Blue MAX ??????
I just found this one on a German dealer site. Since everybody seems quite excited about this topic, I like to post it here for some feedback. 
It is marked "925"
It is marked "925"
-
-
Appears to be a Godet type piece, but without the chased letters and marked "925", indicating post-1918 manufacture. This goes back to a point I have made earlier on this forum, that Godet almost certainly continued to manufacture these after 1918. The piece pictured in David Edkins' book "The Prussian Pour le Merite" as an "eagle variation" by an unknown maker, is marked only "Silber." Likewise, I saw one a coupe of years ago with chased lettering exactly like the wartime pieces, and it also bore only the mark "Silber."
Despite a widespread belief on this forum that no manufacturer would have bothered to make pieces after 1918 because the demand was too small, there are examples out there that appear to be post-1918 pieces by the official makers. In other words, they have the die characteristics of originals by Wagner or Godet, but are marked "800", "925" or "Silber". The fact that there were a few hundred recipients still living makes it entirely plausible that these major manufacturers, who already had the dies on hand, would have made some copies for sale and kept them in stock. Private purchase examples are not a myth. They are real.
Tim"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the War Room!" - President Merkin Muffley -
...on the other hand...
...they may not be worth 12,500 Euros.... But that's for the buyer to decide.
Tim"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the War Room!" - President Merkin MuffleyComment
-
...more information
Tim, "938", please.
In my opinion it is one of the few after 1918, but before 1945 pieces. I don't believe the demand after 1918 was high, but yet pieces were offered. A sales list like the one from Otto Schickle does proof, on the other hand, that not many, or maybe just a few original manufacturers made them after 1918.Last edited by medalnet; 05-26-2005, 12:52 PM.Comment
-
Andreas..Originally posted by medalnet
I would be interested in knowing which 'version' of the Godet PLM was offered by Godet themselves in this 1930's Catalogue.
Perhaps you have it?
regards
MarshallComment
-
Marshall,
sorry, I don't, but a detailed scan of their catalogue would help, to compare and identify.Comment
-
I'm working on it.....
MarshallComment
-
Of course we can all agree that Godet manufactured the PLM post-1918. That is without question as I have two specific examples illustrated in the book that are post-war silver content marked.
SPComment
-
Great. This should help everybody to understand, that the tools for those pieces were still the exact same!Originally posted by Stephen PreviteraComment
-
some of the lawyers are nodding yes, but jury hasn't decided that yet
Andreas, Maybe...maybe not. Over the past couple of weeks, there has been a discussion of the Jacobs PLM and it's similarity/dissimilarity to the classic Godet PLM made during WWI. Sone Forum member has said that in his opionion that the piece was a "Godet." The eagles are the same, while the rest of the badge is not. In the past few days, Tony Colson posted his "J.G.u.S." marked PLM that looks identical to the Shickel catalogue PLM of 1940. The eagles on the Jacobs PLM, Tony Colson's PLM (do we call it a Schickel, or a "Godet" based on the eagles, and not the badge characteristics?), and the Schickel 1940 catalogue are, depending on what you look at (the eagles?) either a Godet, or if you look at the rest of the badge (the wide centers, different lettering styles, etc) very different from the classic "Godet."Originally posted by medalnet
Schickle appears to have offered a PLM for sale, although whether the firm actually made the same PLM is unknown. So far, there is no solid information on who actually made Tony Colson's PLM, the "1940 Schickel", and Jacobs PLM. Are all of these "Godet" PLMs based on the type of eagles, and without considering what the rest of the badge(s) look like? If they are Godets, then this implies that Godet had at least two styles of dies if he had anything at all to do with the Schickel type PLM. Let's say, there's somethings we're guessing at, and that we really don't know some things for certain.
On a side note, I've been making enquiries among some of the aviation scholars on the where-abouts of Theo Osterkamps papers, and where they might be. The papers might provide information on who actually made the 50 year medal given to Jacobs. More on this if/when I hear something positive.
LesComment
-
Dear Les,
I strongly believe that those days same principles applied then in today's world. The demand drove the offering of those Court Jewlers. I am very sure the tooling remained the same, yet was maybe reworked. The cost for those things were as astronomical those days as today. We know for fact, that toolings were only replaced if broken. Parts of toolings (like reverse of service medals) were used with different averse stamps hence differnet portraits of kings etc.
YEs, the Schickle piece looks a little bit different, but I am sure, even though I don't have the evidence, it is made with the same tooling or was refurbished.
Andreas
"medalnet"Comment
-
[QUOTE=medalnet]Dear Les,
I strongly believe that those days same principles applied then in today's world. The demand drove the offering of those Court Jewlers. I am very sure the tooling remained the same, yet was maybe reworked. The cost for those things were as astronomical those days as today. We know for fact, that toolings were only replaced if broken. Parts of toolings (like reverse of service medals) were used with different averse stamps hence differnet portraits of kings etc.
YEs, the Schickle piece looks a little bit different, but I am sure, even though I don't have the evidence, it is made with the same tooling or was refurbished.
Andreas
"medalnet"[/QUOTE]
Andreas, "demand" in the world of commerce is something that advertisers know how to create. If people weren't convinced through advertising and other signs of wealth or prestige, there would be little need for new models of automobiles every year, changing fashions in clothes and so on. Court jewelers and other jewelry makers are in business to make money, and if they can create a "need" for something to sell, they will. Do women -really- need a large and expensive engagement ring with a massive diamond on it? Not really, but tell them otherwise and see what happens. Every few years, the setting style changes, cut and size of the ring seems to get fancier, etc. In some areas of fashion, one type of style simply doesn't last long, or get you very far.
We know that PLMs changed over the years from 1740-1918/plus (?). The earliest ones had the writing painted on. Was there a -need- for a new style with letters that were in metal instead of painted? Whatever the answer, it doesn't matter, because there was a change, arguably related to jewelers needing to show off what they could do, and sell a new "gimmick." It's the world of business, and making money, as you might say, not only now, but then.
Jewelers might decide to change dies and styles if/when a die wears out or breaks, but they might also want to market a new type. Willy's decree that PLMs should be made in silver gilt resulted in multi-piece medals struck in several pieces and then soldered together, to a new type that was solid, and struck similar to a coin. That Andreas requires new dies that can be set up so that the blank can be struck from both sides at one time. Usually this is done by one die moving upwards, while the other is moving down. This requires a specific type of press, that is different from the single direction hammer blow that can be used for pieces that are struck seperately and then joined. The physics are different, and if both sides are not struck at the same time, the depth of the strike will be result in one side being much "deeper" than the other. Ok..enough of that basic "coinage" information.
It's an easy thing to suggest that dies can be reworked..very easy to say. However, it's a bit like asking a contractor to remodel your house, and have him tear out the old foundation and basement walls, gut all the walls on the first floor, and leave the second floor alone, and put a new roof on and then put new stuff in where the old stuff was removed. The contractor will do it if you're bound and determined to have all that done, but he'll suggest that it's far easier and simpler to simply tear down the house and build a new one. That's almost the case with trying to rework the Godet dies to make them into the type that can be used to make the Schickle or Jacob's type PLM.
Try a simple experiment. If you remember the images of the Godet/Jacobs PLM that Marshall posted for me, print them out and then cut one out and overlay one over the other and hold them against a bright light. You'll see that although both images are almost the same size, that too many things don't overlap. The spacing and sizes of the letters don't match, there are differences in font styles, and other details. Now, imagine the Godet image is a die that you want to rework to look like the Jacobs/Schickel image. Where metal is overlapping, you have to chisel it away so the images will "mesh." Where there isn't any metal, it has to be added...by welding if the dies are steel, or annealed if bronze. That's easier said than done, and getting a clean weld line is not easily done if it can be at all. Excess weld will result in it showing up in the struck blanks also. Then there's the problem of altering the shape of the cross by removing the frame/edges of the cross with the narrow center, and changing the positioning of the arms so the center can be made larger. As I said, much easier to say than it is to do, and far cheaper and easier to make an entirely new die.
Todays costs for doing almost anything are linked directly to labor costs if you have a skilled craftsman make something for you. Labor unions and work related benefits (health insurance, paid vacations, retirement plans) have all jacked up the costs of modern craftsmanship far past what it was like during the Imperial era. A worker today makes enough money to buy a loaf of bread in minutes or less. A century ago, the same worker worked far longer hours, and much harder to buy the same loaf.
Another difference between now and then is the guild/apprentice system. In a jewelery shop, an apprentice would be expected to do many basic tasks and do much of the preparation work for the master's hand. The master jeweler(s) don't have to set up the basic shape of the die, the apprentice can be taught to do some of this as part of his training. He's got to learn to make dies sometime or other if he's going to ever become a master himself, nicht war? A great deal of the basic setup work, creating the rough outlines, etc, can be done with a nominal amount of skill. The actual engraving of fine details requires more ability, and when you use highly skilled engravers to do the fine details, that's the expensive part.
This post is far longer than I intended it to be. My point is that reworking a die sounds easy, and so does the idea that a VW can be made into a Mercedes. Sounds easy...try doing it. Even a highly skilled metal worker will tell you that the time and money to alter an old car (or die) is far too much trouble, and with less time and effort he could make a new one from scratch.
The Schickle/Jacobs type of PLM does appear to have Godet eagles which could have been made from Godet dies, and the eagles applied to the arms of the cross, similar to the example you posted today with the Wagner eagles and Godet cross. The rest of the Schickle has far too many differences if you overlay the images, and that suggests an entirely new die for the arms of the cross itself. Who made the eagles? Schickle...Godet? I don't know.
LesComment
-
Indeed a long reply.
Just one comment to your reply.
Design changes were made in 95% of all cases by order of the head of a state.
A few examples: The model change of the Saxon Order of Albert, Red Eagle Order eagle style changes, Order of the Crown,....
Every court jeweler was forced to submit a sample made ofter a proof held by the order's chancellery.
Getting the business with the state for orders was exactly the same proceedure like in today's world. One would basically submit samples and pricing and, like today, the cheapest got the business in most cases.
One word to refurbishing. If you look closely at the Schickle PlM and the one posted by Tony (I had this ne in my hands), one will realise, that the tail feathers are actually reworked/detailed......
I don't think we can use the comparision between Mercedes and VW. A PlM is a PlM is a PlM. They are all coming from a specific tooling. The older the tooling gets, the worse the quality, the more the jewler/appretice has to finish on the piece.
...and we do have examples for this here as well. Besides the PlM it is very common for Red Eagle Orders or those orders that were made in high volume.Comment
-
Originally posted by medalnet
Andreas,
New designs came come from the top down, or from the manufacturer. In high tech fields governments often state a need for something that can do a specific thing, and it's up to the manufacturer to do the research-development, and submit a model for testing purposes. In the area of jewelry making, how much did any of the heads of state know what could be done by a jeweler unless the jeweler first told them what could be done, or they provided an example. Yes, the head of state could commission something, but there is still room for the maker to do things their way.
There are even times when the jeweler may simply say...NO! Erich Ludvigsen told me about the Kaiser wanting a -specific- Black Eagle Order design made to his wishes, and -Godet- refused to make it, saying it looked ugly and that he did not like the design. He eventually got it made, but not by a German jeweler...it was made in France I was told. Some Germans can be very hard headed about what they want, and some about what they don't want.
Regardless of who wanted the designs of PLM changed, it happened, and those changes are related to the increased skills of jewelers who learned new ways to do things, and various techological advances. Your point about the heads of state is a good one, -but- after 1918, there was no longer a Royal Hohenzollern household and Wilhelm was no longer head of the Order of the Knights of the Order Pour le Merite.
If Willy wanted a design to be submitted for approval, that raises a question, why Godet and Wagner made a medal that shared certain basic features, but were clearly different in many aspects, and they did not copy each other. I wonder why Willy used two different "official" makers, with different styles. The fact that he used at least two sources for his presentation awards suggests that he may have liked variety and tolerated (or preferred?) different designs of some medals, but that the pieces had to have a high degree of skill in their making. We know that Willy almost had a uniform for every regiment in the Imperial Army (and several foreign ones). He also had an interest in medals, and whether he encouraged jewelers to make new designs...I won't venture a guess.
Jewelers after 1918, if they chose to make a PLM did -not- have to submit a design for his approval, and could make what -they- liked, and what they thought their clients might buy. Until LDO made it's apperance after the start of WWII, jewelers were not that restricted with what their medals looked like. The Schickel type appearing in their catalogue in 1940 was a new design, that used Godet style eagles, but the rest of the PLM appears to have been made on very different dies than Godet used during WWI. The Jacobs PLM that was made in the mid-1960's came almost 25 years after Willy was dead and gone, and until I can find out what Osterkamps records indicate about how that medal was acquired, and if there was any design "submittal", there's reasons to believe that after 1918, jewelers were in a position to make and sell what -they- thought would sell.
LesComment
Comment