Announcement

**erikq** · 09-22-2015, 03:28 PM

Yes it is fake...

**SScollector** · 09-22-2015, 05:48 PM

**rzzzm** · 09-22-2015, 07:01 PM

shame..

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=798639

**PaulMann** · 09-22-2015, 07:58 PM

fake tk

"POR"..indeed

cheers,
Pauli

**Raymond270** · 09-23-2015, 02:28 AM

Is it just the nostril that is bad? To me it looks like it was somewhat damaged.

Thank you.

**Ian Hulley** · 09-23-2015, 03:23 AM

Originally posted by PaulMann View Post

"POR"..indeed

More like "POS"

Ian

**Martin Stiles** · 09-23-2015, 05:20 AM

Ges Gesch M1/17

There was a time when both M1/17 Eagles and skulls , were not accepted as original, below I quote JPR from the 2003 thread regarding the Assmann, Ges.Gesch, M1/17 debate. Now M1/17 on an eagle is accepted as an original marking, some of the pioneering work indeed done by self, the skull I have listed on my site is the second I have had since 2003, the first was on a visor cap, please take time an study the details, the item ia clearly Die struck and is multi-layered, also observe the pin 'clamps' precision engineering, to tool up and manufacture these post war would in no way be cost effective, clearly the skull design of this example is the same as the skull commonly marked Ges.Gesch. attributed for use by Assmann, of course M1/17 is the Assmann RZM code.
I have seen many of what I consider reproductions, of M1/17 skulls, which have been poorly produced, some with many flaws, and dodgy pin attachments, others more convincing, all adding to collector dismisal of M1/17 as a period marking, at last I am able to present an original Assmann M1/17 Skull.

JPR. Many collectors still "assume" there is no original Assmann marked M1/17. Could be (it is not my field), even if it does not makes sense at all from a logical point of view, but yet, it is also based on "assumption", no strict evidence. Maybe there is some originals, but like the fake 155/36 they are seldom seen.t would be surprising, even if possible, that Assmann stayed out of SS supplies for too long

JPR I am sorry if I did not also repeat some other parts of my previous posts, like this one: “Second, we also have to keep in mind Assmann was not only a maker but also a huge wholesaler. In his catalogs there is items he never produced himself, but just selling from others.” But once it is written I am supposed to do not repeat it over and over within the same thread. One has just to re-read the full thread which could be easily done.
I also have to ask many collectors, who are using the English language as their main language to forgive me for my text, but my own main language is French and even if I try my best to write in English it is still no perfect and sometimes I can appear un-clear. Please keep also in mind that writing some text in English which would take 10 minutes for“English speaking persons” takes an hour for me, and this without adding time to verify the information to post it the most accurate as possible.
But in this case, my words are very clear: “it confirms the Assmann SS eagle was INTRODUCED in 1936”. The other sentences (above in my original post) which are including other Assmann numbers are in the form: “…introduced (started in production) in 1936”. You will note the text within the parenthesis, text absent from the last sentence (referring to Assmann SS eagle). This was due, and looked to me logical, since we have evidence of “production” by Assmann for items 24065 and item 24250, but no evidence of “production” for item 24096. This item is listed in the Assmann catalog, and bears number 24096, so it was “introduced” by 1936, it is a FACT, but no indication whatsoever could certify it was “produced” by Assmann, and not “sold” by him. The only certified information you or anyone (at least within people sharing this thread – including myself) have is that Assmann HAD AVAILABLE FOR HIS CUSTOMERS A SS CAP EAGLE BY 1936, period! Even if I am going to supply a photo of the original catalog (what apparently you do not have since you did not have photo of the re-print neither – sorry if I still did not sent it to you but I do not recall everything people are asking me to do for them) it will ONLY show the front of this SS eagle, which will not provide ANY evidence as if it is marked RZM 155/36 SS,M1/17 or whatever else (including M1/xx with xx could be 24, 72, etc… if item is moved)!!

Of course, it is more logical to “assume” (but I let others to “assume” – I prefer rely on evidence) that such huge maker would have “produced” his own production, and not moving for someone else. But in such case could someone explain to me why there is so few “original” marked RZM 155/36 SS” SS cap eagles available and why there is numerous “fake” marked M1/17? Based on the posted list – I am using nothing else and I understood this list was for skulls only but could be, without guarantee, a reflect on what available for SS cap eagles – except for 155/36 there is NO OTHER RZM/SS contract numbers listed as original before 1942 but instead RZM numbers like M1/24, M1/52 or M1/72 are widely available. So, I am sorry to disappoint some, but there were some regulations sets by the RZM and/or RF-SS authorities which had to be followed. Just read the March, 23rd 1934 order (available in English also – one has just to spend time and find it) and it is very clear how makers and wholesalers of SS items will be prosecuted if their were not complying to written orders! So, if you agree that M1/72, M1/24 and M1/52 are original markings (and I agree they are), nobody can certify M1/17 been not also an original marking as long there is no document proving Assmann was denied to use this number for SS cap eagles!
So, in summary for some, Assmann is a huge maker, has an item listed under number 24096, list it in his catalog still by 1939 and is “producing” it, but we are not able to find any? Where is common sense? Are we “assuming” all his production was marked RZM 155/36 SS, based on just a close up photo? No 155/37, 155/38, 155/39, etc…? For the records, and it is backed up by original documents as well (sorry but I am not a quick search engine so interested persons could easily find it), one maker could not “produce/make/manufacture” an SS item if an order was not received. Furthermore, such maker with such order was not allowed to produce more than what was initially ordered. Wholesalers had to comply with some restricted regulations as well. This rule was enforced from March 1934 to December 1943 to the best of the documentation available as of today. So, if “logically” Assmann could produce by 1936, “logically” could use the marking RZM 155/36 SS, at least “certainly” he could not supply more than what was produced during this year. So, there is one thing I agree, is that SS cap eagles marked RZM 155/36 SS (IF original - once more, I “assume” and sincerely hope they are) are rare since produced only in 1936, but I do not agree it was the end of the Assmann production. The wholesale input was just to bring another possibility backed up by original documents, but “logically” the use of M1/17 is more appropriate, without any guarantee as long no evidence is available but at least supported by no 155/37, 155/38, etc… available and many other M1/xx numbers attributed. In this case, I am like Gary but just on another end, but I respect and understand his position since he follows his own knowledge based on his own personal experience of original items.

I still do not understand your anger toward some persons since so far nobody made criticism of your contribution to this hobby, or discredit the content of the posted list. It was just logical to comment it since we soon found out some inputs were not backed up by “evidence”, and reader has to be aware of such. If this thread reached 2500 hits so far there is a reason and this is positive IMHO.

If we are talking about “evidence” and “evidence” ONLY, let’s try to prove, or at least find out (at least):
a) what is behind the SS eagle listed in all Assmann’s catalogs as item 24096 (looking the page behind does not bring anything – you can safely believe me)
b) If Assmann received his number 155 by 1936
c) If number 155 is legitimate, why he did not use it by 1937 and after
d) If numbers in the form M1/xx are valid numbers for an extended period of time and for other smaller makers, why M1/17 could not be valid as well
e) Evidence Assmann NEVER produced SS cap eagles marked M1/17
f) A photo showing at least a complete ORIGINAL eagle marked RZM 155/36 SS (front and back view)
g) Know at least if one of those 155/36 marked eagles can be safely tracked to WWII origin (vet pickup, ground dug, etc…)
h) Etc…

So, if we are talking strictly about "evidence" and we want to pass on assumption which is the Mother of all screw-ups, we need to open our eyes and continue to provide the 2500 readers something reliable.

Until further “evidence”, and this is my own “assumption”, Assmann “produced/make/manufactured” some of his first SS cap eagles marked RZM 155/36 SS (note I said “some”, not “all”) and produced later eagles marked, like competitors, M1/17 to comply to regulations.
Even if another “possibility”, based on a mix of original documentation and the relying on the current posted list (taking it as granted, so ignoring it is not carved in stone) could still be Assmann “produced/make/manufactured” some of his first SS cap eagles marked RZM 155/36 SS and later re-sale someone else production, I do not believe this one – but it CAN NOT be rejected neither.
The one which could be safely rejected (and yet it is still an “assumption”) is Assmann “producing/making/manufacturing” his first SS cap eagles marked RZM 155/36 SS and forgiving all about SS cap eagles later.

I hope this time I have been clear and I will kindly ask others to provide some unknown “evidence” if we want to go further.
I will also ask members do not contact me off line for copies of the original documents stated above since they are all readily available, and this since many years

**SScollector** · 09-23-2015, 01:58 PM

The reason these are fake, is because the front strike on these skulls perfectly matches the well known "360/380" marked fakes, (not Assmann's pattern).

Chris

**Martin Stiles** · 09-23-2015, 04:13 PM

Aware

Chris, I am perfectly aware of the 80's Austrian attributed fakes that you refer to,
indeed the face side is near identical, however the key is not the front, it is the rear
of the skull that is all so important, as in all cases of metal insignia, please make your comparrisons and you will see that the insignia you refer to is quite crude in comparrison.

**SScollector** · 09-23-2015, 05:33 PM

Of course I have done about all of the skull comparisons that could ever be done, as my photo data bank consists of over 1,000,000 pictures that I have studied of SS skulls and eagles over the past 15 years.

Anyway, I will not waste anymore of my time on this subject. Almost everyone knows these by now, so good luck in trying to sell it as an original Assmann skull.

Chris

**rzzzm** · 09-23-2015, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by SScollector View Post

Of course I have done about all of the skull comparisons that could ever be done, as my photo data bank consists of over 1,000,000 pictures that I have studied of SS skulls and eagles over the past 15 years.

Anyway, I will not waste anymore of my time on this subject. Almost everyone knows these by now, so good luck in trying to sell it as an original Assmann skull.

Chris

**PaulMann** · 09-24-2015, 12:53 AM

m1/17 tk

I'm prohibited from sharing a photo from hanna, but,
this one looks like the "monkey face" fake to me.

cheers,
Pauli

**Michael73** · 09-24-2015, 01:04 AM

Martin's contribution to this comunity is second to none
No need in a witch-hunt here!

**Stossgruppe3** · 09-24-2015, 02:14 AM

Originally posted by Michael73 View Post

Martin's contribution to this comunity is second to none
No need in a witch-hunt here!

And that's the problem with forums like this ....

No one can see or hear facial expressions when ones opinion is submitted.
Everyone then assumes the worst ... Both of these gentlemen's knowledge is second to none I also don't see its a witch-hunt starting either
neither of them have been rude to one-another. It's just a difference of opinion which anyone is entitled to have
Regards David

Announcement

Hannas's Reich M17 SS Visor Skul

Hannas's Reich M17 SS Visor Skul

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread