Cased Oaks,Swords, w/Diamonds

[mott5ranch]

Hello Everyone,
I guess the topic thread got your attention. Yeah, it did me too. This set is from a private collection. They are NOT mine. I only wish I were in this league to afford something like this! These belong to a friend, after a discussion, I was allowed to post the pictures here. The main point being that I keep the owner anonymous.

Both of us are very interested in your comments and opinions, especially from those who may have had one or know something about them. Some of you may recognize this set from the dealer who had them a few years ago. Regardless, I hope you enjoy the pictures.

I feel very fortunate to be able to share this with you. I am very lucky to have a few collectors share things like this with me. I guess it pays to be a pleasant social drinker! What else could it be? It ain't my good looks, that's for sure.

On with the show! All comments and questions are eagerly welcomed.

[mott5ranch]

picture number 2.

[mott5ranch]

picture number 3

[mott5ranch]

picture number 4

[mott5ranch]

Picture number 5

[mott5ranch]

...and here is the last picture I have....so far

[Allan P.]

what's the substance fixing the diamonds to the back of the oaks?

Allan

[mott5ranch]

Great question Allan.

How am I to determine that?

What substance, if any, do they, the jeweler, makers, etc., use? I thought, but it's a guess, that these brilliants were pressed in place by bending the soft metal around them. Isn't that how most diamonds are mounted? I am trying to learn as well.

Gary

[WalterB]

Wow, if this baby is real that is one amazing piece. Is it an award piece and does it have any attribution/provenance? Not to piss on anyone's parade, but this diamonds piece does not have the maker marks that I have seen in books. I am only reading this from Gordon's great book, so perhaps he could shed some light on whether some diamonds were not maker marked. In addition, Gordon's book goes on to show several diamonds and all of them show that the sword hilts are separate from the sword blades. This is not the case here. Where is Gordon or W.C. Stump when you need them?!?

[Denis]

Hello
Thanks Gary for sharing those pics.
Even if I am not a specialist of such an item (I wish I could), this set is not a textbook one and it appears, as far as I can see, to lack the quality that you can expect of such a high award.
Just my 02 eurocents worth
BEst regards
Denis

[Gordon Williamson]

Heavy work committments have kept me away from the Forum for a while and I'll be busy for some weeks yet, but have a day off work today and was delighted to see this set when I came to visit the Forum.

Walter, this type is described in my book (Paragraph 1 on Page 422) but not illustrated. This is the First Pattern, awarded only to Mölders, Galland and Gollob before the later Klein pattern was introduced. There is a fine example of this type illustrated in "The Iron Time". The basic silver clasps were made by Godet and the Diamonds work reputedly done by Tiffany. The Sword
hilts do not in fact touch the opposing blades, its the strengthening plate on the reverse which bridges the gap so when viewed from the front, it looks like the hilts touch the blades.
If you look closely at Gary's pic number 4 you can just see faintly what looks like the L/50 mark on the loop, also visible in the Iron Time example.

Construction and assembly is just as I would expect to see in a genuine First Type. The diamonds are held in place by tiny "crimps" in the soft silver edge of the hole in which they are placed, these tiny "claws" holding the stone in place. Of course very few things are NOT being faked these days, but I haven't heard yet of any accurate high end copies of this first type being done, unlike the later Klein sets which are heavily reproduced by Klein themselves. Fortunately the modern Klein pieces are easily spotted (if you look at the modern Klein sets on P 423 and 424 of my book you'll note the "jagged " saw tooth edge profile compared with the originals on P 425)

I can't see anything wrong with this set.

Excellent posting Gary ! Thanks to your friend for allowing you to post these pics.

Gordon

[jacques]

thanks to share with us this scarce or unique set.
jacques

[mott5ranch]

Thanks Gordon for your input. I've never had a diamond oakleaves and sword so close before. I've had a fake oaks and swords (no diamonds) years ago, and since then I've been very leary of these pieces. I thought for a moment that perhaps someone else should post these pictures since I've found my share of copies over the years. The owner said, in complete confidence, everyone knows me and, " the piece will speak for itself." He also said that our forum in general tends to question and doubt most items because their are so many good copies in everything. . . most of us have become very skeptical because we've been burned before, but from time to time a rare, real deal, will make it's self known to the our forum and the collecting world.

Gary

[W. C. Stump]

Thanks Gordon for your input. I've never had a diamond oakleaves and sword so close before. I've had a fake oaks and swords (no diamonds) years ago, and since then I've been very leary of these pieces. I thought for a moment that perhaps someone else should post these pictures since I've found my share of copies over the years. The owner said, in complete confidence, everyone knows me and, " the piece will speak for itself." He also said that our forum in general tends to question and doubt most items because their are so many good copies in everything. . . most of us have become very skeptical because we've been burned before, but from time to time a rare, real deal, will make it's self known to the our forum and the collecting world.

Gary

It would be nice to see a clear scan of the L/50 markings. I owned one of the four first types, Molder's and I examined Graf's. The marking can't be seen clearly in any of the scans. Also, would any history come with your friends's set?

[Pieter Verbruggen]

...and they say diamonds are for girls...

Pieter.