WAR MEDALS OF GERMAN AND AUSTRIAN COMPANIES: Official, period, contemporary, replica or forgery?

[demir]

 

Hi,

I would like to receive your views on:

 

WAR MEDALS OF GERMAN AND AUSTRIAN COMPANIES

German and Austrian officers and soldiers, who had the right to wear the War Medal but were not satisfied with the red-painted look of the Turkish-made War Medals, bought medals from the German or Austrian manufacturers and jewelers.

 

Can we accept these Medals made by foreign manufacturers as original Medals? Can we say that these were replicas, copies, or forgeries because they were not struck by the Ottomans? We can say this for the Medals minted by the official Mint in Istanbul or minted by officially appointed companies but taking into consideration the unique situation of the War Medal, we cannot immediately say that they are replicas, copies, or forgeries.

 

When a medal is awarded a document is normally given to the awardee with it. But when the Armistice took place on 30 October 1918 and the War ended for the Ottoman Empire all the government activities stopped. So for those, especially the Germans, who were either interned or left Turkey and have had the medal certificate but still cannot obtain the Medal, it has been hard to find an authority to claim the Medal, not only in Istanbul also in the allied capitals. When the people awarded could not be able to get their Medals officially, they were forced to apply to medal makers and jewelry stores.

 

So, we can say that apart from the official medals produced by the officially named manufacturers during the war and immediately after, medals made by the foreign medal makers can be considered period medals.

 

In addition, there is a document in the archives showing that a sample picture was sent to the Turkish Embassy in Berlin to be forwarded to a producer in Leipzig. We do not know the outcome of this correspondence. Ottoman Government might have ordered a certain number of medals from this company in Leipzig during the War. If the company was able to produce the Medals, we must consider these also as official Medals.

 

On the other hand, the Medals sold from the end of WWI to 1945, we can accept them as contemporary, but from that date on we consider these as replicas.

 

Regards

Demir

Edited March 16, 2022 by demir

[BlackcowboyBS]

Hi Demir,

very interesting questions and you opend up a mine field for the collectors scene! I guess there will be heavy discussions going on. I will give my thoughts on it tonight, when I do have more time to answer, but I am looking forward to reading the discussion upon this topic. 

[BlackcowboyBS]

Hello Demir, here comes my more detailed answer. We have had this discussion many times in the German forum and never found an agreement. 

My very personal opinion is the following:

1. contemporary award pieces:

Made by the Turkish Mint in Istanbul and officially presented to the decorated persons, but also when foreign manufacturers made this badge of honor on behalf of the Ottoman Empire and it was presented to authorized recipients. Contemporary means for me until the end of the war.

2. contemporary secondary pieces:

Secondary pieces purchased by eligible recipients at their own expense from manufacturers who could produce and sell these pieces before the end of the war, even if they were not listed as official suppliers of the Medal of Honor.

3. post-war award pieces:

From officially designated suppliers who served the need for pieces yet to be awarded or resupply for pieces awarded but not yet issued.

4. second pieces purchased after end of war WW1:

Pieces purchased from manufacturers by authorized persons as second or replacement pieces. Here I would actually draw the line at 1945, though of course this is squishy. How do you want to designate a badge of honor that was made in 1952, for example, but was acquired by a permittee after he lost everything in WWII and now acquires such a piece? Nevertheless, I draw the line at 1945 for these pieces.

5. productions after 1945:

Manufactures of the medals on machines or with tools that were also used for this purpose before 1945. 

6. productions after 1945 on new machines and/or as casting, to fool the collectors. 

 

As originals I would count the decorations of the groups 1 to 3, pieces of the group 4 are collectible for me, however, they should be marked with the note that they are second pieces after the end of the war and still distinguish here whether the manufacturer produced already before 1918 or not. 

Specimens from group 5 and 6 do not count as originals for me anymore, group 6 should be clearly classified as a fake. 

 

 

[lew]

It'd be very strange and wrong to call something that almost all high ranking German/Austrian officers worn back in the days, a replica, copy or forgery.

[speedytop]

Hi,

 

Blackcowboy:

"1. contemporary award pieces:

Made by the Turkish Mint in Istanbul and officially presented to the decorated persons, but also when foreign manufacturers made this badge of honor on behalf of the Ottoman Empire and it was presented to authorized recipients. Contemporary means for me until the end of the war."

 

For me, this clearly includes the enameled medals from B.B.&Co, handed out to several German soldiers, before the end of the war.

 

Lew:

"It'd be very strange and wrong to call something that almost all high ranking German/Austrian officers worn back in the days, a replica, copy or forgery."

 

A copy/replica remains a copy/replica, even if a field marshal wears it. This does not depend on the rank, but primarily on the production after the official award period.

 

Uwe

[lew]

The word Replica and Copy are not appropriate and extremely misleading. Literally a replica and copy mean the exact duplicate of something, it's especially clear and sensitive in the collecting world.

Since all foreign made TWMs are different from Turkish made example in any aspects, i.e. material, design, finish and shape etc., they can't be called replica or copy technically.

Why not just align it with other award categories? it's very common to see jeweler made pieces co-existed with award pieces, like the countless of EK variants and aviation badges that are not officially award pieces. It's also not rare for a German, an Austrian or another foreign maker to produce their own variant of awards of the counterparts, e.g. Austrian made PLMs, German made Bulgarian pilot badges, and many more.

Why not just call them German or Austrian made Variant? or specifically Private Purchase Piece or 2nd Wearers Piece as other awards are called in the same context?   

 

 

Edited March 22, 2022 by lew

[v.Perlet]

Interesting thread,

 

okay here is my point of view for German Imperial awards - maybe starting the other way around.

 

1. A Fake is an award that is made to deceive collectors about being an Original or Reproduction

2. A Replica is a copy of an award but openly described/admitted to as such. usually easy to identify

 

3 An original can/should be divided into 2 subcategories

a. Original I.  produced from 1914-1918 or e.g. a German China Medal 1901-1902

b. Original II. purchased privately/produced from known makers till August 1919

On August 11th 1919 the Weimar Constitution went into effect - as such no more awarding of Imperial medals.

4. Reproduction I. awards produced by known makers with original tools from August 1919 to 1932

5. Reproduction II. awards produced by known makers with original tools from 1932 - 1945

 

E.g. an EK1 produced in 1952 even with original tools from a known maker would be a Fake, or one could further the classifications into a 6. Reproduction III - which to me is of no collecting interest - which does not exclude the possibility of collectors - specializing/interested in such Reproduction III items.

 

In the case of the Ottoman award produced e.g. in Germany by a known maker:

Could only be categorized into being an:

Orininal II.

Reproduction I.

Reproduction II.

 

Since I personally wouldn't know as to differentiate an EK1 (14) from 1920 to one produced in 1940 I do not collect knowingly Reproductions I and II.

 

Independent of the "ruling" classifications, these are my personal criteria for my collection.

 

Regards

Andreas

Edited March 23, 2022 by v.Perlet

[lew]

7 hours ago, v.Perlet said:

On August 11th 1919 the Weimar Constitution went into effect - as such no more awarding of Imperial medals.

4. Reproduction I. awards produced by known makers with original tools from August 1919 to 1932

5. Reproduction II. awards produced by known makers with original tools from 1932 - 1945

 

Logical, except that many post-WWI examples were not made from the original tools, some were made by manufactures which not even produced any TWMs during WWI.

For instance Beco and S&L used new tooling, material and fitting hardware on their TWMs in 30/40s.

 

Again, the widely accepted term in collector community and in textbooks is Private Purchase piece for those were made during WWI and 30/40s period .

 

You can name a particular TWM following:

Origin(country or manufacturer) + Purpose(award piece, Private Purchase, collector/museum copy etc.) + Time frame

(e.g. Austrian made + private purchase TWM + from 40s)

 

This is the way other award categories are using in the same context, e.g. Roth made private purchase PLM from interwar, Meybauer made private purchase pilot badge from WWI, M.Hansen made private purchase EK1...

Edited March 23, 2022 by lew

[v.Perlet]

hello Iew,

 

I have no problem with the existing categorization.

However not everyone is an experienced knowledgeable collector - as such, I will try to stay on the safe side and only collect in regards to German imperial awards, as to what I described to be Original I and Original II, and even that isn't easy, at least for me ?

 

Regards

Andreas

Edited March 23, 2022 by v.Perlet

[BlackcowboyBS]

On 22/03/2022 at 14:57, lew said:

It'd be very strange and wrong to call something that almost all high ranking German/Austrian officers worn back in the days, a replica, copy or forgery.

Finally we got a bit of a discussion here! I like that. @lewTo be honest, I have thought on that for a long time and asked my self the following question. If I ever would have met Ernst Jünger and seeing him wearing his PlM, while starring at it, I would realize that this can't be the one he was handed over in 1918, but must be one made in 1936 and privatly purchased by him. Would I dare to call it not an original while confronting him? Maybe not. What would I have done, meeting him in 1975 and seeing him with a privatly purchased one after WW2, because he might have lost the one from 1936? What would it felt for him, would he called it not an original PlM? Note: These dates written here by me are all fiction, just a mind game, to find the right way of naming such pieces. 

 

On 22/03/2022 at 16:29, speedytop said:

Hi,

 

Blackcowboy:

"1. contemporary award pieces:

Made by the Turkish Mint in Istanbul and officially presented to the decorated persons, but also when foreign manufacturers made this badge of honor on behalf of the Ottoman Empire and it was presented to authorized recipients. Contemporary means for me until the end of the war."

 

For me, this clearly includes the enameled medals from B.B.&Co, handed out to several German soldiers, before the end of the war.

 

Lew:

"It'd be very strange and wrong to call something that almost all high ranking German/Austrian officers worn back in the days, a replica, copy or forgery."

 

A copy/replica remains a copy/replica, even if a field marshal wears it. This does not depend on the rank, but primarily on the production after the official award period.

 

Uwe

 

@speedytopHi Uwe  may be duplicate could be the right word, in German we have the word: Zweitstück, but I can't find a better translation than duplicate or like Lew stated privatley purchased 2nd piece? So it might be a PP2P classification?

Edited March 24, 2022 by BlackcowboyBS

[speedytop]

Hi Blackcowboy,

 

when a decoration is not an original, then it largely doesn't matter to me what it is called.

 

It remains for me, as an old collector, the basic distinction between original, copy and fake/forgery.

 

What was not officially made in the award period is either a fake, made to deceive the buyer, or it is a copy, distinguishable from the original, and that in very different qualitiy by different makers. And it is for me not important, for whom it was made.
And I don't care whether the copy is called a reproduction, replica, replacement, duplicate, jeweler's copy, post-war copy or anything else.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

 

Uwe

 

[lew]

17 hours ago, Simius Rex said:

For english-speaking collectors, the terminology used is extremely important.  Classifying something as a copy or a replica is the kiss of death.  To us, it is the same thing as saying "fake."

Completely agree.

 

17 hours ago, Simius Rex said:

Unfortunately, you guys are trying to apply the terminology we use for awards like the Iron Cross.  There exists good research and good information about the manufacturing of the Iron Cross so we can use terms like award piece, wearer's copy, Zweitstück, Spangestück, private-purchase piece, etc. etc. etc.   That is not the case with the Gallipoli Star... especially the early ones.

We're not discussing about identification of maker or production period of any particular TWM here, but rather on a very high level how TWMs from different time period should be called knowing that they're not Turkish made award pieces.

 

 

Very straightforward. We all know the foreigners were indeed awarded for TWMs and majority(if not all) of them were not handed out Turkish made stars, they had to Privately Purchase their own star that was produced and sold by local maker, during and after the war.

I haven't seen any proof so far but anyhow if any foreign made TWMs were ordered and handed out by the Turkish or foreign governments, then they should be considered official award TWMs. 

Edited March 25, 2022 by lew

[speedytop]

Hi Simius Rex:

 

"Classifying something as a copy or a replica is the kiss of death. To us, it is the same thing as saying "fake.""

 

And that is in my opinion complete nonsense. Please have a look in all English dictionaries, and one finds the same distinction there as in the German language:
Fake, produced to be offered as an original in order to deceive.
Copy, produced with identifiable differences from the originals in order to serve as a replacement.

 

The incorrect use of the word "copy" of some collectors does not change the real meaning.

 

 

Hi lew,

 

"... if any foreign made TWMs were ordered and handed out by the Turkish and foreign governments, they should be considered official award TWMs."

 

That is also my opinion, see my earlier comment: "For me, this clearly includes the enameled medals from B.B.&Co, handed out to several German soldiers, before the end of the war."

 

This is the original set für a very high decorated Prussian General (PlM mit Eichenlaub, Schwarzer Adlerorden, Verdienstorden der Preußischen Krone mit Schwertern, and many other highest decorations):

 

 

Uwe

Edited March 27, 2022 by speedytop

[lew]

On 25/03/2022 at 13:56, speedytop said:

That is also my opinion, see my earlier comment: "For me, this clearly includes the enameled medals from B.B.&Co, handed out to several German soldiers, before the end of the war."

 

This is the original set für a very high decorated Prussian General (PlM mit Eichenlaub, Schwarzer Adlerorden, Verdienstorden der Preußischen Krone mit Schwertern, and many other highest cecorations):

 

 

Yes BB&Co produced TWMs before the end of war.

IMO the red envelopes(both the squary and trapezoidal version) were issued for the Turkish made stars.

[speedytop]

I am very sure that this General der Infanterie received his TWM in this envelope. In the complete stock there are exclusively only the awards given to him, nothing has been added to it, neither then nor now.

 

Uwe

Edited March 26, 2022 by speedytop

[JasonA]

Demir - Why don’t you just refer to the German & Austrian versions as period upgrades?  That’s what they are and there’s no mention of copies or replicas in that description which would be a misnomer, I think.

 

J-

[Marcon1]

Hiya,

 

Is a official medal (order, decoration) not that what is given by the issuing country or organization.

Those that are made by others are what is called Tailor's Copies (not made by real tailors ?).

Therefor any made un-official are at best Tailor's Copies or replicas.

As to the German & Austrian versions, where these made with official permission by the Turkish Government or not ??

If not, than they should qualify as Tailor's Copies.

 

Marcon1.

[demir]

Hello gentlemen,

Thanks for your contribution.   (Sorry for the red capital letters. I just wanted to show my answers)

 

 

Lew:   "Since all foreign made TWMs are different from Turkish made example in any aspects, i.e. material, design, finish and shape etc., they can't be called replica or copy technically."  

 

I AGREE, TOUGHRAS AND PSEUDONYMS ON THE FOREIGN-MADE MEDALS WERE NOT WRITTEN AND STRUCK IN PROPERLY BECAUSE OF THE DIFFICULTY IN UNDERSTANDING THE CALLIGRAPHİC LETTERS OF THE TOUGHRA. SO NORMALLY THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN CALLED SOMETHING ELSE.  BUT BECAUSE OF THE SPECIAL SITUATION OF THE WAR MEDAL, WE PREFER TO TRY TO NAME THEM SOMETHING ELSE.

 

"... if any foreign made TWMs were ordered and handed out by the Turkish and foreign governments, they should be considered official award TWMs."

 

I AGREE, BUT THERE IS A BIG “IF”

 

 

"Origin(country or manufacturer) + Purpose(award piece, Private Purchase, collector/museum copy etc.) + Time frame

(e.g. Austrian made + private purchase TWM + from 40s)"

 

1.      OFFICIAL

2.      1915 – 1945: CONTEMPORARY MEDALS MADE BY GERMAN AND AUSTRIANS

3.      FROM 1945: REPLICA, COPY, REPRODUCTION, OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO NAME

 

 

 

BlackcowboyBS    " 1. contemporary award pieces: 2. contemporary secondary pieces: 3 post-war award pieces: 4. second pieces purchased after end of war WW1: 5. productions after 1945: . 6. productions after 1945 on new machines and/or as casting, to fool the collectors. "

 

I THINK MY ANSWER TO LEW COVERS THEM.

MACHINES OLD OR NEW DO NOT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE FOR ME, SINCE THEY ARE UNOFFICIAL CONTEMPORARY MEDALS MADE BY GERMANS AND AUSTRIANS.

ALSO, HOW CAN WE KNOW IF THE MACHINE IS NEW OR NOT, OR THE OWNER OF THE MEDAL HAD BEEN AWARDED OR HAD THE AWARD CERTIFICATE.

 

 

v.Perlet       "In the case of the Ottoman award produced e.g. in Germany by a known maker:

Could only be categorized into being an:

Orininal II.

Reproduction I.

Reproduction II."

 

MY ANSWER TO LEW

 

 

 

 

 

speedytop    

 

"... if any foreign made TWMs were ordered and handed out by the Turkish and foreign governments, they should be considered official award TWMs."

 

Lew: That is also my opinion, see my earlier comment: "For me, this clearly includes the enameled medals from B.B.&Co, handed out to several German soldiers, before the end of the war."

 

AS FAR AS I KNOW, BB&CO. WAS NOT COMMISSIONED BY ANY GOVERNMENT. SO THAT COMPANY ALSO FALLS UNDER THE CATEGORY CONTEMPORARY.

 

 "When a decoration is not an original, then it largely doesn't matter to me what it is called. 

It remains for me, as an old collector, the basic distinction between original, copy and fake/forgery.

"What was not officially made in the award period is either a fake, made to deceive the buyer, or it is a copy, distinguishable from the original, and that is very different quality by different makers. And it is for me not important, for whom it was made.

 And I don't care whether the copy is called a reproduction, replica, replacement, duplicate, jeweler's copy, post-war copy or anything else."

 

I AM TOTALLY IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU, BUT YOU SAID IT, NOT ME 

 

To summarize my humble opinion on this subject;

taking into consideration of the special delivery conditions of the War Medal, I already had softened my many years' early opinion some time ago and had come to a new conclusion and wrote you this initial thread. Receiving your views on the subject I refined my categorization as shown below, and I will use this in my new book “THE TURKISH WAR MEDALS” (Medals of 22 wars, their specifications, history, and many pictures and photos)

 

1.OFFICIAL (Medals of the Imperial Mint in Istanbul or other domestic and/or foreign commissioned manufacturers or jewelers if there were any, and if there were, whether they were able to produce any)

2.1915 – 1945: CONTEMPORARY MEDALS MADE BY GERMAN AND AUSTRIANS

3.FROM 1945: REPLICA, COPY, REPRODUCTION. OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO NAME

 

Best wishes

Demir

 

[lew]

14 hours ago, speedytop said:

I am very sure that this General der Infanterie received his TWM in this envelope. In the complete stock there are exclusively only the awards given to him, nothing has been added to it, neither then nor now.

 

I understand what you said but we need more and solid prove to conclude BB&Co product is an official award by Ottoman government, this is a big deal. By solid prove I meant some sort of purchase order designated to this company or some government record stating that.

Concerning the set from the Prussian general unfortunately we don't know what was in the red envelope when he received it 100 years ago. There're several possibilities including that he might have received a Turkish made star together with this envelope and later purchased the BB&Co... many have done the same I believe especially the foreign ones stationed in Turkey who should have received onsite the official award in red envelope.

Edited March 27, 2022 by lew

[speedytop]

lew,

this General der Infanterie had other Turkish decorations: Order of Osmania 1. class and the Imtiyaz medals in gold and silver with swords in the original case.

Once more, in my opinion and as I can see, there was nothing changed or added later.

Believe it or leave it.

 

Demir,

It is my firm conviction, that the B.B.&Co made TWM must be assigned to the first category (1. Official).

 

Uwe

 

[demir]

Gentlemen,

 

1.

These are fake copies of Turkish and Spanish UN Korea Medals and we call them fakes.

Edited March 29, 2022 by demir

[demir]

2.

 

These are B.B.&Co and Turkish made TWMs.

The last two are B.B.&Cos and others Turkish made.

Please compare the Toughras and pseudonyms.

Also compare B.B.&Cos with each other

Edited March 29, 2022 by demir

[demir]

3.

Gentlemen,

In my initial thread, I explained the special conditions of the TWM and accepted some period items unofficial but period or contemporary medals. Also, I explained why people who deserved the medals bought these.

 

Normally, if one receives an original medal in its envelope or box and loses the medal applies to the military office to receive a new official one. If one cannot get a new one from the military office, one goes to a shop and buys a replica and puts it in the original box.

 

Even though the fact is like this, we generally accept the special situation of the TWM and identify German and Austrian made medals as contemporary but, we cannot accept them and B.B&Cos as official medals.

 

Still, I am open to any discussion based on facts.

With my best wishes

Demir

[BlackcowboyBS]

Hello Demir,

this is a definition which can't be wrong, because if the osmanic government who awarded people just bought these medals from the turkish mint in Istanbul and no other supplier, then only these medals are oficially awarded pieces from the osmanic state. So if you want to drew the line here, there is nothing wrong with it from a technical aspect. 

You may have the consequences that some of the contemporary medals made by other manufacteurers do look better than the offically awarded ones. But I prefer to broden the term original, as stated in my first answer to your question:

• official awarded medal
• contemporary secondary piece or private purchased contemporary duplicate ... etc.

I would do so, because I feel that there are more shades of grey than just pure black and white. If a medal is not an original, then how should you call it besides non original? 

[demir]

BlackcowboyBS

I agree with you. We are saying the same thing. 

 

My "contemporary medals" definition comprises your "contemporary secondary piece or private purchased contemporary duplicate etc" already.

Best wishes

Demir