The Assmann Schinkel

[streptile]

We see they offer alloy or silver EK2s. For EK1s, the choices are also alloy or silver, pinback, or -- and this is specifically stated in the catalogue -- two-piece screwback ("Schraube und Platte" -- screw and disc). Two-piece screwbacks are not rare, but they are uncommon. As we have already seen, this cross under discussion here comes in alloy, silver, pinback, and two-piece screwback. For it to be a coincidence that a cross marked "A" matches the catalogue photo so closely, right down to the uneven flange, and also be offered specifically in silver, alloy, pinack, or two-piece screwback, is so unlikely that it borders on impossible, to my mind.

Conclusion

So, to sum it all up so far: I think that the evidence supports the conclusion that the 1939 Schinkel EK type, and the 1914 EK type, were made by the same maker:

• Same frame
• Same materials
• Same details of construction
• Same poor quality
• Similar and extremely unusual low weight
• Same measurements
• Same overall in-hand feel
• Same hardware options for EK1 versions (pinback and two-piece screwback)

Further, I think the evidence supports the conclusion that Assmann is the maker of the 1914 EK type:

• Similarity to Assmann catalogue photo
• Asymmetrical flange
• "A" mark
• Same hardware options as listed in the 1939 Assmann catalogue
• Same material options as listed in the 1939 Assmann catalogue

Thus, I think the evidence supports the conclusion that Assmann is the maker of the 1939 Schinkel under discussion here.

I imagine some of the members here will not find this evidence sufficient. But I personally find the evidence compelling enough to call this cross an Assmann.

[streptile]

Finally, it occurred to me that there was one more bit of (admittedly circumstantial) evidence to consider.

As Dietrich Maerz has uncovered from archival sources, there were two EK makers who had their LdO licenses revoked for failing to meet the LdO quality-control standards: Petz & Lorenz, and Otto Schickle. But we do not know how many early makers of the EK never received a license due to poor quality. We do know, however, that Assmann sold (and maybe made) 1939 EKs in the early war years, but that no 1939 EKs have yet surfaced marked for Assmann. The most likely explanation for the absence of Assmann-marked EKs, is that Assmann never received an LdO or a PKz license to make EKs. Perhaps they never applied for one. But the more likely explanation is that their products were not up to the quality required by the PKz. Given these suppositions, in looking for an Assmann EK, we would be looking for a low-quality EK that -- because they were probably not made after 1940 -- would also be fairly rare, and would not be marked either with an LdO or a PKz number. The EK we are considering here is precisely this: a low-quality EK, that is never known marked, and that is quite rare.

I welcome your comments, and any debate.

Thank you for taking the time to read this long thread.

[streptile]

Finally I would like to say that I do not discount the possibility that Assmann did not manufacture this cross, but rather bought it from another maker and marked (and marketed) them as Assmanns. To me, this is functionally the same as being an Assmann. It also seems possible to me that the FLL catalogue shows the same cross, and that FLL bought from Assmann, or that both Assmann and FLL bought from a supplier.

[streptile]

--END OF ORIGINAL POST--

For readers, please go back and read from page 1, post 3.

[CMSgt]

Ek

Trevor, an outstanding article and very good research. Jim

[fabri-online]

great work Trevor, I like it a lot.
from my point point of view the one thing I don't feel myself to agree is quality.
looks to me a quality as many many other crosses and better than some that have bad and so low dates, or heavy worn frames or filed inner corners.
I would expect now a try to solve the connection between this probably Assmann and his brother type as mine showed in post # 32 that maybe is a FLL or a step 2 of your showed below.

[Dietrich Maerz]

I splitted the original the original thread into the old one here: http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=665238 and this one.

Unfortunately I can't erase the first post without the whole thing disappearing. Maybe George as a Super-Moderator can fix that.

Thanks Trevor for thating the time to repost this interesting topic.


Dietrich

[Dietrich Maerz]

Finally I would like to say that I do not discount the possibility that Assmann did not manufacture this cross, but rather bought it from another maker and marked (and marketed) them as Assmanns. To me, this is functionally the same as being an Assmann. It also seems possible to me that the FLL catalogue shows the same cross, and that FLL bought from Assmann, or that both Assmann and FLL bought from a supplier.

Here is another very strong indication that Assmann made the crosses in question and not Friedrich Linden. The attached listing was an enclosure to a letter from the Präsidialkanzlei to the company Carl Knoblauch (manufacturer of ribbons) with a listing of the makers of the Iron Cross 2nd Class. The letter is dated 9. July 1940 and shows Assmann as a manufacturer of the Iron Cross 2nd Class. Friedrich Linden is not listed as a manufacturer by the Präsidialkanzlei.

[streptile]

Thanks for the nice comments guys

Here is another very strong indication that Assmann made the crosses in question... letter is dated 9. July 1940 and shows Assmann as a manufacturer of the Iron Cross 2nd Class....

Wow! Very interesting Dietrich.

Unfortunately I can't erase the first post without the whole thing disappearing.

Can you edit it into just a "."? That's as good as deleted....

[Nick Carraway]

Very nice analysis Trevor. I think you have made a compelling case

[jt327gir]

Fascinating research and analysis, Trevor! You have me convinced.

I was just reading the Schinkel article in my newly-arrived back issue (Vol.2, No.3) of "International Medal Collector", and the Assmann variant shown (it looks just like yours) was mentioned as a "possible Assmann." Now we know.

[streptile]

Thanks very much for all your nice comments.

Fascinating research and analysis, Trevor! You have me convinced. I was just reading the Schinkel article in my newly-arrived back issue (Vol.2, No.3) of "International Medal Collector", and the Assmann variant shown (it looks just like yours) was mentioned as a "possible Assmann."

That article was actually written after this thread was first posted (in its original version), and it is this very research that led to the "possible Assmann" maker attribution in the article. Then the photos disappeared in the old thread (with the server change) and I re-posted the thread here.

However, in the old thread, Ben Bijker posited a link to L/54 instead of, or in addition to, Assmann. Now, in any circumstances, Ben's opinion on EKs must not be taken lightly. But it so happens that a few months or weeks after Ben posted his idea about L/54 being a possible maker of the type, one was posted marked L/54 (S&H) (here) with only the hardware being slightly different.

Now we know.

So, to be honest, I don't think we do know for sure. But I think it is fair to say that either Assmann, Linden or S&H manufactured these. I like Assmann as the maker, Ben likes S&H, and Franki likes Linden, and I've made my case here.

As I also wrote somewhere upthread:

I do not discount the possibility that Assmann did not manufacture this cross, but rather bought it from another maker and marked (and marketed) them as Assmanns. To me, this is functionally the same as being an Assmann. It also seems possible to me that the FLL catalogue shows the same cross, and that FLL bought from Assmann, or that both Assmann and FLL bought from a supplier.

[kid74]

http://woeschler-orden.de/node/3392


WR Kirill

[streptile]

http://woeschler-orden.de/node/3392
WR Kirill

Very interesting, thank you Kirill.

Sascha's L/54 EK2 is original and rare.

I think it's clear that these were made by S&H as Ben always suspected. Whether they were also made by Assmann remains to me unclear. Mine is in an Assmann packet.