Rk

[Dietrich Maerz]

OK, I will ask him. Thanks!

[Leroy]

In your research, you have never handled one of these type crosses before? You really need to see one?

IF that is the case, don't bother Andreas in Europe. I can bring you one of mine (no good photos available - I am a bad photographer) to go over at your table at the Max.

[Dietrich Maerz]

My S&L folder is full of B-Types (and also A-Types) and I am absolutely convinced that I have handled more than a few. I appreciate the opportunity to have a look at yours together with you! But it is not (at least for me) that they jump out as "Whoa, that must be a good one!" As you know from our many hours of discussions I am not looking for feelings or believes or opinions of other collectors, be they advanced or distinguished or pre-eminent, I am looking for tangeable proof for everybody to see and reproduce as a safe guideline for safe purchases.

Now that does not mean that I do not respect or listen to the countless collectors I have the pleasure to be connected with via e-mail, phone, and in direct conversation - in the USA, in Germany, and in other countries. I certainly do listen and I take it into consideration during the search for these tangeable identifiers. And you know that also very well.

So far I have not gotten any proof for me and it might very well be that there is none. What does that mean? Actually it only means that the collector community is still better off than 20 years ago at a time where "everything goes" was the general attitute. No need to buy any product which is not proven 100% (or at least 90%) or the collector knows about the controversy.

As of now I will never and I have never given a negative or positive written expertise to any of the non-"4" B-Types. Because I do not know in the sense of what I consider "knowing" for me. From what I have seen and have learned over the decades I would not feel good about it. That does not mean that the remainder of 8-9% which you consider "good" might not be good! They might very well be, but they might as well not be. Just as we agree that 90% are bad, I am not set with my believe on your last 8-9 %.

I am also not in the business to destroy any possibly good piece. To use a nice American term "I just don't give a damn!" I have no B-Type, I am not selling any crosses, I am not a dealer and I personally do not care what people think, wish, hope, or believe about the items they have.
I learned my lesson with the Rounder and all the stories of awarded crosses: taken from safes in Frankfurt, awarded in Stalingrad, awarded in Normandy, given only to LW-pilots and a lot of other fantasy stories which all turned out to be bogus! The only thing that counted in the end was hard, tangeable, scientific proof. And now we know. It was then when I learned that one cannot and should not try to "talk a piece into originality" (and I am not saying you do that!) and that it is far better to search for hard proof, based on the facts the piece itself tells or might tell.

If we cannot understand or don't want to understand what the pieces tell, we should wait and only spread what we really know, free from any story.

In this case, at least for me, I clearly say: "I do not know, but I am very sceptical!" If that is viewed as lack of being advanced, distinguished, pre-eminent or whatever, blame it on the dry engineer in me. For some people the sum of 2+2 is only a convention and depends on the overall circumstances or the agreement of a social group, for me it is 4.0 !

If somebody has a B-Type and an advanced collector tells him it is a good one, nothing is wrong with that. If he asks "Why" and he even gets an answer other than a conspirative smile or a "One clearly can see that!" - even better for him.

I continue the search for tangeable proof. But it is not my Number One priority in life. And I certainly don't want to spoil the fun for some or the good feeling serious research creates in all of us!

Dietrich

[90th Light]

Thank you for the reply Leroy,

what you have shared and this thread is proving very interesting.

Dietrich,

I understand your caution in this matter. It is one of commendable and reasonable prudence. Only recognise a gain or profit when it is beyond doubt but always account for a cost, loss or risk regardless.

However, how do these four Type B's with high finish, zinc cores and dent rows not constitute proof ?

1/ Bob Hritz Kitzingen US vet bring back
2/ Andreas Klein unissued one period purchased as a gift for a U-Boot officer
3/ Dietrich Peltz example with his paper tag attached
4/ Andreas Thies one from the estate of Oskar-Heinz (Heinrich) "Pritzl" Bär

Ever since Bob Hritz reported the veteran brought back example in his collection, three more have surfaced with a direct connection to the Germans who had them before or during May 1945. There are of course a few others in this league but these are the four where we have the direct known connection.

If a known veteran brought back example or other examples directly from German service personal estates does not constitute proof then what does ???

Chris

[sdesember]

Maybe it would be a good idea to clarify on which of the dies that could cause these dent rows, the negative or the positive die? And, what type of deformities, i,e., chipped die or cracked die surface that could cause these dent rows? If it were due to chipped surfaces on the positive die, maybe it would seem possible to smoothen out the deformity on the chipped die surface.

[Bob Hritz]

Bob, logic without prejudging would tell me that such a cross is earlier than one with less dents - or with less pronounced dents. But I really would like to see a very close photo. Had I ever had that cross in hand?

I will bring it to the MAX Show, for your hands on examination, my friend.

Bob Hritz

[Dietrich Maerz]

Thank you, Bob!

[Leroy]

Dietrich - Is the cross which started this thread wartime, in your opinion?