Questionable PLM

[Tony Colson]

Some time ago I acquired this PLM. Of recent. two very reliable sources, (whom I trust, by the way) have politely and diplomatically told me that it is not an original piece. The piece is real gold; I don't know about the oak leaves, but threy look to be gold. On top of the upper arm is a small added plaque with the letter "J.G. & S."
Would appreciate honest input re.provenance?, authenticity? or other data relevant to this kind of piece. No need to hold back. I'm thick skinned.Thanks,
Tony Colson

[Tony Colson]

Some time ago I acquired this PLM. Of recent. two very reliable sources, (whom I trust, by the way) have politely and diplomatically told me that it is not an original piece. The piece is real gold; I don't know about the oak leaves, but threy look to be gold. On top of the upper arm is a small added plaque with the letter "J.G. & S."
Would appreciate honest input re.provenance?, authenticity? or other data relevant to this kind of piece. No need to hold back. I'm thick skinned.Thanks,
Tony Colson

Reverse

[Biro]

two very reliable sources, (whom I trust, by the way) have politely and diplomatically told me that it is not an original piece.Thanks,
Tony Colson

I fear they might be right Tony, the eagles - specifically the tail feathers (or lack of) - are not in the same league as an original Godet.....but I see some pretty heavyweight activity viewing the thread as we speak, so until such time as they contradict me, I would politely and diplomatically have to say 'not a Godet..'


regards

Marshall

[Biro]

Looks a lot like this Schickle though....which would be very interesting!

Marshall

[Tony Colson]

Some time ago I acquired this PLM. Of recent. two very reliable sources, (whom I trust, by the way) have politely and diplomatically told me that it is not an original piece. The piece is real gold; I don't know about the oak leaves, but threy look to be gold. On top of the upper arm is a small added plaque with the letter "J.G. & S."
Would appreciate honest input re.provenance?, authenticity? or other data relevant to this kind of piece. No need to hold back. I'm thick skinned.Thanks,
Tony Colson

Reverese

[Tony Colson]

close up of PLM maker mark

Reverese

View of the s\P:Ms maker mark.

[Stephen Previtera]

Tony,
My dear Friend. Was this the piece I may have seen in person? I remember a plm at your place but not that is was this particular piece. I could be wrong. I tried to view the maker mark visual but nothing came up on my end. I would love to have another look at that part of the cross and see if I can help out.
Stephen

[Biro]

From the distinctive 'lumps' on the top right eagles chest, to the matching 'thighs' and tail feathers, etc.... I'm convinced this is the same as the piece Gordon Williamson found in a 40's Catalogue from Otto Schickle.

Here is the thread Tony - you may want to check it out for yourself until someone else chimes in.

"Replacement" PLMs

regards

Marshall

[Stephen Previtera]

Marshall,
Dead right! It appears to be a ringer. Tony, I think your mystery has been solved.
Stephen

[Tony Colson]

Reverse

Godet detail

[Stephen Previtera]

Tony,
Thanks for posting the maker mark. Marshall established the period for the cross, and Tony and I were just discussing the Oak Leaves over the phone. Now we should move on to them. I am going to attempt a match with images from my research. Stay-tuned.
SP

[Brian S]

Looks a lot like this Schickle though....which would be very interesting!

Marshall

How did THIS one turn out? Looked like you were spot on saying Shickle.

[Gaffken]

I can't say for sure what Tony ultimately decided on this--maybe other forum members are better in the know--but coincidentally, I was fortunate enough to have dropped by his house around the same time this thread came out (and before I was a member here) to view his magical Imperial vault, and he was kind and generous enough to actually let me handle the PLM above. It was everything he initially said it was--gold, hollow, superb manufacturing...I recall spending quite some time peering at the maker mark plaque pictured above simply due to its quality alone.

Granted, I have nowhere near the expertise he did, but if he hadn't have told me that he was starting to lean towards the belief that it wasn't an awarded piece, based on info that recently came to light--probably in this thread--I never would have suspected it wasn't. This last facet alone leads me to believe that he had, or was, re-assessing it as a wearer's copy as had been brought up in the earlier posts.

Unfortunately, this is the best info I have...

Gaffken

[Brian S]

Thanks for the info Gaffken. The words 'wearers' copy' just makes me shudder...

Interesting though that it has the Schickle look, that's what I was really wondering about. Those tail feathers look to me also like a Schickle, but you don't find another maker mark on a Schickle...