Actually I am not just awed by what Luke came up with, I am terminally envious. That table is thoroughly authentic, exceptionally rare, and he got for a bargain. All the points that make a collector happy. Luke is also largely responsible for these next items, which he discovered and turned me on to.
I cannot say with absolute certainty that these candlesticks are made from metal taken from the U-Deutschland, but I am petty sure they are. They do not have the john Bull Authenticity Stamp, they are slightly larger than the candlesticks that are found in the John Bull catalog, and they have two other minor, but significant differences that I will describe and explain.
On the left is one of the larger sticks that I just acquired and the one on the right is a John Bull (JB) example out of my collection. Other than size, both look very similar to one another; they have the same base and stem design, both have four rings on the lower section of the stem, and two rings on the upper stem section. The visual difference is that the stick on the left has a flared holder whereas the one on the right has a beveled holder.
Both have a hollow base attached to the stem. The larger version (left) is attached with a machine screw and the JB version (right) is attached with either a swage pin or some sort of rivet.
I think the same artisan cut the original molds for both large and smaller versions. One reason I think that is the nearly identical design found on both versions, and the three variations—size, candle holder shape, and base attachment, reflect a difference if manufacturing costs. I also found that in both versions, each pair had a stick that was not absolutely vertical--it leans.
I measured the deflection from Vertical on all four sticks and found the two of them, one large and one small, had a 3/16-inch deflection. This strengthens my belief that both sizes were made in paired casts that were designed and cut by the same man.
It is also possible that the larger size used too much brass, which would have reduced the number made, and thus brought in less cash for higher production cost. The flared candle holder and the machine screw base attachment cost measurably more to produce than the beveled holder and swaged pin or rivet base attachment.
The exterior on a flared holder can be finished and polished on a powered wheel, but not the inside, especially one as small as what we have here. That would have to be done by hand, (money) since the Dermal Tool had not yet been invented.
A swage pin can be made in seconds from standard round stock using dikes and a power grinder—both available in 1919. The beveled holder edge could also be finished and polished on a power wheel—also available in 1919.
I cannot prove any of this, but it is my gut feeling. In any event, these mystery sticks make great conversation pieces. Dwight
That's some fine observations, Dwight! When you said you were going to buy these I never dreamed that you'd discover so many similarities. I thought that they looked about the same but you have sure brought up some great ideas and reason to think that the same guy did indeed make these. Definitely something to think about and a great conversation piece.
Nice post, thanks!
Here's a couple more U-Deutchland artifacts just in from the UK.
Happy to finally add the rare Bottomley bust to my collection. And somehow I manged to snag up another bust right after I found this one and it should be arriving very soon and I'll post some pictures when here.
Steve (Harry The Mole) once again came to the rescue and did my bidding on the bust. Seller would not ship to the US so Steve stepped in and saved the day. Thank you again, Steve!
I was only too happy to be able to help you out Luke.
Books published to date... 'Belfast Diaries: A Gunner In Northern Ireland'... 'A Tough Nut To Crack - Andersonstown'... 'An Accrington Pal: The Diaries of Pte Jack Smallshaw, September 1914 To March 1919'.
I realize I'm a bit late to the party but I recently had interest to make replicas of famous WW1 or earlier warships in a certain build-your-own-ship naval warfare game.
U-Deutschland and the following 1917 SM U-155 refit are one of the most interesting 'projects' I've done so far because of the rich history and the nearly 100 pages of discussion in this thread. While I can make passably accurate generic replicas of pre-dreadnoughts out of photo references and period illustrations, U-Deutschland is my first foray into learning about submarine design and of course doing all the fun stuff like replicating functionality of various ballast, dive and trim tanks.
I'm sure my work is nothing special, it after all is based on virtual pixels and 1 meter building blocks instead of 'real' fabrication, but, it's a good way to learn how ships work and a chance to learn about a period of naval history I have not touched
Once again, thank you for keeping the legacy of U-Deutschland alive, and I appreciate all the excellent historical data and images I could find nowhere else!
Hi Carmen. Welcome to the forum. So this is part of a naval warfare game that you are working on?
Hi my name is Carsten. I am a naval architect, a diver, hobby shiphistorian and specialist in submarines. Own a own submarine for wreck research. Das EURONAUT U-Boot-Projekt v2.0. I research the fate of the U-Bremen the last 30 years and have some adittional information not displayed here and about her. I visit the archives or paid people (some 20 years ago) to visit it - in Bremerhaven, Bremen, Berlin and other. Some copies of original files are here in the folders. Some still with secret even for me because a hard read even for a German. I am open for disscusion with the guys here. I have some of the radio transmission and telegramms between DOR, Nauen and Berlin. In my option as conclusion she has a dive accident error during bad weather in the approch of the Orkneys. You find two pictures to open disscussion. The close up picture I steal from Claas side.