What makes a Schinkel a Schinkel

[Bernie Brule]

Never seen one before. Does that make the Imperial TR looking crosses more rare than Schinkels?

[streptile]

Never seen one before. Does that make the Imperial TR looking crosses more rare than Schinkels?

The one I just showed is extremely common, as are the pinback versions. The Imperial versions of Schinkel crosses exist in much higher numbers, in every case I can think of. I would estimate a ratio of about 100:1 for most makers -- higher for others (Meybauer, for example).

[ben bijker]

Perhaps off subject somewhat, but I have been wanting to ask a question myself about my early Schinkle. It has a core which looks like it is copper where the paint has worn off or been removed (ie: the swastika and date). I had read in the past that they used other metals such as zinc, brass, and copper, to make these cores but when I put a magnet to it, it sticks???



Chuck

Chuck, these Schickle's (the one-piece crosses were either none-magnetic or iron/copper-plated/ silver plated and painted.
Because of the extensive trajectory I presume the non-magnetic crosses are later because they are cheaper to make.
In the early years profit wasn't a dirty word either ...

[Biro]

"So this means that there are Imperial EKs that look more TR EKs matching these in Ben's pic. Can someone post one?"

Would this be one?

What's your position on all of this George? Is there a particular standpoint in the EK1 book? (I haven't got it yet but I'm assuming there's a section devoted to Schinkelform crosses?)

Marshall

[George Stimson]

Marshall

I know that Trevor has an interesting viewpoint on the term "Schinkel", but I myself adhere to the thought that the term describes what could be called the "Imperial" shape (form) of the cross. And this is based simply on the general way that the term has been used in the collecting community, not on any in-depth thinking on my part.
We don't have a chapter in our book covering Schinkel crosses generally, rather we cover just two types in the chapters devoted to the two main makers, Paul Meybauer and Wilhelm Deumer. And we do refer to the term "Schinkel form" as being based on the original design of Friedrich Schinkel, which, as has been pointed out above, is not entirely accurate.

[streptile]

Well, I feel like I've said almost all I can .

I think I am right to say that this is the definition you find accurate (I've adapted it from your post above):

[A 1939 EK whose] frame ... most closely resembles the shape of Karl Friedrich Schinkel's original iron cross design of 1813. That 'form' ... is significantly more delicate than it's Third Reich produced counterpart, with arms that begin to 'flare out' much closer to the end of the crosses arms than the centre of the cross, and - with few exceptions - have significantly narrower rims.

I will just say, finally, that this definition of "Schinkel," as it has evolved over the past decade and as you accept it, is in my opinion unsatisfactory for a few reasons, all of which I have stated or alluded to above. To recap them:

1. No Schinkels really closely resemble Karl Friedrich Schinkel's original design for the Iron Cross.
2. By employing solely aesthetic criteria, it makes Schinkels less interesting (to me, anyway).
3. The definition leaves the determination of a "Schinkel" up to the individual collector ("Does this look enough like Schinkel's design to qualify? I think so.") In other words, there is no way to "test" whether a given cross is a Schinkel; or, as you put it, "Curvature ... is most definitely in the arms of the beholder."
4. This potentially opens the door to haphazard inclusion of various crosses within the Schinkel family and legitimizes dealer chicanery (see this image of a current dealer's site. Not a single one of these crosses would be considered a Schinkel under the other, original definition):

I believe the definition I stated above:

Any 1939 EK that was made with frames or dies left-over or adapted from prewar 1914-series EKs.

...has a number of clear benefits:

1. It is faithful to the original conception of the term.
2. It removes the problematic link to Karl Schinkel's original design.
3. It provides a set of criteria that are measurable and verifiable, and thus limits the number of potential Schinkels to those crosses that meet the criteria.
4. By implicitly linking the Schinkel to the economic, political and social history of the Third Reich, it makes them more interesting (to me, anyway).

I had hoped to reach a consensus on this, especially with you guys (Marshall, George). But it seems that may not be possible at the moment, so I would just say that I have appreciated the dialogue .

[Flemming]

To simply say 'it's a WW1 frame therefore it's a Schinkel-form cross", is not - in my opinion - the correct application of the term, because it's ALL about the shape and not the era...

That's been my take on it anyway, and while I admire the Top Row of Bens collection, I do not consider them to have the 'Form' worthy of the term 'Schinkel'.

Marshall

I have also always thought that this was the definition of a "Schinkel" cross....the shape of the cross defines a Schinkel in my opinion.

Best regards
Flemming

[streptile]

Hi Flemming,

Yes, most people have either adopted the modified (shape-based) definition, or they have only learned about Schinkels within the past ten years or so, a period during which the original definition has been little circulated or understood.

[George Stimson]

But hey, Trevor, I agree with you 1000% that the term "Schinkel B" is a totally inappropriate name/descriptive of the straight-armed EK 2 with the Round 3 that usually goes by that monicker!

[streptile]

But hey, Trevor, I agree with you 1000% that the term "Schinkel B" is a totally inappropriate name/descriptive of the straight-armed EK 2 with the Round 3 that usually goes by that monicker!

Honestly, that's great news!

Please coin another name in the EK2 book then.

[George Stimson]

"Please coin another name in the EK2 book then."

Not only will we come up with something, but we will purposely and loudly disavow the "Schinkel B" designation.

[Bernie Brule]

I see valid arguments on both sides of this debate. On the one hand, I had always thought that a Schinkel was defined by visual characteristics. But Trevor has a valid point in that where do you draw the line between a Schinkel and non-Schinkel based on this? Some flare out less than others so when do you get to a point where it is no longer a Schinkel? And who decides?

Personally, I would adopt Trevor's definition but would probably only buy a Schinkel based on the visual characteristics because "it looks different". That is a collector's prerogative - buy what you like.

[Biro]

Personally, I would rather see a generic name for ALL 1939 EK's with a WW1 frame and maintain 'Schinkel-form' as the name for the existing sub-set within that catagory... not necessarily because I feel the name Schinkel-form absolutely typifies the less flared arms (although I maintain that it is still not an innacurate name for crosses with the straighter arms) but more because the name is pretty well ensconsed in collector psyche as synonomous with a particular looking cross.


As far as the grey area between what is and what isn't Schinkelform? Well Bernie innadvertantly nailed it in one, simply by looking at the top row of Bens collection (below) and realising that, compared to the bottom two rows, there was a distinct and easily identifiable visual difference that didn't fit with his perception of a Schinkleform cross. That collection (if I read Ben's comments correctly) is only one cross away from being a complete representation of the family of EK1's we currently know to utilise WW1 cores... so I'm not sure I'd consider visual identification alone as a potential minefield?

Trevor - your points and concerns are excellent and well justified - there's a whole group of Imperial framed 1939 EK's out there missing out on their rightfull notoriety and collectibility.

I just think that maintaining the name 'Schinkelforms' as a sub-set of the wider Imperial framed group and coining a new name for the entire group will be easier for you/us in the long run.

All the best

Marshall

[George Stimson]

Okay, Marshall.

Now, let's talk about "Prinzen" Spangen!

[Biro]

Okay, Marshall.

Now, let's talk about "Prinzen" Spangen!

Heh heh...

Again, part of collector psyche.. a "prince sized' anything is Prinzen as far as your average collector is concerned - although as you well know such an object never existed for wear by any young prince.

Try changing THAT one...