stamp Mn

[MULON]

In these days I was thinking back to this whole discussion .... I just can't convince myself that MN could be Menesa ... that document by Max Muller Nurmberg puts me in crisis. As I said, at today I never seen a canteen that is marked MMN and, believe me, between ebay, collections, shows etc I saw several thousand . I am firmly convinced that Muller Nurmberg is MN, and Menesa ... is just Menesa.

[knoffhoff]

We still don't have 100% proof, but in my opinion a lot more things speak for MN being MENESA than MN being Müller.
Eventually at one point we will find something that gives us 100% certainty.

[MULON]

We still don't have 100% proof, but in my opinion a lot more things speak for MN being MENESA than MN being Müller.
Eventually at one point we will find something that gives us 100% certainty.

I hope it

[Bernhard]

I am following this thread with great interrest.
Very interresting information from the Bundesarchiv.
Great work knoffhoff !!!!

[screensize]

Eventually at one point we will find something that gives us 100% certainty.

oh... searchers for the truth.... I think I have found the proof that MN is .....

is....

is....

[screensize]

MENESA !

How could it be I did not recognise this earlier?
The pictures were posted on another forum about 1 year ago.

It is a post-war canteen by Menesa, probably put together by using left-over wartime parts.







Is this the long lost 100% proof ?

[Bernhard]

For me it is !
Really makes sense.

[knoffhoff]

I own one of those too and posted pictures in this thread earlier. I am convinced that MN is Metallindustrie Neunkirchen (MENESA), like you will see when you read what I wrote about this issue earlier, but others are still not convinced. I think we have 99% proof for it, but the final document saying that MN is MENESA is missing.
Until this is found it seems there are people still not believing in it.
And since I like to backup my theories as strong as possible, I will be out there looking for the final proof.

[MULON]

Until this is found it seems there are people still not believing in it.

Here I'm
I can't convince myself that MN is Menesa.
I still don't understand why the word "menesa" appeared suddenly in only 43 year and not before, when we all know that MN was one of the longest producer and, at last, at all today I never seen before nothing with maker marks MMN - Max Muller Nurmberg.
So, for me, MN is Max Muller Nurmberg, and Menesa is Menesa, two different producer.
BTW these are only theories without 100% prof.

[MULON]

Now the question could be why exist these canteens with double marking?
My answer to this question is that probably Muller Nurmberg ended the raw material, subcontracting work (or part of it) at menesa.

[screensize]

Haha, this will never end

We need to find a document to proove it.

Have a nice weekend,
Chris

[MULON]

Good evening friends
Recall this thread because I find it interesting and important.
I read with great interest what has been written in the other topic by dear friend Bernhard, however I'm still not convinced by what you say and still rest on my beliefs that MN is the producer Max Muller Nurmberg. What I don't understand is why didn't take this theory like good yet there is a clear historical document that demonstrates what Muller produced ..... canteens. Also what can't enter in my head is why only by 1943 MENESA would start to produce items with double marking ... ... This doesn't make any sense, doesn't make any sense. As I wrote above, in my opinion Muller and Menesa have collaborated from 43 onwards, and for this reason is the double marking.

[MULON]

Ciao a tutti
Here I'm again about this MN
One thing you noted me it's that MN have no sense because complete marking Of Max Muller Nurmberg, as period rules says, would be MMN. This thing is not true because there are many other producers who have produced two letters or even one ...
There are two exapmles, ET on mess kit and E on canteen cup:

[knoffhoff]

Let me try to explain it one more time, maybe you understand now.

As we know from other known capital letter codes a acronym is formed by using the first letters of the company name and the first letter of the city the company is located in.

e.g.

HRE = Heinrich Ritter Esslingen
ESB = Eduard Sommerfeld Berlin

Then we have companies like "Eisenwerke Thale", best known as helmet producer, that have the city name already included at the end of the company name.
The name of the company consist of two words. The word "Eisenwerke" , which describes what the company is about, i.e. ironwork. The word "Thale" is the city the company is located in.
In this case, since the city name "Thale" is already there only one other letter, the "E" of "Eisenwerke" is left to form a acronym out of two letters only" ET" .

Exactly the same thing applies for "Metallindustrie Neunkirchen".

We take the "N" of the city name "Neunkirchen" and the "M" of the only word that is left of the company name "Metallindustrie" and voila we get "MN".

To come back to how it looks like in most cases with three letters I will once more try to explain.

The company "Rudolf Fissler" is located in "Idar-Oberstein".
In this case the name of the company is formed out of the first and last name of the owner of the firm "Rudolf" and "Fissler".
To form the acronym the first letter of both words of the company name is used, "R" and "F". Additionaly the first letter of the town the company was located in is added. "I" for "Idar-Oberstein".
Which results in the thre letter code "RFI"

You are talking about the company "Max Müller" that is located in "Nürnberg"
Same rule applies as above. A acronym would be formed out of the first letter of both of the company names words "Max" and "Müller". So you get "M" and "M".
Then the first letter "N" of the cities name "Nürnberg" is added.
And the result is "MMN", a maker mark nobody has ever seen.
And the obvious reason for that is that they never produced canteens.
Nobody has ever had any proof that Max Müller ever produced canteens.
The only proof there is, is that they sold canteens, nothing more.

I don't know what that single letter "E" marking is. Might be a misprinted "HRE" canteen, since the "E" kind of looks alike. It might also be a exception of the rules, which always are to find.
But I can tell you that it is in no way any proof that "Max Müller" was the producer of "MN" canteens.
I respect you as a collector and somebody who is also trying to find out where the things we collect came from.
But with all due to respect, please forget about the "Max Müller" theory unless you can show us somethintg more valid to back it up.

Cheers,
Marco

[regiment739]

Great thread buys and really interesting. I have just bought a Menesa marked canteen. On the bottom of the canteen it has Aluminium pur and menesa with a big 1 under it (I presume that means 1 litre as I have seen a flask with 3/4 on it) The black cup like one shown on here has again aluminium pur and Menesa on the top and the MN 43 by the handle. Great informative thread gents