Unmarked SS Hat Skull

[Bob Hritz]

Here is one that I believe is 100% authentic and early. It is made of tombak and silver plated. The reverse is devoid of any marks, but it sure looks like the 52 marked variety.

Your learned opinions please.

Bob Hritz

[Bob Hritz]

Verso: unmatked SS hat skull.

Bob Hritz

[SSgentleman]

it exhibits the traits of an original skull. early RZM 52 tombak is rare. however need a hands on examination for confirmation also could i check with collectors with RZM 52 skull, is your prong end in sharp angled or flat?

[sgstandard]

Skull

I don't know if this helps....

[sgstandard]

Skull

Reverse..

[Bob Hritz]

I am not comparing it to the later M1/52, but to the very early 52 (ONLY) marked deschler skull. They are completely different dies. Plus, the posted M1/52 skull appears to be CupAl, not tombak.

bob Hritz

[SSgentleman]

nice cupal M1/52 skull i think Bob is referring to the earlier 1934tombak RZM 52 marked skulls

[Bob Hritz]

Yes, I was comparing it to this tombak type of 52 marked skull. Unfortunately, this example does not have prongs remaining.

Bob Hritz

[Bob Hritz]

Verso: 52 marked tombak skull.

Bob Hritz

[Sayle F]

52

Here is one but the 52 is marked in the bottom corner.

[Sayle F]

52

back

[Robin Lumsden]

Bob.

I also think that your unmarked skull is a good one.

However, I don't think it's a Deschler. It's different from the early '52' marked TK I have. Mine is also marked with the '52' in the bottom corner, like 'SayleF's. It is in silvered brass, not tombak. The die type is different from yours. I can't post a picture just now, but it is very much more similar to the standard 'M1/52' type than it is to the one at the top of the thread.

Whoever made your skull, I like it a lot.

[Fritz]

A while back I have asked a forum member which I think of as knowledgable with these and he liked it. I think it's a early unmarked deschler.

Cheers

Fritz

[Fritz]

reverse

[bwanek1]

Since I had never had the chance to examine one of these "unmarked Deschlers" firsthand, at my request (and at his expense), Mr. Hritz kindly shipped me the skull which started this thread some months ago, so that I could get a thorough look. I am truly sorry, for not repaying his kindness by immediately explaining my conclusions. I meant to start a thread on it, in which I explained my thoughts to everyone and solicited other opinions, but I kept putting it off for one reason or another, and I eventually forgot about it entirely. Please accept my apology, Bob.

OK, getting past my contrition, here is what I think:

I do believe that this skull is original Third Reich, but I believe that the maker is unknown. I see no reason whatsoever to conclude that this skull was made by Deschler. This style is often referred to as an "unmarked Deschler," because of several similarities in design and construction with early Deschlers, like the 52-marked style, but there are several design characteristics which all other Deschlers display, including the early ones, which are absent in this skull. Conversely, there are some very unique characteristics on this style which are found on none of the other Deschler styles.

I will elaborate more fully later (soon, I promise, Bob), including some side-by-side photo comparisons I had worked on, but that is it in a nutshell for now.

Best,
Brad