EK Spange 1870

[Marc Garlasco]

Gents,

I do not want to infringe on any copyrights, but I found this interesting article some guy has hidden away on his website. Maybe folks will find it interesting.

http://www.garlasco.com/page1.jpg

http://www.garlasco.com/page2.jpg

Later!
Marc

[gregM]

If there is any truth to this article---There are going to be some unhappy people--ME INCLUDED

[Darrell]

Hi Marc, as you have probably already seen, there was a good thread about these here:

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=2570

[Marc Garlasco]

Thanks Darrell, I missed that one!
Marc

[Blitz]

I hope I'm not reading that article correctly. If I AM reading it correctly, It appears to state that spanges, where the EK is surrounded by a pebbled line, are fakes. If that is true.. ..Oh my God.

[Biro]

...It appears to state that spanges, where the EK is surrounded by a pebbled line, are fakes.....

..... and yet in one of the oldest collections around (Max Aurich) and also Herr Geissler's book, we see exclusively only examples with beaded frames.

Great post Marc! - Just goes to highlight that these things are VERY sadly no longer worth the grief of trying to persue. There simply IS no accurate reference point available to us meer mortals.

Notch one up for the piss-bag fakers...

... or if you're willing to take a punt on one as pictured in Geissler without the 'moon crown & 800' mark, go here.. http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?...MEWA%3AIT&rd=1

[Blitz]

Yeah, you're right Marshall. I hope that new evidence will give some light to this issue in the future, but untill that happens.. ..It's a real minefield.

[Tom Y]

Please, please, dont let it be true

[George Stimson]

The Spange presented in the article as a Nachguss is not the same Spange that has been discussed here or at GMIC.

[WBallok]

Maybe another example of a new kind of reference article conceived to confuse people about what is real and what is fake? Who decided that the WHS without the mini-dot beading were all fakes? I have seen at least five different variations of the 1914 WHS in the past thirty years or longer. I do not remember seeing any of the type without the mini-dots. This is the first time I recall to see this type. Not saying it is unauthentic but just telling my experience. There must be fakes of the WHS of course but now this decoration becomes uncollectible like some others! The fakers are killing militaria collecting!

Bill

[Tiger 1]

Gentlemen,

Before we accept that the 'sky is falling' maybe some more info about this article and it's authors is needed.

First , can someone translate this into English for us who are German reading impaired? It would be a great help to read the whole article for ourselves.

Secondly, I'm not familiar with the authors. Can anyone post some of their credentials or the depth of their expertise? Are they well known in Europe? Germany? Like I said, I don't know anything about them.

Credentials are vital to our chosen authorities of the moment. I mean no disprespect to the individuals who wrote this article, but who are they?

We do know that Heyde, Geissler, Bowen, Kleitmann, Previtera and other well known authors have shown and acknowledged the beaded or dotted frame WHS as being legitimate. In this case Heyde is most valuable as it shows the Max Aurich collection that was put together long before WWII. Have these who came before suddenly become out of favor or obsolete regarding thier findings? Think about it for a moment.

I think we need to look at all the info published and otherwise before we throw up our hands in desperation because of a contrary view point.

Just some thoughts.

Tony

[Biro]

Hi Tony

Ever the voice of reason and calm - and don't we need it here sometimes!

The existance of this article Marc has posted was highlighted by Tim Tezer in this thread ages ago 1870 EKII, opinions? ...I'll copy and paste his brief synopsis/translation of the content for other non German speakers like us...

Needless to say, it is an old article and vastly contradicts much of the more acclaimed references that feature these beaded pieces (notably Heyde and Geissler).

Far from being a sensation, I think folks here should appreciate that this article merely muddies further the already clouded waters of what we think we should be looking for in an original and is certainly not the death-nell of any given piece.

It gives little comfort, but neither should it cause overt reactions - we already know it's a minefield.

As George has pointed out, it does not address the current crop of WHS that feature the 'crown moon and 800' mark on the reverse - but that is another discussion. More-over, it seems to reference as 'Nachguss'the type Geissler shows as his example of an original - (which for what it's worth, I have much more faith in... ). I could be mistaken on that - but the reverse markings are very similar

Here's Tims account of the contents anyway...

Hope you're well mate

Marshall


.....Well, I just painfully read through the article from "Orden und Ehrenzichen" #17, the journal of the BDOS, February 2002. The article is by Peter Sauerwald and Claus Zimmerling. (Sauerwald is the dean of the followers of "Probemassigkeit" in the German collecting fraternity, and his views are not very friendly to private purchase examples of anything. It is either EXACTLY like a piece known to have been made and awarded during the time of award, or it's not.)

The crux of his article is that a lot of copies of the spange appeared on the market in the 1970's, and a close examination of them reveals that they are castings - rounded corners and edges, rather than the sharp edges of a die-struck piece, etc. These characteristics are hard to spot without using the 50-power magnification that he uses for some of the photos. The fake example he shows has prong attachments, using round prongs soldered onto the back, and is marked "JOH. WAGNER & SOHN / BERLIN".

The example that he claims is an original awarded type is a slide type, i.e. with a silver backstrap that allows it to be slipped over the ribbon. It has no makers mark or silver mark whatsoever, but awarded originals are known to have been made only by the firm of Wagner. Interestingly, the cross in the center of the original piece given in that article has NO beading around the edges.

Cross-referencing with the examples from the Max Aurich collection, pictured in Friedhelm Heyde's book, shows that both of Aurich's have beading around the cross, and both are slip-on types without any makers marks.

If we accept Sauerwald's contention, supported at least partially by the photos from the Aurich collection, then we could conclude that all the original AWARDED spanges were slip-ons, but there might easily have been PERIOD spanges that were prong-back. The slip-on type does not lend itself to court-mounting - in order to do a mounting like the one pictured here, it would be necessary to either remove the backstrap from the original award, or simply purchase a copy.

I don't know if that helps, but there it is....

Tim (Tezer)
<!-- / message -->

[Marc Garlasco]

Marshall,
Great info and yes, we should all take a deep breath. These pieces are tough. For my part I am in no rush to buy one though. That said, one on a nice medalbar with provenance...well, let me check my bank account.
Marc

[Tiger 1]

Thanks for the kind words Marshall, we're plodding along the best we can.

I'll throw out something else for us to chew on for a while.

We need to look at and understand how glass enamelling is done. This may be pertinent to our discussion here.

When the glass enamel is fired on the EK of the spange there is an excess of enamel above the surface. This excess is then struck down and polished level with the raised devices on the cross. This method of enamel work with letters, dates, crowns or other devices that are flush with the surface are readily seen on the 1870-1871 Women's and Maiden's Crosses and the PLM. Even more so in the maufacture of the TR era Mother's Crosses. Depending on the level of workmanship we can sometimes see the direction that the enamel was polished in. Look and see.

Once we understand how the enamel is struck flush other possibilities can begin to make sense. It is not a large leap in logic that the example shown in the article was stuck and polished down a bit too much after enamelling and lost whatever beading may have been there originally. The fact that the stippling on the bar doesn't match suggests a different manufacturor. Obviously not Wagner.

Something to think about.

The sky is high, brite and blue, for me anyway.

Tony

[Bob Hritz]

Now I am so confused that I even question vet pieces. here is one I got from ads, in Iowa, I believe, in thelate 1970's. I never thought it was matrked in any way, but tonight discovered that there are 2 lines of markingds on the reverse of the bar, UNDER the slide attachemnt. needless to say, I cannot read it. The enamel is flush and ground flat. unfortunately, the glass enamel is rather badly damaged with much cracked and missing. Now tha question is whether I have a clever copy or an original.

Bob Hritz