This is related to a recent discussion we had about when "fat" frame beading may have been first used. I am going out on a limb here, so will someone please catch me if I fall? The steps to my hypothesis:
1. Standard 1870 and 1914 EK2 have thin frame beading. However, occasionally one will surface with what looks almost like "fat" TR (Third Reich) style frame beading.
2. In every reference book I have examined the variation of the 1939 EK referred to as "Shinckleform" claims that the these were made from Imperial EK frame tooling etc. The outer edge does have the shape of pre-1918 EK2 with a "1939" core, but why is the beading on the frames fat like a standard 1939 EK2 and not thin like the 1914s?
3. Does it not make sense that if these "Shinckleform" 1939 EK2 use "leftover Imperial parts and tooling" then the frame beading would be thin?
4. "Jogendstil." the German version of "Art Deco" originated in 1920 and emphasized the functional design that was based on logic and geometry. The climax of Art Deco came in 1925 with the "Paris Exposition International des Arts Decorative et Industries."
5. Hypothesis: Perhaps the occasional 1870 and 1914 EK2 we encounter with "fat" frame beading were made very soon after the Great War during the advent of Art Deco in the early 1920s as these EK no longer came under Imperial decree and simply reflect the fashion of the time. When the TR developed the standard pattern for the 1939 EK, they adopted this pattern of fat frame beading, but the shape of the EK also evolved and altered the shape of the arms as we all know. So in fact, is it possible that the Shinckleform 1939 is actually not from left-over 1914 stock, but left-over stock by one (or more) manufacturers who were making EK in the early 1920s? These EK with the fatter frame beading are simply a manufacturer's response to current style. The numbers must not have been great, as consequently, any EK, be it 1870, 1914, or 1939 with the Imperial shape but fat frame beading, are not commonly encountered.
<img src=http://www.kaisersbunker.com/ek/compare4.jpg>
Does anyone have their arms out? Or am I going to land flat on my face here?
Tony
(*Note* Sebastian kindly allowed me to use the photo of the "Shinckleform" 1939 of his EK page on this site)
1. Standard 1870 and 1914 EK2 have thin frame beading. However, occasionally one will surface with what looks almost like "fat" TR (Third Reich) style frame beading.
2. In every reference book I have examined the variation of the 1939 EK referred to as "Shinckleform" claims that the these were made from Imperial EK frame tooling etc. The outer edge does have the shape of pre-1918 EK2 with a "1939" core, but why is the beading on the frames fat like a standard 1939 EK2 and not thin like the 1914s?
3. Does it not make sense that if these "Shinckleform" 1939 EK2 use "leftover Imperial parts and tooling" then the frame beading would be thin?
4. "Jogendstil." the German version of "Art Deco" originated in 1920 and emphasized the functional design that was based on logic and geometry. The climax of Art Deco came in 1925 with the "Paris Exposition International des Arts Decorative et Industries."
5. Hypothesis: Perhaps the occasional 1870 and 1914 EK2 we encounter with "fat" frame beading were made very soon after the Great War during the advent of Art Deco in the early 1920s as these EK no longer came under Imperial decree and simply reflect the fashion of the time. When the TR developed the standard pattern for the 1939 EK, they adopted this pattern of fat frame beading, but the shape of the EK also evolved and altered the shape of the arms as we all know. So in fact, is it possible that the Shinckleform 1939 is actually not from left-over 1914 stock, but left-over stock by one (or more) manufacturers who were making EK in the early 1920s? These EK with the fatter frame beading are simply a manufacturer's response to current style. The numbers must not have been great, as consequently, any EK, be it 1870, 1914, or 1939 with the Imperial shape but fat frame beading, are not commonly encountered.
<img src=http://www.kaisersbunker.com/ek/compare4.jpg>
Does anyone have their arms out? Or am I going to land flat on my face here?
Tony
(*Note* Sebastian kindly allowed me to use the photo of the "Shinckleform" 1939 of his EK page on this site)
Comment