves on serious collectors and students, ruining discussions right, left and centre. This is much less common in Imperial German circles and, of course, forums addressing the militaria of other nations. Third Reich collecting attracts a huge number of morons and I just got bored, like a growing number of other fairly serious collectors.

But I will still attempt to engage in interesting discussions amongst serious people, this thread being a good example.

The Flawed Die S+L crosses is a science in iteself and as we know cannot simply be dismissed out of hand. I used to be a big believer that the flawed ones were all postwar, but that argument has long been pounded into the ground. Some of us (me included) still dislike them, but mostly out of habit, kind of like, still disliking spinach after your mother proves it does not really taste that bad.

I would not say that the argument has been pounded into the ground. It is more of a case of anyone challenging the latest guru's voodoo incantations being thrown off forums where they are protected for one reason or another. But I'm not going to get into an S&L debate here. People see what they want to see. I see what I see: 1957 pattern cores contained in flawless rims struck on exactly the same dies as flawless rims containing 1939 pattern cores, followed by cracked rims struck on the same dies comtaining 1957 and 1939 pattern cores. No amount of "Timeline Theory" is going to persuade me to buy such a cross.

As for the diamonds. Most modern references confirm that recipients attest to getting A and B pieces, and that there are differences in these. Rommels are displayed at Stuttgart. Museum well worth visiting.

I know that some recipients stated that they received A and B-Stück ELSuB but then, how many RKT do we know of who sold their medals several times over after the war? It may well be the case that recipients were supposed to receive dress copies with inferior stones but the stones encountered in the Type 1 awards by Godet were not of the highest quality to begin with. Remember that the certificate was the award and the insignia merely represented the certificate. Had the government wished to give recipients high-value ELSuB, they would probably have commissioned the insignia in white gold with the best quality rose-cut stones. As for differences between platinum and silver ELSuB by Klein, the only differences - leaving aside the collector market copies that were very different to the wartime design - involve the quality of the stones and the hallmarks. Platinum and silver versions were cast in the same moulds and assembled and finished in the same way. My problem is rooted in logic: platinum was a semi-precious metal in those days, like silver, and was used in this case and in the case of the eagles on Göring's PO Badges with diamonds for the reasons I have already stated, reasons any jeweller can explain.

Many references state the PKZ numbers were from 1944, but I have had a totally unscrewed with DKiG group where the guy got it earlier, and it has the number. I think the DK is the stone in the shoe to the accepted 1944 date.

Perhaps. But again, one cannot simply accept the word of elderly veterans. I have sat with German veterans in the 1980s, before they were even considered 'elderly' by today's standards, and looked at their awards, which often included copies of the kind made by, for example, Sean Barry-Weske in the late 1970s and early 1980s and sold as copies all over the world, while the veterans recalled that these were the very badges they wore during the war. Did your man really get the PKA-numbered DK before 1944 or is it an example added at some point later on? It is not that they are lying. For them, it is the medal they got during the war. They didn't care who made it or when. And in German military tradition, it is the award document that counts, not the badge.

Anyone with the dosh to buy KCs and/or diamonds needs to hit the books, deciding what is wrong and right, and deciding if he wants to avoid pieces about which there may be contention.

Precisely. That is what I was saying. I don't mind if people want to add flawed S&L KCs or mint K&Q KCs to their collections. I don't mind if they buy Army Balloon Badges or numbered LW Ground and Panzer Assault Badges. But I do mind when people try to browbeat others into agreeing that their treasures are genuine and beyond question. People have been thrown off forums for disagreeing with dealers, reference book authors and other often self-appointed gurus. The thing is, truth needs no defence. If someone really believes an item is unquestionably authentic, then why do they react so violently to a differing opinion?

The whole KC thing has maybe become LESS of a minefield over the years, we have left the "it is great quality, so must be original" behind many years ago, the "rounder" (IMHO less of a conspiricy, but simply a fake that was "there" for a time) has bitten the dust... a row of authors have dealt with the subject, building upon each other as they go.

It is less of a minefield than it was because the Internet has enabled honest collectors to compare notes, as it were. The Rounder scam was just one of many attempts to pass fakes off as genuine and came apart at the seams after one of the key people involved in promoting it as a genuine variant had some sort of emotional breakdown and confessed to fabricating the story that constituted a cornerstone of the argument in favour of the Rounder. Moreover, one of the authors in question advanced the theory that these crosses had been produced by Paul Meybauer and even showed an example bearing the firm's PKA number. However, when asked to produce documentary evidence that this firm was an approved supplier of the KC to the government, he did not produce it.

Regards,

PK

Edited January 19, 2012 by PKeating

[hagahr]

well ,,PK .

its an interesting thread indeed .

but what about the official Orden regulations 1941 ?

Holland verzamelt.nl - 1905 to1941 laws & regulations

they are a proof,,,,, and a licence to make Orden copy's fore what ever jeweller had the skills fore,,,

WY is that being ignored ?

Don''t you think we underestimate the period theatre and film Market,,,,,,,,, fore Orden copy's at the time between 1939 /1945 ?

Is there a possibility that the market contains the highest Orden equal to the Original ? ( as they had to be by law )

and just took a high flight,,,,, as the post war era had a need fore memorabilia off such kind ?

just asking an opinion ?

Edited January 19, 2012 by hagahr

[hagahr]

ohh and PS,,,,lets put the disappointment in the present collector ( and Goeroe) knowledge,,,, off all kind behind us ,,,

these unknowns and enigma's are also fun to discuss .

lets not spoil our fun by bad experiences in the past ...

this hobby suppose to be fun,,

[Chris Boonzaier]

"The Rounder scam was just one of many attempts to pass fakes off as genuine and came apart at the seams after one of the key people involved in promoting it as a genuine variant had some sort of emotional breakdown and confessed to fabricating the story that constituted a cornerstone of the argument in favour of the Rounder. Moreover, one of the authors in question advanced the theory that these crosses had been produced by Paul Meybauer and even showed an example bearing the firm's PKA number. However, when asked to produce documentary evidence that this firm was an approved supplier of the KC to the government, he did not produce it."

Hi,

I really dont believe in any Bourne Ultimatum sized conspiracy.

I have no idea if Meybauer made RKs, but by coincidence, see the post above, an ad of theirs saying they make ALL current medals...

I think the Rounder thing was too long and drawn out to go back through old threads trying to recreate what happened, but seem to remember the "Key Person" involved was simply pretending a cross he had belonged to a relative, trying to polish his families military street cred, it then got sucked into the Rounder debate and he was stuck with his embelishment and had to ride the train till the end of the ride.

I am a bit in the dark for large parts of the argument, but is the "Meybauer" the one in Gordons book? I think the fact that it made it in there just goes to show how widespread the acceptance of these was, less of a conspiracy and simply lots of people who thought they were good....

Best

Chris

[Chris Boonzaier]

Hi

a thought...

I think the problem may be that we "ex 3rd Reich collectors" are stuck in a bit of a time warp.

Having tossed all that stuff ages ago i have until very, very recently not spared a glance in that direction for quite a few years.

my last WW2 book was Gordons Iron Cross one, and that was 10 years ago!!!! (No wonder a rounder was in there, they were still considered Kosher back then). Since then I have bought the odd WW1 book, and totally lost track as to what has appeared on the 3rrd Reich market.

THEN... about a week ago i saw that Geissler had brought out a new EK book, his 1995 250 page book is now a 2011 650 page work... and I thought..."WOW, I am really out of touch with whats going on in the book world..."

I have seen that there are new books, but not taken note of what the guys have been doing...

A couple of days ago I was visiting a "new" collector, a year in the hobby, and more books than items... but what books they are!!!!

Sascha webers 500 pages on the Infantry assault! Marc Garlasco's Flak book (knew of it but had never seen it), Gordon's Torpedo Los!... these kinds of work move the hobby literature into a new dimension.

Another work was Dietrich März RK book. Now, I myself have had more than the odd moment when DM has almost driven me to smashing my keyboard, I cannot say we would be the best pair to be stranded in a hut together... but credit where credit is due.... it is a magnum opus, it is THE work on the subject.

I wont be buying it because once again it is nowhere near my collecting field, but I think, flipping through it, that he has covered all bases, and very convincingly.

I hope to get the Geissler book next week (hoping for a large Imperial section)... and hope it is just as good.

These guys have really moved a bar a few nothces higher... I dabbled in Infantry assault badges for about 12 years... but a total newbie with Sascha Webers book has more knowledge at his fingertips than i had at mine back then.

Best

Chris

[hagahr]

and I pass on this point,,, back to my hobby ,,,imperial .

I leave you WW2 guy's to your ehhh,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,????????????????????????????????????????????,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, thing .

Edited January 20, 2012 by hagahr