Schickle RK on Regimentals

[Leroy]

Knights Cross. One freak finding will not change the paper trail for me.

Dietrich - I have re-read the Schickle section in your book. What paper trail are you referring to?

[Dietrich Maerz]

Wouldn't you think that the L/15 - Schickle connection is enough. Based on the letters I posted a year ago.

[Leroy]

Dietrich - I do not doubt for a minute that L/15 was Schickle or that crosses bear the L/15 mark; however, how is it PROVEN that Schickle actually, physically, produced the RK with its mark? Maybe it did, maybe it didn't. Like Zimmermann/Godet: who did what? I really could care less if someday Schickle is firmly established to have made the cross "from the ground up". My only point is that there may be a connection with Deumer (which we know from its shop photos was involved, in some way, with RK finishing or production) and that this "avenue" of investigation should not only not be ignored, but also poses enough of a question that we should not say, at this point, that it is established beyond question that Schickle really produced the cross.

[Dietrich Maerz]

OK, fair enough. Keep digging. As long as there is no definite proof, I stay with the logic approach.

[Leroy]

OK, fair enough. Keep digging. As long as there is no definite proof, I stay with the logic approach.

I will keep digging and hope that others will, too. The 'logic" approach is: "It says it's a Schickle, Schickle advertised an RK, so it must be a Schickle." That's also fair.

Well, Deumer advertised an RK, too, there are photos of an RK being worked on in their shop (no such photos exist for Schickle that I'm aware of), an RK (which looks like a Schickle) is found on a Deumer card, with good provenance, with Oakleaves which match the ones made by Deumer for the German Order, and now a mint Schickle is offered as coming from Ludenscheid right after the war (a "story", of course). Enough, though, to keep an open mind and wonder about the truth.

[Rich G]

Question: Are the Schickle RK's marked 835 considered and/or proved to be post war or are they considered wartime?

Rich

[Ludwig]

What are you talking about? That cross is not a Schickle.

[Leroy]

These are not Schickle dates, Ludwig?

[mdj]

its not so ugly as it should look like

[Leroy]

??????

[Rich G]

??????

+1

[streptile]

its not so ugly as it should look like

A very cryptic post there...

The RK on your boat is not a Schickle (or an authentic one of any type), right?

[Ludwig]

its not so ugly as it should look like

Not an original KC! – IMO.

[Ludwig]

These are not Schickle dates, Ludwig?

No, just check the Knight´s Cross database here at the WAF!

[Leroy]

I just checked Dietrich's book, and except for the paint job they look like Schickle to me: