Xmas ornaments from Hitler's tree

[Peter U]

M45, just take your two baubles to an antique dealer that specializes in 19th century art glass and ask how he or she will qualify the quality of the glass and the paint work.
And while you are in that shop compare them with real quality glass work from the same period and see the difference between your 4 for 1 Reichsmark Christmas decorations and glass from an art studio.
You can even compare them with carnaval glass from the 1930's and see the difference.
If you don't like their answer, then just show them to Thomas W. on a militaria show and he will proclaim "all original!" and then you have the answer you have been wanting to hear all this time.

Success Peter.

 

[M45]

I don't think M45's baubles are cheaply made, because they required a more elaborate mold than the apparent molds for the known fake ornaments. M45's ornaments are embellished with scallops that frame the swastika disc flat. You don't see that type of feature on the fake ornaments. If you're making molds to produce fakes, I don't think the mold makers would be motivated to add unnecessary embellishments when the swastika and runes are what sells. I think that type of embellishment could be used to date the ornaments, and the maker, if that feature is unique to a specific maker. It appears to be from the 20s or 30s to me.

You touched on a critical aspect in the differences between authentic TR era artifacts and replicas - fine detail. Micro Joe's videos go into this detail. Fakes are often made differently than originals and/or lack the fine detail. Fakes are often crude representations of the real thing (re: Walter K.'s baubles).

 

[Hambone]

It seems like we have skipped the step of some proof of originality beyond a guy at a swap meet in 1977 said he was a vet and said he found these in an attic of a house. Some of you guys are asking for proof that it's fake. The standard is prove it is original. The existence of a Nazi law forbidding swastika ornaments or a law requiring swastika ornaments is not particularly relevant as the first requirement has not been met IMHO based upon the proof submitted. My very reasonable queries concerning proof were completely ignored, and this has somehow jumped to "they are real because you have not properly cited the Nazi law forbidding them" or "you cannot prove them fake."

This type of ornament was made from pre-1933 to the present date. They don't look particularly well finished and are not well painted. My experience with swastika adorned anything from pre-1946 is a high level of workmanship.

 

[Peter U]

They don't look particularly well finished and are not well painted. My experience with swastika adorned anything from pre-1946 is a high level of workmanship.

That is because their was quality control of the NSDAP on their symbol(s).
The RZM for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichszeugmeisterei
And Goebbels didn't allow companies to put it on all kinds of cheap-, bad quality- or throw away objects.

I'am not in to 3R party pins, daggers and dress swords but I have to admit that the originals are top quality finished products.

 

[M45]

Re: that some of us have experience with the law is good to know.

Suppose I had never posted the first NSDAP bauble photos and only THEORIZED that such things could possibly exist, I would have been asked to provide some type of proof to support my theory.

So I post the Wikipedia blurb on the nazi xmas decorations, period photos of various types of nazi decorations, photos of the gothic swaz baubles with period advert, but no actual period photos of NSDAP style baubles.

So my evidence could be considered merely circumstantial evidence (as opposed to DIRECT evidence).

But we should not discount the importance of circumstantial evidence. Remember, Scott Peterson was condemned to death on essentially circumstantial evidence alone (no smoking gun/bloody knife, no eyewitnesses to the murder, etc)

So one might say, "Well Brian, it could really go either way with the NSDAP baubles. Maybe they exist(ed) and maybe they didn't. It is still only a theory.

So when I post photos of actual purported NSDAP baubles, that is DIRECT EVIDENCE, whether you accept authenticity or not. They are reasonable, possible, believable (by some) examples.

Upon examination of the photos we can see HOW they were made, by an early 20th century glass blowing operation (not kitsch-style cheap manufacture) (DIRECT EVIDENCE).

We can also see by the photos the fine detail found on original TR era items (as opposed to the lack of detail with fakes in general and in the Walter K. baubles) (DIRECT EVIDENCE).

Other circumstantial evidence could be the implausibility of the alternative scenarios used to condemn authenticity.

 

[Peter U]

This sounds a lot like comparing one fake with another fake and coming to the conclusion that one fake looks better then the other one and thus must be original.

You can think your glass Christmas ornaments are high quality hand made objects and Marcus might agree but I can 100% guarentee you that they came out of a mold and were pressed in a glass blowing machine, you can see the edge where the two halfs of the mold were pressed together.
They pump these out of a machine as fast as a compressor can blow them and then after they are cooled down quickly hand painted with a few brush strokes by a woman or a child.

 

[Marcus]

It seems like we have skipped the step of some proof of originality beyond a guy at a swap meet in 1977 said he was a vet and said he found these in an attic of a house. Some of you guys are asking for proof that it's fake. The standard is prove it is original. The existence of a Nazi law forbidding swastika ornaments or a law requiring swastika ornaments is not particularly relevant as the first requirement has not been met IMHO based upon the proof submitted. My very reasonable queries concerning proof were completely ignored, and this has somehow jumped to "they are real because you have not properly cited the Nazi law forbidding them" or "you cannot prove them fake."

This type of ornament was made from pre-1933 to the present date. They don't look particularly well finished and are not well painted. My experience with swastika adorned anything from pre-1946 is a high level of workmanship.

You are not understanding what I am saying here. I never said they are real. I never said they are fake

I am NOT saying "They are real because you have not properly cited Nazi law forbidding them". I am not saying "They are real because you can not prove them fake".

What I am saying is YOU CAN NOT IMMEDIATELY DISMISS THEM AS FAKES BASED ON SUPPOSED LAWS THAT ARE MARGINALLY REFERRED, TO WITHOUT EVER BEING ACTUALLY PRESENTED, BY PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO BACKGROUND IN LAW OR THE LANGUAGE SAID LAWS ARE WRITTEN IN.



As far as "high level of workmanship" Yeah, that will go for a Ritterkreuz. Not so much for some of the tinnies or the little WHW trinkets and such. The quality of these isn't as low as some of the Soviet stuff, but it obviously wasn't designed and produced by a jeweler in Vienna or Munich.

And again, I will refer to German beer mugs from the period. Not swastika adorned beer mugs, just plain old "steingut" stoneware and porcelain mugs. The quality of these varies a lot, from high quality fine china to cheap rough stuff given away as prizes in a "Volksfest" type fair. Like I have already said, price determines quality and quality determines price, and you get what you pay for. Even in Nazi Germany.

 

[Marcus]

That is because their was quality control of the NSDAP on their symbol(s).
The RZM for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichszeugmeisterei
And Goebbels didn't allow companies to put it on all kinds of cheap-, bad quality- or throw away objects.

I'am not in to 3R party pins, daggers and dress swords but I have to admit that the originals are top quality finished products.

Leave NSDAP and RZM items out of the discussion. These are not official NSDAP items, nor are they RZM marked.

Leave Wikipedia out of it. All I'm hearing and seeing is dualing Wiki stuff presented here that is again only marginally relevant to the discussion at hand.

Unless someone can Wiki up the exact text, in German of any alleged law (covering the 1921 to 1945 period) forbidding putting swazis on ornaments.

How doe Goebbels get into this discussion? Did he make ornaments?

Throw away objects - like little paper Hakenkreuz flags handed out in large quantities for people to wave at parades, party rallies, visits by Nazi officials like Hitler?

How about party newspapers - big eagle and swazi on the front, but not something that is going to be kept for more than a day or two.

As far as "top quality finished products" these obviously are not Nazi daggers and swords, and comparing these ornaments to such is even less relevant than comparing a cheap little Nazi pin (and some of them are very cheap) to a Ritterkreuz.

 

[biggymu]

This sounds a lot like comparing one fake with another fake and coming to the conclusion that one fake looks better then the other one and thus must be original.

You can think your glass Christmas ornaments are high quality hand made objects and Marcus might agree but I can 100% guarentee you that they came out of a mold and were pressed in a glass blowing machine, you can see the edge where the two halfs of the mold were pressed together.
They pump these out of a machine as fast as a compressor can blow them and then after they are cooled down quickly hand painted with a few brush strokes by a woman or a child.

As I have been following this thread and reading information on the links provided. The original German companies making these baubles from the earliest days used molds. On the websites, they claim to have many of the original molds. So invalidating baubles because of mold marks is not sound reasoning.

 

[Hambone]

You are not understanding what I am saying here. I never said they are real. I never said they are fake

I am NOT saying "They are real because you have not properly cited Nazi law forbidding them". I am not saying "They are real because you can not prove them fake".

What I am saying is YOU CAN NOT IMMEDIATELY DISMISS THEM AS FAKES BASED ON SUPPOSED LAWS THAT ARE MARGINALLY REFERRED, TO WITHOUT EVER BEING ACTUALLY PRESENTED, BY PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO BACKGROUND IN LAW OR THE LANGUAGE SAID LAWS ARE WRITTEN IN.

As far as "high level of workmanship" Yeah, that will go for a Ritterkreuz. Not so much for some of the tinnies or the little WHW trinkets and such. The quality of these isn't as low as some of the Soviet stuff, but it obviously wasn't designed and produced by a jeweler in Vienna or Munich.

And again, I will refer to German beer mugs from the period. Not swastika adorned beer mugs, just plain old "steingut" stoneware and porcelain mugs. The quality of these varies a lot, from high quality fine china to cheap rough stuff given away as prizes in a "Volksfest" type fair. Like I have already said, price determines quality and quality determines price, and you get what you pay for. Even in Nazi Germany.

I am understanding what you are saying. I am saying the same as your clarification: the debate over these laws, or lack thereof, are tangentially relevant, but not positive or dispositive. However, the issue here I have is this: the existence of painted glass Christmas tree ornaments with swastikas (sloppy or perfect) acquired in 1977 from a guy at a swap meet who said he was a vet and that he found them in an attic does not change the presumption from fake to original. At the end of the day that's the only evidence produced that they are original. That they exist is proof of their originality and the burden shifts to require proving they are not original, i.e., proving a negative? Perhaps at WAF or Gunboreds. Not here.

 

[M45]

You could apply this same thinking to the FPNr marked quadruplets. YOU presume the NSDAP baubles to be fake, but YOU also presume the FPNr marked quadruplets to be authentic (with no actual proof such as paint testing). Is one or the other ACTUALLY fake or authentic based on your presumptions ? Others may presume differently. Are their presumptions any less or more accurate than yours ? Where does the burden of proof lie with the FPNr helmets ?

 

[Peter U]

My point is that they are cheaply made things, a dime a dozen object.
Goebbels didn't want the NSDAP type Swatika being used on cheap objects that is why when the NSDAP completely took power in Germany he put a law on the books that prohibited the production and sales of them, together with other substandard products like corkscrews, Hitler dolls,...etc, a whole list of items.
- Marcus if you want to study that law of May 1933, just ask historian (and pay him) in Germany to sent you a copy.
This law was also enforced, that is why we don't see period original bad quality swastika stuff.


And now for the 777th time if M45 wants me to reckognize that his baubles are pre May 1945, I need to see some evidence and if he can't show that, they are what they are, Swastika Christmas baubles and only God knows how old they really are, but I seriously doubt that they came from Hitlers tree.
Perhaps they hung in mister Hilters tree in Christmas 1944 just before his house was bombed to pieces.

 

[Peter U]

You could apply this same thinking to the FPNr marked quadruplets. YOU presume the NSDAP baubles to be fake, but YOU also presume the FPNr marked quadruplets to be authentic (with no actual proof such as paint testing). Is one or the other ACTUALLY fake or authentic based on your presumptions ? Others may presume differently. Are their presumptions any less or more accurate than yours ? Where does the burden of proof lie with the FPNr helmets ?

And this is exactly why this thread was started!
It has never really been about your Swastika Christmas ornaments hasn't it?
It was just bait for us, to see how we would respond.


I'll sum it up for you again in four sentences.
The Fp helmets in question were found in the US with severeal different veterans and have been in several different collections, but more importantly it also was discovered in relic state in France independent from eachother.
That relic helmet is material evidence that they are real.
Also they were sold for exactly the same value as without having a name and Fp in them, so there was no financial gain, the first and only thing fakers are interested in, they do it to make money.
Follow the money, their is alas nothing to follow in this case.

 

[Hambone]

You could apply this same thinking to the FPNr marked quadruplets. YOU presume the NSDAP baubles to be fake, but YOU also presume the FPNr marked quadruplets to be authentic (with no actual proof such as paint testing). Is one or the other ACTUALLY fake or authentic based on your presumptions ? Others may presume differently. Are their presumptions any less or more accurate than yours ? Where does the burden of proof lie with the FPNr helmets ?

FPN helmets and Swastika ornaments have little in common, except for the general requirements for establishing originality. Apply your analysis from that thread to the Christmas ornaments. The differences are significant however, to wit:
1) We have no period photographs or period proof of any kind that swastika adorned Xmas kitsch ornaments ever existed. Named and FPN helmets are common and we have period photographs of them and of them being painted by the same guy for a unit.
2) Of the four FPN helmets which turned up on the internet in about a ten year period, one is a relic in a French collection; one was owned by a member here and bought by Ken N. from him; one was sourced by Ken N. to make the pair; One was found by me and I paid no more for it than if it had no such name in the rim. You've got two ornaments in a postwar cigar box that you bought as a teenager from a random guy at a swap meet in 1977 who told you he was a vet, who said he found them in an attic of a house.
3) There are a large number of fake swastika ornaments of this type, Walter has table full of them, etc. Fake named lids are not nearly in such profusion as the fakery doesn't yield as much profit.
4) There are no regulations forbidding names and FPNs in steel helmets.

You immediately call BS on these helmets (which is fine here), claiming that named and FPN helmets are unusual or non-existent after pre-war, which is far from fact and reality (way far from it). We produced evidence and circumstances to refute that. What evidence do you have to support the originality of these ornaments? Pretend that these ornaments are those FPN marked and named helmets. Call bullshit on them as you did those helmets. Now, what is your response as the advocate for the originality of the ornaments? Because they exist they are original as no one can prove them fake?

Now, explain why Walter's Hitler head, swastika, and SS ornaments are not original under your analysis.

Kanzler militaria

Kanzler militaria

www.kanzlermilitaria.com

 

[Warrior1354]

FPN helmets and Swastika ornaments have little in common, except for the general requirements for establishing originality. Apply your analysis from that thread to the Christmas ornaments. The differences are significant however, to wit:
1) We have no period photographs or period proof of any kind that swastika adorned Xmas kitsch ornaments ever existed. Named and FPN helmets are common and we have period photographs of them and of them being painted by the same guy for a unit.
2) Of the four FPN helmets which turned up on the internet in about a ten year period, one is a relic in a French collection; one was owned by a member here and bought by Ken N. from him; one was sourced by Ken N. to make the pair; One was found by me and I paid no more for it than if it had no such name in the rim. You've got two ornaments in a postwar cigar box that you bought as a teenager from a random guy at a swap meet in 1977 who told you he was a vet, who said if found them in an attic of a house.
3) There are a large number of fake swastika ornaments of this type, Walter has table full of them, etc. Fake named lids are not nearly in such profusion as the fakery doesn't yield as much profit.
4) There are no regulations forbidding names and FPNs in steel helmets.

You immediately call bullshit on these helmets, claiming that named and FPN helmets are unusual or non-existent after pre-war, which is far from the truth (way far from it). We produced evidence and circumstances to refute that. What evidence do you have to support the originality of these ornaments? Pretend that these ornaments are those FPN marked and named helmets. Call bullshit on them as you did those helmets. Now, what is your response as the advocate for the originality of the ornaments? Because they exist they are original as no one can prove them fake?

Now, explain why Walter's Hitler head, swastika, and SS ornaments are not original under your analysis.

Kanzler militaria

Kanzler militaria

www.kanzlermilitaria.com

 

[Hambone]

Marcus, have we determined the manner of construction? Hot mold injected I would imagine? I don't know that this is an expensive process. Again, my grandparents had boxes of the same type of Christmas ornaments, painted, etc., from the 50s-70s.

EDIT: Here you go:

 

[Hambone]

Walter mongers his swastika ornaments for $50 a pop. Today you can buy a dozen (12) far more ornate and sophisticated hand painted glass ornaments, with glitter and sprinkles and such, painted perfectly, for $34.99 ($2.91 per ornament) at retail (today). I'd say there is tremendous financial incentive to make a couple molds (quite easy) and do this for $50.00 a pop. Hell, if you can sell them for $10 a pop he's still making 400% profit. From $2.91 (we'll round up to $3.00, and remember, this is RETAIL not cost) an ornament to $50.00 per ornament is a 16.67x markup, or 1667% markup.

So, if these were bought in 1977, what is the RETAIL (maker cost is probably 1/5 this but we will use retail) value of such an ornament in 1977 dollars? Well, $3.00 per ornament in 2022 is about 65 cents in 1977. So, if the 1977 swap meet vet marked these up like Walter (1667%) he would have sold them for about $11.00 each. If he only marked them up 500% he could sell them for $3.25 each in 1977 and clear 500% profit. Such swastika glass balls could have easily been made, painted, etc., for about 25 cents a pop in the 1970s, probably far cheaper, by real West Germans or Chinese, in Hong Kong, whatever. And if they could be sold for $2.50 each that would be 1000% profit.

$0.65 in 1977 → 2024 | Inflation Calculator

The 3.57% inflation rate means $0.65 in 1977 is equivalent to $3.38 today. This inflation calculator uses the official US consumer price index published by the Department of Labor.

www.in2013dollars.com

Christmas Ornaments vintage Style Balls - Etsy

This nobly decorated christmas balls set has been blown and crafted with great effort and patience by hand. Christmas ornaments with a vintage finish provide designs of the past in a modern eye-catching look. The set contains 12 christmas balls with a diameter of about 2.36 inches. Additional

www.etsy.com

 

[biggymu]

Dammit, Ham, now you got me seeing dollar signs!

I'm not stopping with just Nazi Christmas stuff, I'm going to corner the market on genuine original, "found in a barn in Bavaria" Nazi Valentines day, Halloween, Thanksgiving, 4th of July, Kwaanza, and Martin Luther King Day items.

I'm gonna be rich! Rich, I tell you, rich!.

Bingo! Inclusiveness, sustainable! Build Back Baubles!

 

[Hambone]

So, does this mean M45's ornaments are fake? Nope. Does it mean that they are real? Nope. At this point, with the evidence we have, given the adverse presumption following any Nazi relic, is it "more likely than not" that the swastika ornaments are pre-1946 or post-1946? it certainly helps that they appeared in 1977 and don't look like the current Hitlerhed and Swastika stuff Walter is mongering with his Nazi shitepaper.

 

[tjg79]

As they sit, they lack provenance.