Two NS Bread Plates - Cultural Items

[dragnet]

You are missing the point as well.
Look closely at the lid of that 1944 dated chest - it has been denazified:

In each corner of the lid there were initially four runic symbols made of wrought iron situated which were significant parts of the iconographical decoration and therefore ideological message of that chest.

Among them the doubled Sigrune - it is clearly a wooden SS cultural piece.

Thats interesting, perhpas Dedman can post some close shots of the de-nazified corners you mention, from the pics provided i cannot make out any holes were these metal corner plates were held to the wood, perhaps filled and sanded??

[Thorsten B.]

Thats interesting, perhpas Dedman can post some close shots of the de-nazified corners you mention, from the pics provided i cannot make out any holes were these metal corner plates were held to the wood, perhaps filled and sanded??

There were four round wrought iron made circles with runic symbols in them - one in each corner and each with a different runic symbol in it´s circle among them the doubled Sigrune.

Although these four symbols have been removed from the lid the wrought iron left "shadows" on the surface of the wood and therefore the lid.

By closely looking at the two pics he shared the circle with - or better: the "shadow" it left after it´s removal - the doubled Sigrune can be detected in the corner at the bottom right.

[dragnet]

There were four round wrought iron made circles with runic symbols in them - one in each corner and each with a different runic symbol in it´s circle among them the doubled Sigrune.

Although these four symbols have been removed from the lid the wrought iron left "shadows" on the surface of the wood and therefore the lid.

By closely looking at the two pics he shared the circle with - or better: the "shadow" it left after it´s removal - the doubled Sigrune can be detected in the corner at the bottom right.

Fair enough, can see the shadows, still be nice to see some close up shots of the corner areas, how were the symbols fixed to the wood

[Thorsten B.]

Fair enough, can see the shadows, still be nice to see some close up shots of the corner areas, how were the symbols fixed to the wood

Well, obviously with small wrought iron nails which did not leave big deep holes in the lid after being removed - yes, would be nice to see some close-ups.

[Minnesinger]

A photograph of a piece of furniture in a workshop does not provide any proof of a collector carving runes into a chest, it shows a piece of furniture, (not even the chest accused of being faked) in a workshop.

Believing the runes have been carved carved into the wood at a later date and implying Thorsten has done it is an extremely obtuse case of jumping to the wrong conclusion. Also wrong is the propagation of this nonsense.

This runic chest is not a unique piece, another German collector also owns an exactly similar piece and owned before Thorsten purchased his from Ebay. This lie perpetuated about carving runes is not only an attempt to cast doubts upon Thorsten's chest, it's a slight against another collector's property, in this case two owners.

I suspect I'm not the only one that does not believe the above nonsense. The chest was on the market before Thorsten owned it and it was complete with its runes. I found a picture I saved from the Ebay page, see below.

There is more to learn about these runic chests, they could well be historically important and period expression of the ideology of the period. I for one look forward to any further forthcoming information. They certainly don't deserve to be condemned or afflicted with doubt by such ruefully ignorant and incorrect comments.

Why not just come out and say you are the owner of the other chest then? Because it clearly says 'you have bought this item' and surely you are not posting it on behalf of someone else... Or did you sell it to Thorsten after buying it on Ebay? I can see why the price is blurred out then. Or, no, you say he got his from Ebay.

If I didn't know better I'd say you two are one and the same person. *Confused* Because let's face it. That blurred printscreen really doesn't prove a thing, especially with the post to go with it. Was it a "buy it now"? Whats to stop someone from doing some carving, putting it on Ebay and buying it themselves a second later from a separate account to give it provenance? I think both the buyer and sellers nicknames are of interest here to see if there is any other dealings in common between them.

[Michael Fay]

Here is a possible scenario:

Just like the latest frenzy of buying up non Nazi and non Gahr brooches in the hopes of creating /finding an argument that they are after cornering the market...
some people have been buying up these old wooden chests for cheap on various ebays and auctions...ostensibly as stand-ins for TR era displays but really to eventually have newly carved SS runes (or SS associated symbols/Zeichens) on them later ,
and voila....sell a few on the various ebays for "provenance" perhaps and everyone believes there is a new SS product for the groups hoping to have a SS chest for their perceived real Jul corner.
Bah, Hum bug.

[Michael Fay]

You are missing the point. Take the whole post to get the message, its a simple one. You take points out of context to make argument and it seems you have written a whole load of wishy washy babble for no other reason other than to twist what I said and imply something else for you to argue with me about. I didn't say what you are implying so I'm not wasting my time in responding to you.

Your desire for an argument does not negate the simple truth of my post and that is; the perpetuated accusation is that woodshop pictures equals Thorsten carving runes. My post shows he didn't. The runes were there before he owned it.

Nope , I refute all your wishful presuppositions above.
Are you going to sue me for disagreeing?
runes can be carved anytime even right before your pal bought the item (that you are harping on). Then if he sold it to you or anyone else... it proves nothing .
Changing hands does not prove any item is authentic.
What a unintelligent argument