A Study of the Godet Style PlM

[Les]

When Edkins' work was published in 1981, was anyone even aware of the Schickle catalog? I can't find my copy (although it is here somewhere!) of his book, but I don't recall him specifically mentioning Schickle in it - perhaps someone can check if this is correct.

I went to the HH site and, using the magnification tool, looked very closely at
the eagles on the piece they are selling as a jeweller's copy. To me, at least, while they are nice looking, they appear to be castings.

Leroy, Edkin's did not mention or show the Shickle variation, or anything like it. A far more recent publication on PlMs did not mention it either. No one seems to have made the connection between the Schickle catalog and the PlM, until Gordon Williamson posted some images from the catalog, and Marshall pointed all of it out, on this sub-forum. (Marshall deserves an "atta boy" again for that, and his observations on this thread.)

Leroy, the eagles are almost certainly cast, not stamped.

[Brian S]

yes cast, and a big problem...

[Zepenthusiast]

Les, I am not sure about Edkins and the lack of a "Schickle." On page 42, in the section on crowns, there is a wide-centered Godet-style cross pictured. It is not identified by maker. What do you make of it? Rule in or out?

[Les]

Les, I am not sure about Edkins and the lack of a "Schickle." On page 42, in the section on crowns, there is a wide-centered Godet-style cross pictured. It is not identified by maker. What do you make of it? Rule in or out?

Jim,

Out. Far out, and well out of the ball-park.

It's a post WWII copy, and wasn't made by Schickel or Godet. Techinically speaking, it's neither because it was made long after -both- wars.

That specific piece was made in the 1960's. It was given to Josef Jacob's on the 50th anniversary of his being awarded the PlM in 1917, by Theo Osterkamp who was the titular head of the Ritter des Ordens (PlM) at the time. Osterkamp had the combination of cross and crown specifically made for the event. The cross itself bears a very strong resemblance to a very cheap copper based, "clad" copy being sold at the time. More than a few jewelers could have modified one of the crosses without major modifications.

After Jacob's died, Jacob's medals, etc, were acquired by Neal O'Connor's Foundation of Aviation Research. O'Connor specifically refers to this piece in his volume on Prussian awards in his aviation book series. He says the piece was "base metal" but did not say specifically what the metal was, although base metal would rule out either gold or silver.

[Leroy]

At the risk of "crossing over the barbed wire" and intruding into a field which truly belongs to others more versed in PLM's than I am, I would like to suggest something.

Looking at the HH auction piece using their magnification tool, the eagles appeared to me (and others have now agreed) to be fairly crude castings. By contrast (and believe me, I have looked very closely), the eagles on other pieces are die-struck. There are other differences, as well, between such bronze-gilt hollow pieces and the silver ones like the HH piece, which may be, simply, I now suggest, recent "clones" of the "Schickle" ("recent" as in "recent since the appearance of the Schickle catalog).

There, I've said it........

[Les]

At the risk of "crossing over the barbed wire" and intruding into a field which truly belongs to others more versed in PLM's than I am, I would like to suggest something.

Looking at the HH auction piece using their magnification tool, the eagles appeared to me (and others have now agreed) to be fairly crude castings. By contrast (and believe me, I have looked very closely), the eagles on other pieces are die-struck. There are other differences, as well, between such bronze-gilt hollow pieces and the silver ones like the HH piece, which may be, simply, I now suggest, recent "clones" of the "Schickle" ("recent" as in "recent since the appearance of the Schickle catalog).

There, I've said it........

Leroy, anyone with a good eye for details and can wade through this post and retain many of the details, has the ability to make pertinent comments, and raise questions.

The hollow bronze "Colson", or Schickel looking pieces, were stamped or die-struck. The hollow bronze pieces usually have a high degree of detail, the enamel is in good condition, and overall the workmanship is high-quality. The one Tony owned was not made by joining pieces at the center, and your own observations on the grooves or indentations close to the center suggest clamping of the piece for engraving and or finishing details, but not for joining the arms together. There absence of excess solder on/near/around the junction of the arms and indentations supports this conclusion.

The same can not be said about the silver -gilt version that seemed to start appearing on the market within 6 months to a year after the Colson-Schickel was discussed here on WAF. The silver gilt version shows signs of being cast. The indentations may have been transferred by casting and copying an original bronze gilt version. Jim's observation of the arms being cut and pasted together also shows a very different method of construction from the bronze gilt version.

Comparing the silver gilt version to the bronze-gilt one, the overall impression is the silver gilt copy was made using cast rather than stamped parts, the workmanship is lacking, and does not have the overall quality of the bronze-gilt version. The fact that stamped parts were used on the bronze, and cast on the silver, strongly suggests the silver version is nothing more than a copy.

Is it possible a cast copy using cut and paste technology could be made and put on the collector market in six months or less? Considering the skill level needed to make castings, then cut and paste, not that much time would be needed at all.

[Leroy]

I am very relieved to learn that I am not seeing things.

Thank you, Les, for this excellent information, which must be of benefit to the entire collecting community, no matter how potentially upsetting it might be to some. If anyone needed a wake-up call to the efforts of fakers based on information and research from serious collectors, published on forums (as Gordon did with the Schickle catalog), this is it.

Regards,
Leroy

P.S. One small personal correction I feel compelled to make: In post 87, my piece was said to be "silver gilt". I'm not sure where this came from, as that's not what I said when I first posted it on this forum. I thought it was hollow gold, and didn't see any signs of any other metal, but in now looking into the hole for the suspension loop, the underlying metal is not silver, but rather, to the extent I can detect, bronze. In light of these new revelations, the correction is, I think, important, not only for my personal benefit as the owner of a die-struck piece, but for the benefit of other collectors, as well.

[Mike Kenny]

Regarding Meybauer PLMs, from what I've read here consensus seems to be that they only made/offered single-sided examples? I admit I have not read every word of every post, but would the above statement be correct?

Regards
Mike

[Les]

Regarding Meybauer PLMs, from what I've read here consensus seems to be that they only made/offered single-sided examples? I admit I have not read every word of every post, but would the above statement be correct?

Regards
Mike

Mike, so far, that appears to be the situation.

[Mike Kenny]

Thanks Les,

Interesting.

I now know for a fact that Meybauer offered for sale, over a fairly reasonable time period;

Pour le merite, doppelseitig (also in miniatur) and
Pour le merite, einseitig (no miniatur offered)

Obviously I can not state whether they made them or only sourced them, but they definitely offered them.

I'll leave any implications to those with experience on this order.

Regards,
Mike

[GdC26]

Gents,

I've read this tread with fascination. As a complete layman in this particular field, out of curiosity, am I correct in saying that while there is significant uncertainty over the manufaturing date of the silver gilt hollow PLM that forms part of the Wulff grouping, the PLM in the Teschner grouping is undisputed in the sense that there is no disagreement that although unmarked, it is a silver gilt WWI produced Godet type PLM? I ask because I cannot find such an unmarked PLM in the references I have.

Many thanks and regards,
Sandro

[Biro]

.... The Teschner grouping is undisputed in the sense that there is no disagreement that although unmarked, it is a silver gilt WWI produced Godet type PLM? ..... Sandro

Hi Sandro

The Teschner plm is slightly unique in that it conforms to all the pre-requisites of a wartime Godet made PLM with the exception of the 'chasing' of the lettering and crown, a textbook example of a Godet can be seen here http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...80&postcount=6

I think Teschners is considerably more of an anomaly than a red flag in this instance... There appear to be a few other examples of Godets without this 'chasing' feature just as there are totally legit and marked Wagner/Friedlanders with a connected U and R.

Was the Teschner PLM undeniably MADE by Godet? I would say almost certainly, but it's always possible the lack of any letter chasing points to the involvement of a 2nd party retailer at some point in the proceedings (the final construction phase perhaps?).

Teschners plm... http://www.emedals.ca/catalog.asp?item=GEM971#bigPic

What is incontestable is that the Teschner PLM was DESIGNED by Godet.

Marshall

[GdC26]

Many thanks Marschall, this confirms my understanding of the debate on hte Teschler PLM. Much appreciate the confirmation.
Regards,
Sandro

[ccj]

What's the latest?

[ccj]

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=699396