Is this a 1957 set of Oakleaves and Swords?

[Peter J.]

Hi David,

I fully comprehend what you said in your first post . Since you took the time to elaborate, I'll clearify what I found amusing. Of course the post-war Oaks don't fetch the same price as a wartime piece, but the early ones (mid50'-mid 60's) are more expensive than the ones made in the 80's (that's the "more interesting" aspect). Correct, the were sold together with the 57 issue of the KC as replacement pieces after 1957. But before 1957 they were simply reproductions, fakes or whatever one choses to call them (and that's the "transformation" aspect). However it's up to each and everyone to decide what to collect and I hope you find what you're looking for in the days to come

cheers
Peter

[Franco]

Hi,
I dont see what the problem is with 57 O&S.They always have 8 dots on the cross guard and they always have flat backs.There not copies,just new versions.
Cheers

[speedytop]

Hi Franco,

you know the difference between a copy and a fake?

A "new version", clearly visible no original, is a copy.

And a copy is a copy, in 1953, in 1957, in 1965 and in 2008.


Hi David,

"replacement" after the end of WWII is for me a nice paraphrase for "copy".

Replacement is for lost pieces, and the veterans could buy copies as a replacement several years before 1957.. Are you able to distinguish, that such a piece is from 1955 or 1957?

And why must they replace oaks or oaks with swords?
They could wear the originals!

The collecting community said for decades, that 1957 versions were awarded, issued or re-issued.
But there is no award, no issue, no re-issue.

There is only the allowance, to produce, to sell, to buy and to wear these decorations (and to collect them).

Everybody, worldwide, could buy these 1957 versions, without any limitations, really everybody!

Regards
Uwe

[don-zamo]

I thought you had to be a vet and prove you actually earned the award before you could buy one?

James M

[Dietrich Maerz]

I thought you had to be a vet and prove you actually earned the award before you could buy one?

James M

To wear one you had to prove it - not to buy!

You can buy a car ... but you need a drivers license to use it. Got it?

[DavidM]

Hi David,

"replacement" after the end of WWII is for me a nice paraphrase for "copy".

Replacement is for lost pieces, and the veterans could buy copies as a replacement several years before 1957.. Are you able to distinguish, that such a piece is from 1955 or 1957?

And why must they replace oaks or oaks with swords?
They could wear the originals!

The collecting community said for decades, that 1957 versions were awarded, issued or re-issued.
But there is no award, no issue, no re-issue.

There is only the allowance, to produce, to sell, to buy and to wear these decorations (and to collect them).

Everybody, worldwide, could buy these 1957 versions, without any limitations, really everybody!

Regards
Uwe

I thought you had to be a vet and prove you actually earned the award before you could buy one?

James M

Hello Uwe

I fully appreciate what you are saying, and as hopefully you know, I agree with you. I have said a few times here that there was no need to remake the Oaks etc as they never held any banned symbols. What I've been trying to say, and have done in two of my posts, is that my honestly held belief, based on what I have read and been told so far is that, although Oaks and Oaks with Swords were made by S&L and others more or less immediately after the war as replacements for those whose originals had been 'souvinered' or otherwise lost, S&L also made Oaks and Oaks with Swords to accompany the 'new form' RKs. But, and here I think is where the confusion has come about, my understanding has always been that the Oaks etc that S&L made to accompany the 'new form' RKs from 1957 / 1958 onwards are quite distinct and identifiable as such, in other words the die markings, or whatever, enable them to be identified as items made post war, but made to accompany the 'new form' RKs - what for convienece are (admittedly incorrectly) referred to as 57 versions of the Oaks etc. If you are saying that there is no difference between those made immediately after the war and the so called 57 versions, then no, I wouldn't be able to distinguish between them. As I say, it is my honestly held understanding, (and from what I have read, been told and discussed with other collectors is their understanding as well), that the Oaks and Oaks with Swords made as replacements to go with the the 'new form' awards are identifeable as such, and are distinct from others made post war. Is this or this not the case?

James,
The law and regulations surrounding the law of 1957 which brought into being the 'new form' items stated that anyone could buy them, but only those with proof that they were entitled to the original wartime award could wear them. In other words back in 1958 when the 'new form' items started to be available you or I could have bought them, but we couldn't wear or otherwise use them. Also, Dietrich says in his book 'The Knights Cross of the Iron Cross', page 389, that 'Paragraph 14 of the 1957 law regulated the sale of orders and medals. Section 1 of the law stated that only retail shops which had recieved permission from the appropriate authority were allowed to sell to the public.'

Regards
David

[Leroy]

S&L made oakleaves (and possibly oakleaves and swords) during the war, but they were never "official" pieces. For a short time, until the 1941 sale prohibition, these could be retailed. After that, they could be retained for shop display only (and supposedly only one for that purpose), but that was probably not rigorously enforced.

S&L may well have made replacement pieces for vets, or may have sold them ones left on hand from the war years. Certainly, such pieces were made available to the collector market postwar.

Based only on what I have personally seen,I believe that there are at least 3 types of S&L oaks (or oaks and swords):

1. Pieces made during the war and illustrated in period catalogs or
photos and postwar pieces identical to the wartime ones
2. Pieces made to accompany early '57 reissues (usually of nice
quality and marked "O"); and
3. Pieces of poor quality, really just "collector pieces"

The wartime pieces, and pieces made postwar just like the wartime pieces, are virtually identical in design to the early '57 sets, but are heavier, thicker and of
a quality that is simply better than the early '57's. In the absence of dead-solid provenance, I don't know how you could ever know a real wartime piece from one made pre-57. The same would apply to other sets of oaks or oaks and swords made by other companies who were not "official" suppliers of these awards. There are certainly real wartime ones out there, but I don't have a good feel, at this point, how (in the absence of provenance) you could tell the difference.

As to availability/ authorization, I agree with what has been said previously. These particular awards were never banned and never had to be re-authorized, as they had no swastika. The legitimate (i.e. entitled vet) market for these would always have been small.
Best,
Leroy

[DavidM]

Hello Leroy

Many thanks that. Much appreciated and very useful.

Regards
David