Warning: session_start(): open(/var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74/sess_20b62d3a77d0e69c887dca161260d6bdcc08d39854c1fe19, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Eichenlaub- Opinions? - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
demjanskbattlefield

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Eichenlaub- Opinions?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
    #1

    Eichenlaub- Opinions?

    Hi guys,

    I'd like some expert opinions on this Eichenlaub- specifics, good and bad, would be much appreciated. The top half of the loop has been bent back since it was found. It's not being offered for sale, I'm just trying to authenticate it for a friend.

    Thanks in advance.

    Matt


    Last edited by Matt L; 06-09-2005, 11:31 AM.
    Tags: None
    #2
    Hi Matt,

    this is not an original Godet.

    Dietrich
    B&D PUBLISHING
    Premium Books from Collectors for Collectors

    Comment

      #3
      Okay, but why?

      Comment

        #4
        Matt,

        the pebble pattern on the obverse is not correct. Compare to real ones in old threads. I also have an issue with the shape of the "21".

        Dietrich
        B&D PUBLISHING
        Premium Books from Collectors for Collectors

        Comment

          #5
          Thanks Dietrich- I have tried to wade through other threads about Godet Eichenlaub, but that's no easy task; a lot of images aren't there anymore, a good portion of the time posters haven't labeled their side-by-side images as to which is the original and which is the piece being compared, nor do they often specify the provenance of the 'originals'. And then there's the personal... discussion... that also makes it very difficult to glean valid facts. So I was simply hoping to have people point out very specific things that are good or bad and exactly why. Something like 'here's a real one, and this particular feature is the same or different from the one in question'. One 19-page thread did show an Eichenlaub that seemed to match this one, but I still don't know if anything was settled as to its authenticity. Hell, I'm not even sure if it's reasonable to compare the obverses of one marked '21' with one marked 'SILBER L/50'!

          So please just a few specifics guys- and a good image or two of an Eichenlaub with provenance to compare this one to would be great. I promise, I'm not on a crusade to prove this one good or anything I'd just like to be able to see for myself why it's good or bad.

          Thanks

          Matt

          Comment

            #6
            Matt,

            I'm with Dietrich on your Oaks. Here are images of a 'good' one. If you are going to 'dabble' with these high priced awards, you might want to invest in a couple of good reference books. The Iron Cross of 1939 by Gordon Williamson, and The Iron Times by Stephen Previtera are two that come to mind. That's a great way to 'hit the ground running'.

            Regards,
            Mark


            Last edited by mmiller; 06-09-2005, 01:40 PM.
            "You can check out any time you like ..... But you can never leave....."

            Comment

              #7
              Just a question mark on the Godet you show. I have been under the impression that the "1" should not have the bottom serif. Does that not apply with these awards?

              Regards
              Gary
              Originally posted by mmiller
              Matt,

              I'm with Dietrich on your Oaks. Here are images of a 'good' one. If you are going to 'dabble' with these high priced awards, you might want to invest in a couple of good reference books. The Iron Cross of 1939 by Gordon Williamson, and The Iron Times by Stephen Previtera are two that come to mind. That's a great way to 'hit the ground running'.

              Regards,
              Mark


              Comment

                #8
                Correct Oaks, second pattern.....
                Last edited by Harry; 07-10-2007, 06:44 AM.

                Comment

                  #9
                  reverse 21 mark.........
                  Last edited by Harry; 07-10-2007, 06:44 AM.

                  Comment

                    #10
                    Hi Gary,

                    I think I understand your question about the '1'. As far as I know, the number one on my Oaks is textbook. It appears to match Harry's.

                    ???
                    Mark
                    "You can check out any time you like ..... But you can never leave....."

                    Comment

                      #11
                      Look at the blurred obverse rim/edge of the set that started this thread, and compare with the crisp and well defined obverse rim/edge of the genuine ones.

                      Cheers.
                      Peter

                      Comment

                        #12
                        Peter knows how to kill a fake
                        Mikael

                        Comment

                          #13
                          OLs

                          The first set is

                          Comment

                            #14
                            Thanks for the replies thus far guys

                            Now I'm curious- it appears from what I've read in past threads and indeed from the images posted here, that there were 3 different types of Godet Eichenlaube:

                            1) 'L/50'
                            2) '21' with same obverse as 'L/50'
                            3) '21' with 'type II' obverse- different from 1) and 2)

                            Is this correct? Looking closely at the details in the pebbling and one or two other rather more obvious features of the Paepke L/50 and others posted, the one I'm asking about most certainly isn't supposed to be this first type- however I haven't yet found sufficiently-detailed images of the second type to show conclusively that the medal in question is a reproduction. That's not to say I don't believe the statements made above, but rather that it's necessary to be able to see specifically why it's cannot authentic so I can explain to the unfortunate owner who thought he'd found something wonderful.

                            Matt

                            Comment

                            Previous template Next

                            Users Viewing this Thread

                            Collapse

                            There are currently 2 users online. 0 members and 2 guests.

                            Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.

                            Working...
                            X