GFM von Bock's KC?

[J G]

...you're more than welcome
Pieter.

Pieter,
What about scanning the picture then cutting or blurring the "something special" in photoshop or something and then posting? Just a suggestion

[Dietrich Maerz]

Pieter,

you can also send it to me and I will cut out whatever you wish?! Unless it's the cross itself .

Dietrich

[Harry]

Here it is, I knew I had seen one of these (several times) before.......

[George Stimson]

Can you explain your post a bit, Harry?

[Harry]

Certainly George,
I do believe that this is the same type of cross posted at the start of this thread. And yes, I know the corners ane not rounded! But I think the rounded corners on the other pics are an artifact of the picture, OR they had to doctor the frame to fit the core (Oh no! I am in for it now) This cross in my post above is in a well known european auction billed a a 'second type' RK by Steinhauer & Luck. We know S&L stuck with the same die (pattern) right through their early '57ers to their post war copies of the '39ers!

[George Stimson]

Thanks, Harry. '

Have any aspersions been cast on "von Bock's" PlM in the picture with the RK in question here?

[George Stimson]

I think that John's and Dietrich's suggestions (Posts 61 and 62) are reasonable enough. We don't need to see the entire card, just the RK.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Here is what Stephen has to say about this:

"Hi Dietrich

Thanks for your kind remarks regarding Prussian Blue and the link to the WF thread. Amazing visual comparisons by forum members in pursuit of the truth - just fantastic! I defer to Peter and Detlev's judgement on the KC as my concentration was completely on the PLM which, in my judgement, is 100% correct..... Also, with each piece in the book, I indicated the source, unless that source preferred to remain anonymous for one reason or another. In this instance that is the case. ...

Stephen"

and in a follow up e-mail when I asked about the source:

"The PLM was my study for this book. It matches in all aspects a correct form of the cross and therefore I believe it an original. It matches on weight, form type per manufacturer, markings per manufacturer and has other characteristics I have observed in my studies of originals. As a researcher yourself, I must assume you are privy to the protocal of respecting the requests of those who allow you access to their collections."

And that is something I respect of course 100% as I've been there myself.

So, in Stephens opinion the PLM is 100% correct.

Dietrich


P.S.: I got of course permission from Stephen to post his e-mail!

[Dietrich Maerz]

Hi Harry,

it is not the same cross, IMHO. Just look at the lizard tail configuartion of the inner corners. Even if filed away, you would still see the orientation of the beading. Now look at this cross - the one in question: different beading orientation and not filed.

Dietrich

[Brian S]

So, in Stephens opinion the PLM is 100% correct.

And it probably is. The question would be simply, if the RK is not von Bock's, there is in all probability the distinct possibility the PlM was not von Bock's. A real PlM but...

[Dave Kane]

Brian...it's called 'the hook'

Older than even hookers....

[Dietrich Maerz]

From the pictures I got even I can say with confidence that the PLM pictured in Stephen's book is (also) not von Bock's.

Dietrich

[Tiger 1]

???????????????

Proof please.

Tony

[Dietrich Maerz]

Tony,

the cross in the book has some visual damage as you can see. The pictures I got don't show this damage. I'm sure you will understand that I cannot post the pictures because I was asked not to do so.
However, I have no doubt in my mind that I got the real story regarding von Bock's RK and PLM.

Dietrich

[Tiger 1]

Dietrich,

With all due respect to the owner and to yourself. I find that answer is not very scientific or objective.

I say this only because of the various 'discussions' members have had here about 'stories' associated with awards without factual proof. Now I am asked to believe that this should suffice as an factual answer? This leaves many more questions than are answered both here on the forum and in the book"Prussian Blue".

I don't believe this 'secrecy' serves the search for truth. Are we going back to the nod and wink of it's good because I say so? Sorry for being so blunt but I am a bit disappointed.

Tony