1936 Olympic Medal - Opinions on Observation

[John F.]

Hello, I purchased this 1936 Olympic Commemorative medal from another forum member and I was hoping to get some opinions of my observation for authenticity purposes. My concerns are several but I am not an expert on these medals, but do own one that I purchased from Detlev that i used for comparison.

The medal is marked #34 for Wilhel Annetsberger of Munich so I am not sure if these are known attributes of this maker. My concerns are:

- The thinness of the suspension ring
- Flat spots on the upper part of the of the lower Olympic rings
- The length of the eagles neck,
- The brake in the contour long the left wing
- Lack of details on the eagles legs, talons as well as the wreath
- The round balls on the ends of the numbers (1936)
- Although you can not tell by the pics the metal used in the production of this medal does not seem correct (if that make sense)

Your opinions on this medal and on my observations are needed.

Thanks,
John

[John F.]

Parade Mount. Ribbon does not glow.

[John F.]

Close-up of the obverse

[John F.]

Close-up of the reverse

[John F.]

#34 Makers Mark for Wilhel Annetsberger of Munich

[Darrell]

Hi John,

Not sure I've seen many variations on these, but here's mine to compare.

Obv.

[Darrell]

Rev:

[John F.]

Hi Darrell,

Thanks, yours is more similiar to mine then the one posted. Here is a pic of mine.


Best,
John

[byterock]

You might want to add to your list of bad points that the rings had three ridges which I do not see in this examples.

That being said it does look a little too good to be a simple cast perhaps a late strike when the die was worn out could explain the rings but then again the eagle does not look good at all and that cannot be explained away by a bad die.

What does the rim look like??

[DTS]

I'm sorry to say that I recently bought one of these myself (on a police medal bar), and that before doing so, I did a lot of research on all of the forums. Your medal, in my opinion, is a standard reproduction. The eagle's head alone gives it away, as does the final "E" in the word "verdienstvolle" on the back. Note how the horizontal lines on the "E" are all even, and end without any sort of a serif. Compare this to all originals, and you will immediately see the difference. Also, there should be a slight "wave" to the lines of the lettering on the back. Your's are completely straight. I don't have posting privileges, or I would show you.

I'm sure it's an honest mistake by the seller, but I believe you should ask for your money back.

My opinion only,

DTS

[Tom Yanacek]

Hello John,

Good observations on your part. I can only agree with the concerns you have about this medal. That is one strange looking bird. The head looks nothing like an eagle. Have you checked this one with a magnet? Most of the originals were die-stuck from iron and then silver-plated. Another cause for suspicion is the maker's mark. I have never seen an original with a maker's mark before. And above all else, this one just looks too new; as if it was made yesterday. Not one I would care to own.

Best regards,
Tom

[Gernika81]

I agree with Tom. I don't like it. The eagle is thin-headed and the details on the talons and the wings... too strange. What's more, the medal is too new... If I were you, I would get rid of it and get an original.

[byterock]

One or two more quick observations.

On the 'FUR' on the obverse there is a line through the umlaut. On all originals I have see the umlaut is two very distinct dots.

As well all the 'E' on this item are even while on orginals the middle line of the 'E' is long.

All in all a sure thing for the fakes gallery

[Gernika81]

Good point byterock. I would also add the perfect alingment of the text, compared to the irregularity of the text of the original Olympia medals.

[John F.]

Gentlemen,

Thank you for time, efforts ,and comments.

The seller is a honorable/honest person and is making this issue right.

Thanks again for your help!
John