New arrivals from the bombed Zimmermann factory

[Robert T.]

One last point for tonight, if you look at the middle Berry on the Godet set, it encroaches a good bit into the edge of the crossguard, whereas on the other set it doesn't appear to touch the crossguard edge at all.

But either way, very minute differences and I would agree that these are close enough to Godet to suggest sister dies.

Tom

The "sheared 21 set" that started this thread is even more similar to the example in DM book, but the soldering to the oaks appears crudely done or was not hand-finished...



Robert

[Leroy]

Not to belabor the point, but you will note that all of the dots (or "berries", if you will) are smaller on the "unknown" set than on the "Godet". What if they were "fatter"?

I think Dietrich has indicated that the sheared set may be a legitimate "Godet" set. Factory reject? Debris collapse damage? Who knows.....

[Robert T.]

A new working die would perhaps produce higher dots on the cross guards and crisper kurled bands on the handles.

Robert

[ChrisJ]

A new working die would perhaps produce higher dots on the cross guards and crisper kurled bands on the handles.

Robert

Yes that's possible Robert. Other possibilities:

- different drop weights on the press (or hydraulic pressure)
- development test pieces

The sheared set looks like a cold chisel has been used to deliberately destroy it. As I stated earlier, these are uncannily close in my opinion, but not quite there.

(Tom, )

[ChrisJ]

How about the Oak Leaves ?

Look at the pimple at the lower centre on the comparison pictures on page 4 (post 51)

[ChrisJ]

Look at the pimple at the lower centre on the comparison pictures on page 4 (post 51)[/QUOTE]

Oops. Stupid remark. Disregard

[tinmantis]

for what it's worth:
I have a EK2 spange planchet from this 'burnt hoard', and IMO it's 100% zimmerman
I had never seen another, and I took all comparisons to an extremely rare mm'd zimmerman EK1 spange I'd seen years before. The design was unmistakeable, and extremely crisp strike
rare as hell, and IMO totally original
regards
jon

[Robert T.]

Niemann Swords Set

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...t=godet+swords

Same high and narrow dots, crisp details, wide weld joints between the oaks and swords.... was described as being the cleanest set ever seen....

"Again, it might be the picture but I just cannot really find the typical fingerprints of original swords, Type 900 21 made by Godet. But that could be the reflection of the extremely polished and cleaned set...." D. Maerz

Was the Niemann Swords Set also retrieved from the bombed Zimmermann factory and had to be exessively cleaned?

[Robert T.]

More comparisons...

Robert

[streptile]

For me, personally, I have very little doubt this stuff comes from the Zimmermann factory fire. I know of multiple lots from this same fire, and all of them lend credence to the story in one way or another. I can add some details (and even photos) later, and explain more fully, but -- to me -- I don't doubt this stuff comes from that lot, and that Zimmermann supplied Gebr. Godet with pre-marked EK2s, EK1s, RKs, and even some other orders and decorations that Godet is famous for "making" during the Third Reich, such as Red Cross decorations and German Eagle Orders. I think this is not widely known at present, but I believe it to be true with near certainty and I can offer some evidence given a bit of time later this week.

I don't have an opinion about the construction of the swords, as I don't own a set and never considered the subject.

HERE is an old thread, by the way, which I will have to update with some information I've gathered over the past two years. As may be seen there, it was believed already some years ago that "21" marked OL and OLS sets were found in the lot.

[Robert T.]

The "900" from the sheared set compared to the Niemann set.

[Leroy]

Robert - Thanks for the link to that thread (which I remember now). In that one, a set of Oakleaves was involved, as well as a set of Oakleaves & Swords. Dietrich pointed out that the Oakleaves portion of the Swords set shown there did not match the normal Godet Oakleaves. He said "...Also, I have not seen 900 21 oaks which do not really show the fingerprints of the genuine 900 21 oaks. Either the picture is completely misleading or Godet had another die ..."

Trevor - Thanks for that link, too. I know the work you have been doing on Godet, which is groundbreaking in many ways.

It would seem that either we have pure fakes or another set of dies. There is no middle ground.

[Dietrich Maerz]

I do not know what it is so important to quote me all over sudden but if it needs to be done, it should be correct. The quote below (in regards to the 2009 thread brought up):

... Dietrich pointed out that the Oakleaves portion of the Swords set shown there did not match the normal Godet Oakleaves. He said "...Also, I have not seen 900 21 oaks which do not really show the fingerprints of the genuine 900 21 oaks. Either the picture is completely misleading or Godet had another die ...

was NOT in regards to the Oaks and Swords posted above BUT in regards to the oaks in the thread (please read post 23 of the linked thread), which were deemed fake or at least nor 900-21 by most of the members taking part (including Leroy). Quoting the above remark from me has absolutely no connection to the Sword Set that was taken from that 2009 thread and posted here again.

Also, RT quotes me, too (quite out of context):

"Again, it might be the picture but I just cannot really find the typical fingerprints of original swords, Type 900 21 made by Godet. But that could be the reflection of the extremely polished and cleaned set...." D. Maerz

To put that quote right below this remark from him: ".... was described as being the cleanest set ever seen...." could be construed that I insisted also over the next 100 total posts of the very long thread that I am or was of the opinion that the Sword set he copied to this thread from the old thread was a fake despite the whole world agreed that it was not (Also the wording "cleanest" was not used in the context of "textbook" but rather in the sense of "most cleaned ever". But that is just another irrelevant misquote). He forgets to mention, knowingly or unknowingly I do not know, that I made very clear that the Sword set is real and that it was extremely cleaned. Sadly he missed my ironic point of the "two dies" which I used to draw out Mr. Niemann to make a comment since he was the one offering both for sale with the usual stories attached. Niemann posted and that was not helpful. But I contribute the missing by RT of the finer points of the thread to my bad English.

He could have quoted me from that thread with : "Does that mean that Schoerners swords are cleaned in the same way? The swords seem to be OK otherwise." but elected not to. Well, c'est la vie!

I would also like to say this, since it seems the thread is now tackling the question whether the clipped Sword Set is good or not: At no place in this thread have I voiced any opinion about that set! Not one single word! And I still don't!

All I have contributed so far (apart from the logic questions which are not allowed to ask since they are deemed fun spoilers) is that IMHO the unfinished planchets of the swords (NOT the Sword Set!!!) are not typical Godet - an opinion that has so far been agreed to by Chris and Leroy and seems to be off the table.

Since this is a long post I like to put a short synopsis at the end so I will not be misquoted again:

- my quote Leroy posted was not made in regards to the sword brought up from the old thread
- it is clear as it can be that in the old thread I deemed the Swords original.
- I have not said anything regarding the "clipped" set
- I am of the opinion the planchets are not Godet and I am not alone ...

Sorry for the long posting.

[Robert T.]

Also, RT quotes me, too (quite out of context):

To put that quote right below this remark from him: ".... was described as being the cleanest set ever seen...."

To Dietrich,

The remark was based on this quote by andrewb:

(WOW! Those oaks/swords are the cleanest set I've ever seen. Either they were made yesterday or someone has given them a very good polish.

Regards,
AB. )

___________________
To Trevor,

Thanks for the excellent link!

Robert

[Leroy]

Dietrich - You are exactly correct regarding the quote. I mixed it up and I apologize. What you clearly said in the other thread was that the Oakleaves posted there, marked 900-21, did not match known samples of Godet Oakleaves and that they could be real only if Godet had "a second die" (and it was clear that you did not believe that to be the case).

I must say, however, that your approval of the Oakleaves and Swords set in that other thread leaves me confused now that we see the swords from that set compared to the multiple swords sets exhibited in this current thread (which you have said do not include the "fingerprints" of Godet swords). Tom Durante earlier compared here, unfavorablty, the positioning of the "dots" in the crossguard in the currently shown multiple sets to the positioning of the dots in a known Godet set (a "fingerprint"). In the photo of the Godet Swords set from that older thread (now posted here in this thread for the first time by Robert) the dots in the multiple sets seem to be positioned the same as in the Godet Swords set from that older thread. Seeing that now (but still being unable to see the "lateral lines" in the crossguards from a standard Godet set reflected in the multiple sets shown here) I am pushed further towards the idea of not identical, but sister, dies at work here. In essence, I am now wondering if the disputed Oakleaves in the older thread come from a "sister die" to the oakleaves used in the accepted Oakleaves and Swords set from that older thread, while the swords used in the disputed sets here come from a "sister die" to the swords used in that same accepted set of Oakleaves and Swords.

To me (even though I still sincerely apologize for the quoting error on my part) the principle remains the same: the only way the swords posted here could be real is if there was, in fact, "a second die".

You also noted that: "I would also like to say this, since it seems the thread is now tackling the question whether the clipped Sword Set is good or not: At no place in this thread have I voiced any opinion about that set! Not one single word! And I still don't!" Actually (after you had said that the swords posted in this thread did not match Godet), I posted a photo of the "clipped set" of Oakleaves and Swords and asked you if you thought it was a fake, put together with other items from the Zimmermann fire grouping. In response, you said "Again, now I was talking about the two-sided stamped sword set ( no capital letters) Not about the Sword set ... " To me, that was an implied statement that you thought the "clipped Sword Set" (note use of capital letters by you) could be, or actually was, real. I must have misunderstood (although I don't think so).)