UBB.threads Forums Edged Weapons German Sword & Miniatures Forum swastika wrong way !?

Hello Frederick , could you give your opinion about this one ?

http://daggers.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/817092573/m/3260070874

Hi Rob NL,

Well you are persistent - I do know of this sword, and as you and some others already know, my opinion of it is not totally flattering. However, despite Craig's exhortations that I stand up and say what I have to say, I will not be shanghaid into that until I am ready to speak - there is some other research that I am pursuing.

So for the current time can we concentrate on your sword with the reverse swastika? After all that is what this thread is all about. Several of us here are particularly interested in seeing how all the material you are buying is related to the Knights Cross Winner it is claimed to come from (we are even more curious as to who this gentleman really is). You see, Rob NL, the fact that your sword with the reversed emblem appears to be more important than the Knights Cross and its' associated recipient is a matter of some curiosity. I find it odd that the focus of attention is on the sword, and not upon the German hero who allegedly carried it. Hopefully you can produce an answer to these conundrums.

Roger foxart: Thank you for posting such an excellent set of images. We all benefit from your collaboration in sharing this with us. Thank you.

FJS

Actually, Fred, I'd like you to address your concerns on the Wolfe sword in the Wolfe thread. There is no harm, is there, in stating your reasons for thinking the Wolfe sword is fake? There is no "Shanghaying" at all - you have a very strong opinion that the Wolf sword is fake, so why not state it plainly.

By the way, why should you find it "odd" that the focus of attention here is on Rob's "reverse swastika" sword? It is, after all, the sword forum, is it not?

Hi Frederick ,

as I said before , I will go there next week, and meet him .
I am really confused by your reply.
I posted a picture of a sword on the sword forum, why should I concentrate on the recipient? After all, isnt it "buy the sword , NOT the story " .
But , if you want for me to post some pics of the rest of the grouping so you can see them , just say the word.

"What we've got here is...a failure to communicate."

Tagline delivered by Warden Martin in Cool Hand Luke -- 1967

“Did I miss a meeting?” (Garry Marshall in the movie ‘Soap Dish’ 1991) referring to some of the comments made regarding a different discussion. I thought that the presentation Luftwaffe sword thread was on hiatus awaiting posting of the rest of the supporting documentation. The last time I looked there was some question about an exchange - and it was unknown what exactly was involved.

Speaking as an outside observer my point is, as has occurred on occasion with other Third Reich items, sometimes if the documentation or other evidence and the item itself don’t quite match up it does call into question an item’s provenance. Let me emphasize that I am not saying that this is the case here - having only the limited knowledge which has been presented. But if I was in similar situation and was called upon to discuss something I would probably want all of the available information myself. And the reason for that is with some items it’s the supporting facts that can make or break the ‘chain of evidence’ used to try and prove provenance/legitimacy.

As for this thread which has been very educational for me, I am eagerly awaiting the rest of the artifacts with the reversed swastika sword. FP

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

So Fred , you need documents to see that the Wolf sword is real?
Strange that you cant judge from the pictures.
But anyway , the documents will be posted today or tomorrow .
Then I would really want to hear what is wrong with the sword.

Greetings from Holland .

OK, first my reply to Craig:

When I respond to the issue of the Wolf Sword, then I will do it on the appropriate thread. I have no reticence in speaking out when I am ready - I merely responded in this column as a matter of courtesy to the enquiry by Rob NL. I will deliver my commentary about the Wolf Sword when I am complete, in my own time, and in the appropriate thread.

To refer to Rob NL's sword (also in the latter part of Craig's submission), I feel that perhaps I haven't explained myself clearly - in which case I will do so now:

Rob NL - your sword with the reverse swastika is incredibly interesting - and I fully accept that it dates from the time of the Third Reich. I have previously given my understanding of how it may have come into existence. It is a matter of choice whether or not you accept my interpretation of it, or that of some other contributor. At this moment all opinions are equally valid and the one thing that we seem to agree upon is that it does date from that period.

Your revelation that the sword is part of a grouping of things that you are buying adds a new dimension to this - for in your grouping there is a Knights Cross which somebody has told you is genuine? Not only that, the dealer from whom you are buying this material tells you that they are all from the same owner - a Knights Cross Winner, and also that you can meet the man himself. This is fantastic - because what this means is that your sword is no longer a curious anomaly among Third Reich Swords - it is now a personality item! The Sword of a Knights Cross Winner, that is why my focus on this item shifts from the basic construction of the sword to the individual who originally owned it.

You must get the former owner to reveal to you how it was that he purchased this sword;
Where did he buy it from?;
Was the design shown in a catalogue?;
Did he have a preference for the deisgn of the "reversed" swastika?

All this is important, Rob NL - as you will discover in future years that true provenance is everything. From my point of view, even if this destroys my theory about the sword being reject parts made up post-war, I am happy to lose my argument about the sword in favour of you being able to reveal the true facts about the sword pattern.

This way every collector will benefit from the knowledge you discover about this Sword, and the Knights Cross Winner who owned it. I look forward to your revelations.

In the period since I logged on you have submitted other photos. I cannot comment on the medals - I leave that to a specialist - I am sure that their are contributors to this site who can help you. But the Army Dagger with the engraving/etching(?) to a Knights Cross bearer? Could we please have more photographs of the actual dedication? Thank you.

Referring (again!) to the Wolf Sword, as you will see (above) I will reveal my views, and the back-up support for them, when I am ready. For the moment let us concentrate on your acquisitions. I look forward to your reply to my questions above.

Best wishes.

FJS

This has been a very interesting thread made even more interesting because it would connect a living veteran to specific Third Reich artifacts. Given the probable age of the veteran, a rare event in the 21st century because most have already passed away. I also would like some pictures with the full dedication. And if possible some good closeups of the dagger, and especially the engraving details. I’m not a handwriting analyst and claim no expertise in that area. As a lay person, however, I noticed that that the style of (what seems to be) engraving looked very similar. And when I did a side by side comparison of a couple of the characters - it seemed to me that the similarities were very pronounced. One of my questions to the Knights Cross Winner would be or would have been regarding the engraving. Was the same person who engraved the sword langet for him, the one who also engraved the dagger? Regards, FP

Gentlemen,

I have no comments at the moment on these reversed swastika swords. I have my thoughts about the subject but.....much is to be found out and learned yet. Certainly a very interesting thread.

Now.............

I would like to "throw a cat in among the pigeons" as an old friend of mine is wont to say when things need to be stirred up a bit.

Brass hilts being early and aluminum or alloy ones being later ones is not necessarily a valid truism.

I have an Eickhorn von Stein pattern sword with the late Eickhorn over the shoulder squirrel tm. I also had a Zeiten model marked with the same late tm. So what you may ask? These are known entities with gilted aluminum hilts.

What makes them different is that the hilts are of gilted brass and not aluminum or other substitute alloy.

Houston has seen the von Stein at a Chicago Show a while back as he was curious about this anamoly.

We may need to rethink some of the suppositions put forth here.

Just some thoughts,

Tony

FP,

While the pictures aren't overly clear, the langet appears to be engraved using a template and a pantagraph stylus. The indexing is off a bit as the initials are not well centered on the langet shield.

The dagger blade on the other hand looks to have been done freehand using an electric pen of some type.

For what it's worth.

Tony

Hello Tony ,

Please permit me to throw another “cat” into the equation. Eickhorn was a major player, and probably had stocks of pre manufactured parts waiting to be assembled. Voos was not, and seems to have done a lot of small scale hand work as needed. Speaking generally, there is no question that copper was restricted for military use (dress weapons don't count) in the late 1930's. Followed by aluminum, with zinc being the metal of choice until the end of series production in 1942.

And please don’t let the images I posted make unclear my intent. Unfortunately, to enhance them enough to be able to show them side by side, it created a lot of computer generated “artifacts” which does make it look more like an electropencil. That is why I asked for more images because I knew that there was a discrepancy between the ones Rob NL posted and the comparison.

Best Regards, FP

Duplicate message deleted.

Regarding the Voos anomalies:

I have file pictures of my swords, as well as one owned 6 or 7 years ago by Bill Shea, and will ask Roger to post them tomorrow. There have been some incisive comments and questions about these enigmatic sword patterns, and that is as it should be. As a collector, one has to be somewhat skeptical of unseen or oddball items. Indidentally, most of these anomalies have been purchased at modest prices, as they were either suspected as fakes, or not even noticed by the seller. I passed up my Voos dovehead and never noticed the backwards swastika, until Reichssword pointed it out to me, and I then bought it. I don't think that the seller ever noticed the anomaly. My lionhead was purchased reasonably on Ebay before the "ban".

To address FP's comments about the hilt sandcastings, which he mentioned and is obviously knowledgable about, I can only add that brass seems to cast rather well compared to aluminum. Most cast aluminum hilts lack the detail of brass castings. Aluminum has a lower melting point than copper and brass (I believe), and may have other ductile characteristics that account for the poorer detail. Maybe the cleaning and deburring operations affect the surface results as well, as aluminum is softer.

A different type of hard-packed sand would have been used with different metals too. I recall seeing some pretty hard sand mold residues at some of the steel foundries that I have been in, as the heat of the molten metal no doubt causes a metamorphosis in the used mold. Some had a hard porcellain look after being used, and what they looked like before the pouring procedure, I can't say for sure, but it was a hard cream colored sand mold that was used at that particular small parts metal foundry. I have also seen a fine grey compacted sand used at foundries that made larger steel castings. Steel, brass and aluminum would require different procedures and mold materials, in order to obtain the desired casting rusults. Others with foundry experience may be able to clarify some of this information. If I can get back into that one foundry, I'll ask the forman some particulars.

The later zinc hilt castings were made by the molten injection die molding process. It is called Zinkspritzguss in German, and the parts are also referred to as 'Feinzink' parts. This die casting process produces a very clearly detailed hilt, albeit from a less than desireable material. Germany had an abundance of Zinc at that time, primarily from the large deposits in Upper Silesia. It became a ubiquitous ersatz metal during the war. Pack & Co. also used a zinc based alloy they called "Tombak", but it appears to have been sand cast, not die cast in their sword hilts. I don't recall ever seeing a Voos sword hilt made from zinc die casting; they are either brass or annodized aluminum.

I think that anyone with a Voos factory catalog from the 1938-42 period would be a big help in clarifying some of the questions regarding different patterns and models. I would pay good money just to get a Xerox copy of a well illustrated Voos catalog. I think that Voos had a Casberg-like design artist who conceived their unique and esoteric/exotic patterns. Once you learn to recognize the Voos signature look, there is no mistaking their products, trademarks or not. Much research needs to be done on the Voos firm, and it would be terrific if such information were brought to light. Unfortunately, Anthony Carter, who I knew, never released his second volume of 'The Sword and Knifemakers of Germany' with information on the Voos firm, as he died suddenly in mid 2002. So, if anyone can shed some light on Voos swords, please do.

You might want to check with Tom Johnson. He has the most extensive collection of edged weapons catalogues that I'm aware of. BTW: Your email isn't working.
Jim

I’m looking forward to the images of Ace’s swords and that of the other one he mentioned. It will be very interesting to see them and get a chance to observe some possible variations.

Ace is obviously well acquainted with factory operations and we are in general agreement. As he indicated there are different casting sands and techniques depending on how much finish work is desired, and of course what metal is being cast. With sand casting not only do you have to have a good master pattern, but the sand itself is critical and has to be properly cohesive so that when the pattern is removed an exact impression is left. And it has to allow gasses to escape and tolerate cooling shrinkage etc. For high temperature alloy precision parts in this era investment casting is often the preferred option. As he stated aluminum is harder to (gravity) sand cast. And while there are some ways to try and get around problems with conventional molds. For lower temperature alloys like aluminum (1218 °F) and especially (zinc 787 °F) the easiest method is to pressure die cast it which is what is normally done. More upfront cost, but the payoff is a much better product with less work. (Copper at 1981 °F was more challenging to die cast back then.)

Purely a technical matter, perhaps one of our German speakers can help because I thought ‘Feinzink’ referred to a high grade zinc alloy (minimal impurities). I also am under the impression that ‘Tombak’ refers to a high copper content brass which often has a reddish hue. Terminology aside, as he stated there is no question that zinc became the metal of choice for late production. And I think that it’s reasonable to assume that there was an overlap in materials depending on the maker and time period.

I defer to his knowledge of the Voos company being more familiar with those who had contracts with the Wehrmacht. And deeply regret the very untimely passing of Anthony Carter who was a gentleman and scholar of the first order. And who had done considerable research regarding German blade makers - and was always ready to share his knowledge with like minded individuals. Regards to All, FP

Posting for Ace...
Additional photos of other known Voos reverse swastika sabers.

First, aluminum dovehead.

Next, 1 of 2 for aluminum lionhead

2 of 2, aluminum lionhead

Last set, Bill Shea's aluminum Voos lionhead (photographed 6-7 yrs ago).
Note, previous 2 swords in Ace's collection.

The sword looks good to me. How many of us know how to hang the United States flag? Does the blue uion go to the left or right? It changes if worn on a uniform.

FOXART

Super set of photographs - you have done us all proud, and especially so in locating some older period photos from an old collector (I use the word "old" in the most respectful sense. I think I mean "senior" collector.)

Whatever this thing really is, we could not objectively assess it without your excellent photographic contribution. You have been very generous, and also prompt, with your archival contribution. Now we have to pursue another source of information:

Has anybody got any information on Rob NL, and his alleged Knights Cross Winner connection to his reverse swastika sword?

There may be more to this subject than meets the eye at first glance - so we need to take all information on board. So come on Rob NL - what is the latest development with your intended purchase?

Regards
FJS

Further casting information:

Before stopping to visit Roger and having him kindly post the sword photos, I stopped at Harbor Casting in N. Canton. A helpful shop forman there answered many of my questions about metal casting, and I observed their operation as we talked. They only cast steel, brass and bronze items of small and moderate size there. They were casting brass boat motor propellers before I arrived. The molds are made from a special fine grained grey sand, that is formed as a wet mixture over the pattern, and then kiln dried before use. The sand changes color to a cream hue during and after the pouring process. The metal is made in small batches in a small melting furnace that is heated by electric coils that have cooling water circulating through the hollow coils. The melting device is attached to a hoist for mobility and pouring. I didn't catch the name of this mini furnace, unfortunately. This technology is similiar to that used in heating small steel bar stubs prior to drop forging in other operations that I've seen. I was able to examine the sand molding material on a cooled batch of propellers, and it was fragile and crumbled easily after being fired. It was not hard as I thought that I remembered it from prior visits, but maybe that was what I saw years ago when Frankham Bronze was still in business locally. Anyway, the molten metal was poured into the flared mold 'riser'and flowed by gravity down into the 'tree', as several parts were made from multiple molds with one pouring of that heat. That is how modern sand casting is basically done today on a small scale.

Roger later connected me with a friend of his at Stark Pattern (they make mold and die patterns) who knew the technology of aluminum casting, and he graciously answered my questions about that operation. He said that it is usually done by gravity sand casting similar to steel and brass, but the riser is larger to apply more weight and pressure to fully fill the molds. Since aluminum's specific gravity is so much lighter that the other metals, some adjustments are made in the process to eliminate bubbles and air pockets, depending on size and desired quality. Sometimes aluminum is pressure cast using hydraulics in a die casting method similar to zinc casting, and another option is the use of glazed plaster-of-paris or even steel molds, in order to obtain higher detail and quality. He said that brass gravity- casts better than aluminum and that there is better detail because of the density of the heavier metal. Aluminum can also loose detail in the cleaning procedure because of its softer and more fragile characteristics. He said that most casting technology and processes in use today were also used in the 1930's.

Fred, in regards to 'Tombak', as featured in the Pack catalog, my experience with the material used by Pack & Co. is that is is not the same as the metal alloy 'Tombac', as used in Canada. I have a Pack Luft sword made of this material, and it is heafty like zinc or brass, but is obviously cast from a zinc based alloy. It can be clearly seen where the light plating finish is now gone. The Pack 'Tombak' army sword hilts are sand cast from the same zinc alloy. You can always spot them, as they have a greenish hue where the zinc impurities bleed through into the gold plating. Brass or any alloy with a very high copper content won't do that. I think that Pack was talking-up a cost cutting production alloy in their solicitations about their 'new Tombak'.

All in all, it was a very informative day. Though I could have 'Googled' the same basic information on the web, I got the info in a much more constructive way, and enjoyed the experience. I hope that you enjoy the information here as well.

Frederick wrote ;

quote:

and his alleged Knights Cross Winner connection

quote:

???
Tell me , does this mean that you question my connection with him?

double

quote:

Originally posted by
Frederick ;

quote:

and his alleged Knights Cross Winner connection

quote:

???
Tell me , does this mean that you are questioning my connection with him?

[/QUOTE]

Rob NL.

No I am NOT questioning YOUR connection with the Knights Cross Winner. What I am questioning is how you can be certain that all the items you are purchasing really were carried by that Knights Cross Winner?

From my own particular point of view it is the sword that raises the most interest. Because if the Knights Cross Winner from whom these items allegedly came really did carry that sword - then that would negate my theory that the sword is constructed from original, reject parts.

I hope that this clarifies to you the purpose of my question.

Best regards
FJS

Ace, Thank You (and Roger) for posting both versions of the aluminum hilted reversed swastika swords. They add a lot to the discussion because it indicates that these swords were series production with no effort made to to change or modify the knucklebow assemblies. If Bill Shea said his sword was aluminum because it was extra lightweight, then that was probably was what it was. However, while the lighting seems to be off, in the middle image to me it looks like perhaps the base metal possibly was zinc?? I am not saying that it was. Just pointing out that it seems to have a much darker gray color than the blade - and aluminum when it oxidizes tends to be more white (image reposted below).

And thank you also for the additional input on casting. It roughly coincides from what I remember about it and gives a good snapshot view as regards current practices. While in the dim past I’ve done sand casting myself, now I am more conversant with investment casting as one of my brothers is in the business. (And another worked as a plant engineer for U.S. Steel but the castings there were much larger.) That said, it was the visible problems in the aluminum sand casting first posted that indicated to me that whomever was doing the casting for Voos had not quite figured out how to handle aluminum. Which as you illustrate is more difficult to achieve good detail using gravity.

The Germans use the same word as English with a slightly different spelling. And the German dictionary/engineering definition is pretty clear that “Tombak” is a brass alloy made primarily from copper with zinc being the alloying element (roughly 70%cu 30zn% - varies). After copper was restricted to military production all sorts of materials are seen in an effort to replace it. If Pack & Co. late manufactured “Tombak” is primarily zinc that may be the case. Although I would think that it could get a little confusing for Third Reich collectors because badge/medal collectors use “Tombak” when referring to badges made primarily from copper. As do on occasion early blade collectors. Regards to All, FP

Well, I know that I have a hand written document from him saying that he owned these items.
He got a late type Knight's Cross , that also is a good sign because he won his Cross in march '45 .

Another Voos langet for comp. Very interesting and informative thread.

Baron, does the sword that you just posted have a Voos trademark on the blade?