Schaumburg-Lippe for review

[Valter Gorenc]

I'm looking at these spanges and considering to buy one of them, but I'd like to hear your opinions first. The first one looks bad to me - the Schaumburg Lippe cross has too thick letters, probably fake?

[Valter Gorenc]

This one looks better, but the decorations are a bit crowded and irregularly mounted - the bottom line is not even. Too crumpy for Sedlatzek?

[Valter Gorenc]

What about this small bar? I know the pics are crap, but that's all I have. Any help really appreciated.

[Don D.]

I actually like the first one the best. Construction-wise it looks good. The second bar is trying to be a frack bar but has been but has been mounted backwards. The hinge should be up top when worn. That and you would expect the ribbons to all be furled the same.

The last one is probably ok as well but again, why such a difference on the ribbons? Perhaps the recipient put it together himself to save money.

[Valter Gorenc]

Don, thank you very much for your quick and detailed explanation! I didn't notice the frack bar has upturned pin and hinge... If I understand correctly, the Lippe cross on the first bar is fine, a variation?

[gen_key]

imo is the first schaumburg-lippe cross is a replacement for "spange"


regards kai

[Valter Gorenc]

Kai, thanks for your opinion. However, I see many differences between 1st cross and Spangenstück on your picture (the left one with thin ring attachment) - the crown is different, central letter A is distintly thicker and other letter too, especially "Für". In fact, it looks more like right cross on your picture, the one with thick ring attachment (which is awarded piece, if I understand right).

[pzrwest]

The ribbons on the second bar are over lapped wrong should be lapped with the service medal first then the next ending with the EKII being added last if not mistaken.... Harold

[gen_key]

but it don't looks like a piece with flat backside,
the ring is different but there can be different
makers of these crosses. I guess the awaded type
crosses are these with the wider, flat ring attechment?
Or is it wrong?

Thank you!

regards kai

[Valter Gorenc]

Gentlemen,. thank you for your excellent contributions! I just checked all this forum's entries "schaumburg" and didn't find any cross that would match the first one - none with that thick / short central A, all A's are more slender. Could it be a rarer undocumented variant? I'll keep searching.

Harold, you're right, ribbons on the 2nd bar are mounted the wrong way, the EK II should be on top!

[Jesse]

The first is not a war time piece and I do not think it is a inter war piece either. The small ring is clearly not of the war time type. You see many of these with the same very thin, far too thin ring on ebay.de. A well known faker sells these as "57 type".

The second I have always thought of as inter war, they often show this level of wear and again the small ring is different from the accepted war time piece, similar but not the same.

The third is war time, but I cannot vouch for the authenticity of the bars themselves.

Does anyone have any other pictures of the first type on a bar? I would be surprised if it is a spangenstuck..

J

[saschaw]

If I were you, I'd buy the tuxedo bar, although the tailer mounted the ribbons from up to down instead the other way.

Bar #1 originates from ebay seller "agle42" which is "hagekna41"'s wife... nothing for my collection!

[Don D.]

Thanks for that bit of info Saschaw.

[Valter Gorenc]

Jesse, Sascha, thank you very much for your opinions!

I think I'll skip them all and wait for another one. But I learned something new and I really appreciate your help and fruitful discussion!

[saschaw]

I think I'll skip them all and wait for another one.

After seeing #2 on ebay coincidently, I have to agree... skip them all!