S&L Showroom circa 1940/1?

[Dietrich Maerz]

Have you, Dietrich, ever seen a post-1941 catalog from any maker?

No!

[jacques]

Jacques,
I believe the last catalog now that we know of for S&L seems to be the one which may have come out in the first quarter of 1941 (based on a March 1, 1941 start-up date for the LDO and the fact that the catalog mentions S&L's "L 16" assignment). This is the version seen from both Dietrich and on GCA (although GCA refers to it as the "1940" catalog). There is no actual date on the catalog itself. I know that this one shows Spanish Crosses, but I don't believe it shows a Condor Legion Tank Badge. Perhaps Dietrich, if he has one with all the pages, could confirm that. One thing I noticed in the 1939 catalog, which I have, is that S&L, in addition to the "bound pages", also had an "add-in" extra page, which is just inserted. No idea if they repeated that practice for new items in the last catalog.
Did you see the SK with the very prominent center? I'm very curious about that one.
Regards,
Leroy

Hi Leroy,
the answer concerning the LC Pz badge is at the bottom of the 1941 S&L catalog page 9 (the page showing the spanish cross and other spanish decoration)...I just had a look this morning. Sometimes we have not to focus on the pictures but on the text!

[Leroy]

You are right! I didn't see it, either!

The LCTB is there (just not pictured!) for RM 16!

This should change some minds..........

Good man, Jacques!

[jacques]

You are right! I didn't see it, either!

The LCTB is there (just not pictured!) for RM 16!

This should change some minds..........

Good man, Jacques!

Hi,
I just hope that a post-1941 catalog will pop out , or a sharp close up of the picture to see exactly the form of the bones.

jacques

[Brian S]

Change minds? That S&L made one? Not sure what you mean.

[jacques]

Change minds? That S&L made one? Not sure what you mean.

S&L made it certainly because it appears in the sale catalog of 1941 (I didn't noticed it until now), without picture anyway, and it is presented in the Leipzig S&L showroom. I just would like to see a close up of Jaeger S&L showroom to see the form of the badge and especially the bones. May be a Post-1941 catalog, if they exist, show a pictured badge.

jacques

[Brian S]

I don't agree that because they sell it they made it? I've sold Wehrmacht badges and I don't make them, honestly I don't... I'll even hang a few on my wall and photograph them.

[gregM]

On a side note--Winkler's weekly update today has a LCPB listed.

[jacques]

Of course, it is not a 100% bullet proof, but it is an interesting concordance. In any case, as the main part of S&L badges were not marked, we can also say that nothing proove that they made the badges and decorations that are exposed in the showroom and presented within their catalog. S&l could have been nothing but a simple retailer as Sedlatzeck. In that hobby, there are unfortunatly only very few bullet proof, the most part is dedcution, logic, speculation and we have to live with that.
So, no , it is not sure that S&l made this badge, but I tend to think they did. I'll continue to search other informations to reduce the proof %, knowing that I will never reach the 100%.

jacques

[Brian S]

Jacques, we do know of course they made and marked many items. They were a manufacturer. And I have to presume they were an intelligent manufacturer and retailer. If an item existed and it was to be sold in very limited quanities and another manufacturer had it and offered to them at wholesale, I would have to deduce they would make a smart business decision and sell someone else's badge rather than gear up and make it themselves for a limited run.

Whether this includes the LCTB or not I couldn't begin to guess. Maybe they were among the first. But they took pride in marking so many of their other badges, why not mark the LCTB also.

[Robin Lumsden]

You are right! I didn't see it, either!

The LCTB is there (just not pictured!) for RM 16!

This should change some minds..........

Good man, Jacques!

Hurrah !!!!!

[Zepenthusiast]

This discussion has evolved in very interesting ways, getting into the netherworld between the Imperial and TR eras. However, it has not provoked a single dancing cow for way too long, hence I will now throw in a new challenge!

Careful measurement of the arm width to edge thickness ratio (measured at the vertex of the "notch" in the end of the arm--same spot where weep holes are commonly placed for hollow crosses) of various Pour le Merites of different manufacture shows this ratio to be quite reproducible. Even taking into account issues of parallax in oblique views, the ratio is surpringly consistent for solid silver-gilt Godets, silver-gilt Wagners and their hollow fore-bearers. The ratio is comonly less than 0.1, usually around 0.08 to 0.09 for the solid silver-gilt Wagner, for instance. By contrast, the PlM in the S&L showroom has a pretty dramatic edge thickness: even conservatively, it is well over 0.10 (close to 0.12?)

There is only one type of Pour le Merite which shows this same ratio of edge thickness to arm width, and that is...the "Beautiful and Deadly" crosses marked GODET, as seen in Prussian Blue, wherein the elements incongruous with known wartime Wagners naturally rendered it suspicious, and also in the posting by Weitz featured in the thread about my mysterious cross (A PlM--What to Make of It.) My own cross, while matching the eagles of these in many ways, does not show the same thickness to arm width ratio (it is 0.87, measured directly from the article.)

So...are we looking at one of these "GODET" mystery crosses in the S&L showroom? Could that explain how S&L could be showing a cross they didn't make???

[Robin Lumsden]

Could that explain how S&L could be showing a cross they didn't make???

Nah.

[streptile]

So...are we looking at one of these "GODET" mystery crosses in the S&L showroom? Could that explain how S&L could be showing a cross they didn't make???

I think the weep-hole alone kills that BaD cross. It's a novel theory, but a stretch. I think it's unlikely.

[Zepenthusiast]

What do you make of Bob Hritz's similar cross he proved was hollow, though? Even if the "B.a.D" cross were shown to be solid, does that rule out that it could be a copy of an authentic 1930's PlM?

Alternative theory for the thickness of the S&L showroom cross? Can't be a standard hollow Wagner--no way mathematically.