UBB.threads Forums Uniform & Accessories The Honor Ring Forum dak ring

Wow, OK, huh, ,a lot going on here..

First let me say this forum has one of the absolute best memberships for 3rd reich jewelry out there! We have members/collectors from all over the world. Not just that but they are actual experienced collectors! So,,

I know MilitaryNut a long time. We are close military collecting friends and personal. BUT,,we will still get into it! , that is have opposing views. No matter how hard we disagree in the end its over, I can't change his mind and he's not changing mine. Sometimes with time we will have the same view on something we disagree on. In the end like I said its over. The respect and friendship is still there and we go on searching,collecting and that's what its about..

So, Andy writes a lot in his posts. I've got to read them 4 , 5 times to absorb them. He makes many valid points..

For me - It is not the run of the mill DAK Ital type pattern we're used to seeing. I had no opinion of it when first posted. I outright don't like DAK rings whether they are mass produced for retail type or the hand made campaign type ring.
[still like seiing them!]

What I don't like,,is the outer finish, don't like the overall detail. What I do like [after seeing more photos] is the inner band finish and that its gilt. And, of course the vent holes get big points for me.
The side embellishments collectors think they are always gold. Not true. Sometimes they are just brass. Mostly though brass with a touch of low content gold.
Now days counterfeiters will put the time in and extra money for a few pieces that will bring in decent money. It is not like the old days when 50, 100 examples of their bogus wares will be all over the place. Now its a few pieces . Better for them as its less to move. So your not going to see exact copies around like asked for.

A question,,,the vent holes,,,IF you took a thin wire. Can it be inserted inside? Or is it blocked as soon as it goes in a millimeter or so?

HI IS THIS OK. MIKE

Thats vent holes

NOTICE THE JOINT MARK ON PICTURE 2

:D:D and a nice join seam. What do you think gaspare?

, yeah, that's a vent hole!! No problems there!

yes a vent hole, but what about the rest of the ring gaspare ?

Its fine.... Don't think anyone would go thru the trouble of reproducing that...
Since what we collect isn't issued or there is much info on,,,We have to develop and stick to criteria of authenticity for our rings. For these 'Italian' type produced rings we look for the smooth gilt inner band. The plated embellishments on the sides, good workmanship, seam and the vent holes etc. Until we catch a reproduction with all those traits we have to stick to the criteria!
The ring is fine. It's good when a member calls a ring out even if they are wrong. Elsewise we get to common place and eventhing shown becomes 'Ooo Aahh that's a beauty' and its over.. Get it in your collection case and enjoy it!

PS
I wrote Italian even though its not hallmarked as such. And I've already received email stating that without the official Italian wartime hallmark its not Italian. It is why I wrote 'Italian' type.

G, you have it right when you say Italian. They were made by the same Italian jewelry shops as the others, but won't have the traditional 800 stamp/ makers mark with fasces as that was only required on silver jewelry. Not being silver, they used alternate marks, such as the arrow, three stars, and 5 stars. I'm sure others will turn up.

well we only need be concerned with the official silver hallmark system in place for 1934 to 1944... Which the ring does not have..
Could just be lower than 800 [low content silver] and they didn't have to hallmark it [?]
If you have any source material for your statement for the other marks I'd love to read it..

G, I wish I could say I had source material but we both know it's hard to find. I'm basing that statement on what I've observed with the examples I own, plus my file of web images that I have kept to study and mix in a little gathered knowledge from selling vintage jewelry for a number of years. My primary example is the ring I posted in comparison to Mikes...the next to last ring. It meets all the criteria that was previously discussed and I have no doubt of its authenticity.

Unfortunately it has a bit of wear and a minor break in the shank just left of the joiner seam. But that gave me a good specimen of this type to examine the construction. The top table is definitely silver washed brass. I can see that pretty easily. When I look at it with my loupe, there are areas on the bottom shank where brass shows against the silver metal. It could be deep nicks exposing the underlying brass, but more likely it is spill from when the inner band was connected to the outer shell. The inner band was quite tarnished in spots when i got it, and when cleaned it was easy to see where the inner gilding has worn away exposing the brass. The silver metal had not tarnished however. It could be a very low grade silver as you say, or possibly even an alpacca nickel silver.

most countries with silver standards in place require silversmiths to use a minimum standard grade of silver, so to me that says it either is silvered brass or alpaccca. Either way, it wouldn't require a purity mark, hence the use of the manufacturers symbols. I have a jeweler friend who is going to use an xray spectrograph on some of my rings so I can get an accurate metal content for my own personal research. I'll know more about it in a few weeks. I guess you could say it's a bit of an educated guess, but in light of not having any manufacturers documentation, it sounds logical to me.

THIS IS THE BEST THREAD THATS BEEN ON THIS FORUM FOR AGES, I FEEL WE HAVE LEARNT A GREAT DEAL
I TOOK THE RING TO MY JEWELERS FOR HIM TO INSPECT AND IT IS CONSTRUCTED EXACTLY AS DAK 1941 DESCRIBED
PLEASE EXCUSE MY USE OF CAPITALS ( MY EYESIGHT IS NOT AS GOOD AS IT USED TO BE ) MIKE

Fantastic Mike! Again, this explains the lack of silver standard hallmarks.

Again, Mike, please do not use all capital letters.

I apologise for using capitals, with my poor eyesight I find it easier to see, I,m just happy that my new ring
has been proved authentic, many thanks to the expert forum members on this site. mike

You can change the resolution on your screen so that everything is larger than it would be just using caps.

Dave

well, we actually don't have an explanation for the missing marks.

The law says:

The law 5 February 1934 n. 305 introduced uniformity in the shape of silversmith's marks.
The new mark identifying the silversmith consisted of a lozenge containing:
number: corresponding to the number identifying the silversmith
'fascio': fascist party symbol
two letters: initials of the Province
The lozenge was coupled to an oval containing the purity degree 800 or 925 per thousand.

The marks look like this:

Actually, G, we have had the explanation all along. The ring is not silver. Mike's jeweler confirmed what I had already guessed. The lozenge shape mark with makers number, fasces, and city initials was only used in conjunction with the 800 mark for silver content. That mark was only required on true silver products. That's the catch. As such, they used a symbol mark, likely exclusive to each maker.

One would not expect to see a 14k gold hallmark(585 for my European friends) on a piece of brass jewelry. Why then are we expecting a silver mark on a non silver ring? The law that you quoted is self explanatory...used by silversmiths, and coupled with a silver purity mark of 800 or 925 fineness. Nothing there about using it on what is essentially good quality costume jewelry.

So there are 2 marks,,,the oval with the silver content.. And, the 'lozenge' that has the fascist bundle and codes for city etc.

So we know now the ring isn't silver so no oval. Should it have the lozenge? Who knows? We have an Italian member or 2. Hopefully they will see this and could help. I really suggest going on one of the silver forums [even though we know it isn't silver] . some of them are really knowledgeable! and could help with the mystery marks.. Careful not to show the Swas if you don't have to