Combined P/O with Diamonds, GFM Sperrle

[Pieter Verbruggen]

The badge just does not warm my heart, as it should.

Bob Hritz

...and that's not because it's freezing outside hé Bob... ....
Pieter.

[Sal Williams]

You guys seem to know something about this.... can you elaborate please? Also does anyone know what the "provenonce' was/is on this piece?

Thanks, Sal

[ChrisJ]

Baton

You guys seem to know something about this.... can you elaborate please? Also does anyone know what the "provenonce' was/is on this piece?

Thanks, Sal

Well, Sal...as usual, this thread will probably sink into inuendo and disinformation, with the perpetrators not being prepared to make clear statements (why is that I wonder ?)

My understanding, (but I might be wrong) is that the piece came the same source as Sperrle's baton (here is a picture)....and the following statement was made by the dealer currently dealing with it ~

quote:

The question of ownership of what is considered war booty has been decided in favor of the present owner in litigation; however, discussion as to the finding and purchase of this very great historical treasure will have to, for the most part, unfortunately remain unanswered at this time.

unquote

Bob/Pieter if you believe this piece to be either (1) fake, and/or (2) not Sperrle's then please tell us why. I for one, would be fascinated.

Thanks.

[willy]

This prelim baton has been discussed on this forum before and several issues came up that didn't conform to another baton made at the same time.

[ChrisJ]

This prelim baton has been discussed on this forum before and several issues came up that didn't conform to another baton made at the same time.

Thanks for the input Willy, ....and yes, I was aware of this (and merely fishing).

...but in regard to the PO Badge, it does conform (as does the case) and it carries a COA from a very reputable and respected authority.

But OK...over to you Bob & Pieter... .

[Pieter Verbruggen]

Doesn't trouble me a bit! But please explain why it troubles you.

...they all came in these cases, the only reason for the different style of badges is the "search" of the jewelers to make a construction to the badge that would give the "best" effect to the diamonds....nothing more nothing less.
Pieter.

[Sal Williams]

Thanks for the input Willy, ....and yes, I was aware of this (and merely fishing).

...but in regard to the PO Badge, it does conform (as does the case) and it carries a COA from a very reputable and respected authority.

But OK...over to you Bob & Pieter... .

Hi Chris, who is the COA from?

Best, Sal

[Sal Williams]

...they all came in these cases, the only reason for the different style of badges is the "search" of the jewlers to make a construction to the badge that would give the "best" effect to the diamonds....nothing more nothing less.
Pieter.

Hi Pieter, are you saying the maker of the different types is the same maker?

Best, Sal

[Sal Williams]

Boy , you guys sure play it close to the hip!

[Pieter Verbruggen]

Hi Pieter, are you saying the maker of the different types is the same maker?

Best, Sal

...same jeweler I do not know, but I think it was the same company, and NOT in Austria but in Germany, as Dietrich mentioned.
Pieter.

[Pieter Verbruggen]

Boy , you guys sure play it close to the hip!

...this is not a "ost" medaille, you know
Pieter.

[ChrisJ]

Thanks

Thank you Pieter....I know that you dont like to be drawn...but this is important and I (for one) appreciate your input.

Your reasoning would explain why the von Richthoften and R. von Griem & Harlinghausen are the same type. But I beg to differ (ever so slightly). I feel that these badges were ordered in "lots"....and from Berlin. Who got what was the luck of the drawn to an extent...but there is a timeline beginning to appear.

The type that is the subject of this thread would appear to be an early example.

Gentlemen, I think that we are moving on from the nieve theory that the only original pieces are the Hartman type, as has been muted by a well known "authority."

Pieter, you and I both know this is not the case.

To repeat some corrections of often stated "facts"... the diamonds are not "Rose Cut" and all the nonsense that has been written and posted about this. They are "8 cut". The makers were in Berlin and not Vienna, and the "little secret's" do not refer to a postal area ! (what ever, next one might reasonably ask ?).

The orignals are fabulous creatures. Thats why I'm so passionate on the subject !

OK...I'll shut up now, I've had my say, and I thanks you all for staying so far.

Chris

[Pieter Verbruggen]

Thank you Pieter....I know that you dont like to be drawn...but this is important and I (for one) appreciate your input.

Your reasoning would explain why the von Richthoften and R. von Griem & Harlinghausen are the same type. But I beg to differ (ever so slightly). I feel that these badges were ordered in "lots"....and from Berlin. Who got what was the luck of the drawn to an extent...but there is a timeline beginning to appear.

The type that is the subject of this thread would appear to be an early example.

Gentlemen, I think that we are moving on from the nieve theory that the only original pieces are the Hartman type, as has been muted by a well known "authority."

Pieter, you and I both know this is not the case.

To repeat some corrections of often stated "facts"... the diamonds are not "Rose Cut" and all the nonsense that has been written and posted about this. They are "8 cut". The makers were in Berlin and not Vienna, and the "little secret's" do not refer to a postal area ! (what ever, next one might reasonably ask ?).

The orignals are fabulous creatures. Thats why I'm so passionate on the subject !

OK...I'll shut up now, I've had my say, and I thanks you all for staying so far.

Chris

...this is absolutely NOT so, sure the Hartmann piece is 100% original but so is the Harlinghausen piece (wich to my knowledge is still with the family, for the "forumers" a better PROOF you cannot get, the Hartmann one is in a collection).
The Harlinghausen piece is the same style as the Dietrich Pelz and Werner Baumbach PO with minor differences ,but the same style (btw all three in the same case!...ooops for 97% ).
Pretending the Hartmann piece is the only real one, that I call misleading information...although the Hartmann piece is to me one of the best "named" ones! But that's something else.
Than you can say that the Hartmann platinum diamonds are also the "only" real ones...and this would make the Rudel ones fake because they are NOT the same...please can we leave it here?
Pieter.

[ChrisJ]

...this is absolutely NOT so, sure the Hartmann piece is 100% original but so is the Harlinghausen piece (wich to my knowledge is still with the family, for the "forumers" a better PROOF you cannot get, the Hartmann one is in a collection).
The Harlinghausen piece is the same style as the Dietrich Pelz and Werner Baumbach PO with minor differences ,but the same style (btw all three in the same case!...ooops for 97% ).
Pretending the Hartmann piece is the only real one, that I call misleading information...although the Hartmann piece is to me one of the best "named" ones! But that's something else.
Than you can say that the Hartmann platinum diamonds are also the "only" real ones...and this would make the Rudel ones fake because they are NOT the same...please can we leave it here?
Pieter.

Indeed we can...but would you care to give an opinion on the Sperrle piece before we both go ?

(Thanks in advance)

[Sal Williams]

...same jeweler I do not know, but I think it was the same company, and NOT in Austria but in Germany, as Dietrich mentioned.
Pieter.

Thank you Pieter!

Best, Sal