Announcement

**Jon. H** · 12-07-2009, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by NickG View Post

**wewelsburg** · 12-07-2009, 02:21 PM

Nick you could make the eagle a bat too!!

**NickG** · 12-07-2009, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by wewelsburg View Post

Nick you could make the eagle a bat too!!

Now why didn't I think of that!

Attached Files

70078_2_lg-private-purchase-ss-panzer-sidecap.jpg (20.6 KB, 246 views)

**AFF96** · 12-07-2009, 05:25 PM

Originally posted by NickG View Post

Now why didn't I think of that!

You guys are great.

A true artist!!

**sgstandard** · 12-07-2009, 05:32 PM

Cap

FELIX: "When collecting Third Reich and particularly SS, you need to prove that an item is original and not the other way around." I have no dog in this fight, but FELIX's basic assertions are flawed. Without ironclad provenance, originality is based on comparisons to other known originals. If the item does not match other originals in material and construction, it is often considered to be a poor risk of being original. The inability to prove something is original, is, in effect, proving it is likely to be fake. And why the SS in particular? The same rules would apply to SA, Political, HJ, etc. Or vintage Barbies, for those SS collectors with a softer, more effeminate side.

**Matthew S.** · 12-07-2009, 05:40 PM

You people must be mad! Thats a pefect specimen of the rare "Lhasa Apso" TK variant.

**Matthew S.** · 12-07-2009, 05:40 PM

P.S. Check out this "jewel", among many others...

http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/6823675

**Felix** · 12-07-2009, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by sgstandard View Post

FELIX: "When collecting Third Reich and particularly SS, you need to prove that an item is original and not the other way around." I have no dog in this fight, but FELIX's basic assertions are flawed. Without ironclad provenance, originality is based on comparisons to other known originals. If the item does not match other originals in material and construction, it is often considered to be a poor risk of being original. The inability to prove something is original, is, in effect, proving it is likely to be fake. And why the SS in particular? The same rules would apply to SA, Political, HJ, etc. Or vintage Barbies, for those SS collectors with a softer, more effeminate side.

Hello!
Actually my logic is not flawed at all. On the contrary my logic is very sound. I think you have misunderstood a few things and I would therefore like to clarify and I hope you will understand. I am sorry if I caused confusion.
What you did was to take a phrase out of its context and misinterpret it. Or, as I read it you actually agree with me. Let me clarify:

Regarding the above sentence; "When collecting Third Reich and particularly SS, you need to prove that an item is original and not the other way around."
To prove that an item is original means that you can not come and claim any item is original without prof. You have to show why. That is most often done by comparing it to know originals, and checking for known accepted traits of originality. Prof is in the pictures is many cases, or if you can handle in real life.
And put it into a context if someone tells you that you have to prove an item is fake. It simply does not work like that about third reich militaria.
Imagine like this; You ask a dealer about that item you are interested and have seen on a web page. You e-mail him with questions because you are not sure it is original and you want to find out more. What if the dealer answers you; prove it is a fake! You would probably have answered him; No, it is you who should prove to me it is an original.

I advise that one use extra caution when collection SS militaria because it is one of the most faked areas of third reich. (naturally that goes for other areas as well, but extra caution when SS)

I have to say I am a bit surprised that you misunderstod me, or what ever you did. I mean not to insult you, but to clarify.

Sound advice;
Items must be proven to be original. Just because you can not prove that an item is fake, that will not make it original. You must be able to validate it against known original patterns and show that it is within the frames.

Cheers,
Felix

**sgstandard** · 12-07-2009, 07:28 PM

Cap

It's just symantics. Proving something is original is... proving it's not fake. Proving something is fake...is proving it's not original. The result is the same, whichever way you say it. There are only 5 descriptions possible: 1.Fake 2.Not original 3. Original 4.Not fake 5.Undetermined. Try not to be blinded by my brilliance.

**Felix** · 12-07-2009, 07:45 PM

Originally posted by sgstandard View Post

It's just symantics. Proving something is original is... proving it's not fake. Proving something is fake...is proving it's not original. The result is the same, whichever way you say it. There are only 5 descriptions possible: 1.Fake 2.Not original 3. Original 4.Not fake 5.Undetermined. Try not to be blinded by my brilliance.

Ok, I will try not to be blinded.

If you believe you are correct, I think you should follow your own rules and advice.

Good luck with your collecting.

Cheers
//Felix

**wewelsburg** · 12-07-2009, 07:53 PM

I love it Nick!!!

**TonyS** · 12-07-2009, 11:55 PM

Originally posted by sgstandard View Post

It's just symantics. Proving something is original is... proving it's not fake. Proving something is fake...is proving it's not original. The result is the same, whichever way you say it. There are only 5 descriptions possible: 1.Fake 2.Not original 3. Original 4.Not fake 5.Undetermined. Try not to be blinded by my brilliance.

Sorry wrong answer.

Here's the burden of proof explained - again......maybe Gary needs to pin this damn thing so I don't have to keep posting it all the time

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w

ontVertAlignCellWithSp/> <w

ontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/> <w

ontVertAlignInTxbx/> <w:Word11KerningPairs/> <w:CachedColBalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="******45;-"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style>  </style>"It is not up to the skeptic to prove a negative. NOT to get into religion here (I'm JUST using this argument as a logical example!), but it's like the old believer's argument against skeptics, "Well, prove there ISN'T a god" or "prove magic doesn't exist", "prove there aren't UFOs visiting Earth", etc., when the burden of proof isn't on the skeptic to begin with.

First, it is nearly impossible to prove that something doesn't exist, no matter how unlikely or unrealistic the the claim. Secondly , the atheist isn't the one making the claim that bizarre untestable forces are tinkering with the natural world, and it isn't up to him to prove otherwise.

Likewise, the skeptic who says such a 3rd Reich-themed item is likely a fake isn't the one claiming that an undocumented, typically unapproved image is the real article.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. That said, it is on the shoulders of the person who is trying to demonstrate that an item IS original to make the case that the item was made during the war, not the other way around. To approach this hobby otherwise is to end up with a huge collection of fakes."

**Military** · 12-08-2009, 06:01 AM

Had some free time and I thought i might as well do some thinking...

**Ian Hulley** · 12-08-2009, 06:15 AM

I'd ditch the 'Museum Example' if I were you. Most are just storehouses of repro crap which they show as either 'representative examples' or they just don't know the difference. Many have long since sold off any good items to fund displays or flogged them out the back door for personal profit.

Ian.

**sturmbannfuhrer** · 12-08-2009, 06:43 AM

An interesting thread....

leaving everthing else mentioned well alone, if you know your erel's you will probably be thinking a cap this early would most probably contain the Robert Lubstein name maker's mark instead of the EREL diamond shoved in this one.

bad outer, bad inner, what I have seen to be a generic fake Latvian Sweatband... A real piece of junk.

J T

Announcement

Leibstandarte summer dress cap - dachau

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread