schickle RK

[Dave Kane]

I know it's not a Rounder thread...but I couldn't help but note the similar appearance to this fake!!

[tom hansen]

Chuck-


As you have stated, with the nitric acid reagent test, base metal needs to be exposed. I am talking about a scratch that has been made on the inside of the ring at the junction of the two halves to exposed the base metal. If not exposed, the metal on the inside of the ring will be like every other spot on the cross.


Dave-

That is an interesting photo, in that the inner round corners appear to have no finishing. Similarly, why does not the rounder have any file marks on the inner beading or corners?

[George Stimson]

Dave, is there any chance that that fake is the one you saw in the 1980s with the fake Oaks?

[George Stimson]

Tom, it's nice to know that you're not interested in Rounders, that you don't care about them, and that you're not going to make any more posts about them. I agree that some of our members seem rather obsessed with the subject, and I'm glad to know that you are not among that crowd.
So, getting back to the intended subject of this thread (which I believe was Knights Crosses purportedly made by Otto Schickle), I would like to make the following comments.
First of all, I believe that Schickle RKs are wartime, but I have to admit that I only believe that because I have been told that by people who are said to be in a position to know. That said, I would like to pose the following questions about Schickle RKs in general, and about the example you own in particular:
1. Why are there no discernable wartime pictures of this type of RK being worn?
2. Why is there no RK offering in the Otto Schickle catalog of June 1940 when that same catalog offers all of the other grades of the EK and EK Spangen (except the GK) which were instituted on 1 September 1939?
3. Why is an example (yours) which is silver plated stamped "L/15"? Doesn't the presence of an LdO stamp indicate that that cross was under some kind of auspice of the LdO, which was formed (in large part) to assure that awards such as the RK were made only from standardized material (i.e., iron and "real" silver)?
4. Why is the quality of the Schickle RK of a noticably lower quality and aesthetic appeal (That flat ring!) than RKs by other manufacturers?
5. Why are there cores of these RKs with glaring differences, such as the differences in the obverse cores of your example and one that was recently offered by a major German dealer?
6. Why are there no Schickle RKs with any provenance (not counting the two examples claimed in -- gasp! -- books)?
These are my questions. If you can't answer these questions it doesn't necessarily mean that Otto Schickle Knights Crosses are not wartime; it only means that you can't answer the questions. And there would be no shame in that.
But.... do you have answers for any of these questions, Tom?

(And if I just might add as a postscript -- I find the "calling out" approach to research to be most tiresome and immature. )

[Dave Kane]

Dave, is there any chance that that fake is the one you saw in the 1980s with the fake Oaks?

Now that would be real strange!!!!


This is a cross that Doug posted....

[Bob Hritz]

Old time silver testing gouge. Photo 1


Bob Hritz

[Bob Hritz]

Photo 2 illustrates the etching to the silver, in the gouge, from the acid used to test silver.

Bob Hritz

[George Stimson]

"This is a cross that Doug posted...."

I see. It's not even an RK fake? I should have guessed from the cropped pic. (Silly me, thinking we were discussing RKs.... )<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Bob Hritz]

These marks were on the cross when I bought it. I did not have it tested myself.


I have watched old time jewelers take a scribe gouge and take a divit out of articles to test for silver and gold. Most of the old timers will also take the article and abrade it onto a grinding stone and drop acid on the stone. The two results, from the test of the scar and the residue on the grinding stone, should be identical if the item is not plated. The jeweler would use various acid strengths to determine the Karat of gold or the percentage of the silver. It was fascinating to watch, but I doubt I would be sacrificing any of my Knight's Crosses to one of these old time jewelers who buy gold and silver.

Testing inside the ring would be foolish. There is solder from the joint of the 2 halves. No jeweler would allow the test of an area where the solder would skewer his results. The test would be where there is thick base metal.

Bob Hritz

[Dave Kane]

"This is a cross that Doug posted...."

I see. It's not even an RK fake? I should have guessed from the cropped pic. (Silly me, thinking we were discussing RKs.... )<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

George, you don't see things that are similar???


I didn't even intimate that it was an RK....why so cross?

[George Stimson]

I'm not really cross. I just think that it's misleading and causes unnecessary confusion -- something we don't really need in this, or any, discussion.

[Dave Kane]

Not at all...it's been suggested that the same maker made an IC 1st based on the rounded inner corners and the angled Swaz sides.


I merely brought a pic from another thread and asked a question...

I also asked a question about the method of testing and got a reasonable response from Bob.

What causes you then to 'side' on the intent of a simple question??

This isn't about personalities....it was a simple well intended question

[George Stimson]

Okay, I read Doug's thread. I didn't see any suggestion that the same maker made an IC 1st based on the rounded inner corners and the angled Swaz sides. Who made that suggestion?
In any case, this thread is (supposedly) about Schickle RKs, so I don't see why the Rounder aspect of it is being continued....
(And as for personalities -- Dave, you know I don't have one! )

[Brian S]

Brian- Seeing as how you will never test yours, partially to protect your dubious acquisition story

Tom, you nasty little ....., I swear if you were here right now I'd b..... slap you into Puget Sound.

[George Stimson]

And with that I think this thread has gone just about as far as it should. It's a pity, because I really wanted answers to my questions. Oh well. That's the way it goes, I guess.
Good night everybody! Thanks for coming!