On top in both pictures is the one I have had in my collection for years, as you can see it is much smaller than the one I received this week.
-
-
Soup Toureens
On the right is the one I have had in my collection for years, on the left is the one I just got. Note the fact that the latest one I have bought has no makers mark and no date. -
Soup Toureens
Hello Forum members, I got a Navy Soup toureen and it has no makers trademark or date on the bottom. I have had many pieces like this, probably over 1000 pieces of tableware in my lifetime and never seen a piece that did not have a date on it.
Has any one else seen this, also the size of it is much larger than the few Navy soup bowls I have ever had. I am not so worried about the size, just the date and makers mark not being on it.
My question is, has any one else seen a piece like this ? Is someone finally making fakes of this stuff. I have seen the SS Allach faked but not the regular stuff. And it might be a new thing to watch out for.
Jack
Comment
-
Last summer i saw the same Km bowl on a flew market i thought it was not that thick porcelain that you usually see if you take a textbook piece these specimens are thick and heavy this one was surely not. I had strange feelings about these creations so i let it goComment
-
Interesting....Brought this example to mind that was brought into my shop a few years ago....supposedly a yard sale find. Large size, although I don't have it in hand in order to measure it. Nicely marked as you'll see. Safe to assume that this is either standard "Wehrmacht" type or were these also used by political entities? Thanks for any feedback.Comment
-
Soup Bowl
Milton, I have always assumed these were used at Heer training centers and offices Mine is not lightweight , (the one without the date) it is full size and weight. Any one seen anything like it ????????????
JackComment
-
Hi Jack, No, sorry to say, but then again, my example is the first I’ve ever landed so don’t have anything else to compare it to. Mine is relatively heavy as well.Comment
-
They were for use by all members of the armed forces in the barracks canteens not just for officers.
I have had many items of Luftwaffe china that did not have any dates, I am assuming it was a money saving exercise.
As for the size diffrence this is to be expected when slipware items are made by different companies even though they should be the same. The 1942 dated one you have is also probably lighter due to the use of less slip in the contruction. Other signs of late war manufacture would include uneven rims, discolouration etc etcComment
-
Not just for officers
Comment
-
Soup Bowl
Hello All, I did not say officers, I said training camps and offices, I meant office workers. I was trying to make sure the novice did not think they were used in the field. I am sure they were used in factories. So it is good to find that some one else has seen them without dates. I am sure I have had at least 1000 pieces and never one without a maker and year marking. JackComment
-
Serves me right for speed reading and I even read it twice!!!
Normally they were not used in the field but the photo I posted seems to show this. Training picture maybe?
I was very surprised myself when I found the undated Luftwaffe plates last year. By weighing them against my dated pre war and then my dated mid war peices, I deduced that they must be late war. They were much lighter and the rims were not quite flat (turned upside down they wobble)
I am sure they were not rejects because there were 300 of them.Last edited by David Fettes; 01-20-2015, 02:25 PM.Comment
-
Soup Bowl
David, While my scales are not exact, the weight of the larger one I was questioning is about the same as the Luftwaffe pair I have and also about the same as a Police side and bottom marked one I have with a lid. I screwed up and left this out of my info, the smaller ones I have seen in pictures and in the movie Das Boot, used in u-boats and ships. So the weight of the one without the maker mark is about the same weight. I was not questioning the smaller one, I know it is right. Thanks for the help. Jack
Comment
Comment