Stuttgart feuerschutzpolizei belt buckle

[real steel]

As I have said in the past many times on "rare or oddities" that are not seen often enough..."If it is accepted as a period piece from the opinions of the collecting community, one must take it as authentic". Of course there are "Blunders" rarely where proof was uncovered to dispute the community, but in large if the item is published in a respectable reference book, given positive replies from the most respected dealers & collectors, then we must deem it as "real". Unless someone can PROOVE something to be post war or reproduction, that's the way it is & always was
D.

[bsiwula1]

Not that my opinion is worth a ton. But the buckle itself looks to be period made. As Wim says the color looks correct, the construction methods and nice detail makes me think it is a correct period buckle, but that's just my opinion based off the study of other period made buckles. Kindest regards.

Brian

[Rossi]

Not that my opinion is worth a ton. But the buckle itself looks to be period made. As Wim says the color looks correct, the construction methods and nice detail makes me think it is a correct period buckle, but that's just my opinion based off the study of other period made buckles. Kindest regards.

Brian

Thanks Brian. That is what Ben, Myself and others feel as well.

[Ben Evans]

Gents, on these I have always gone by The Nash and Angolia book as I have never owned one and never really looked into them. For me the construction and quality of the buckle Rossi has posted is a pre war made buckle but I am always open to learn.
Is there any reason Markus why post war? I only ask so I can learn for myself if this is so?

Cheers

[Wilhelm Saris]

Hi Wim,

So when you say “the one starting the thread is an old production” what vintage are you thinking? The buckle I posted.

Just after the war when they made good quality buckles then and had better skills as in later years.
They knew how to produce, as they had gotten their skills since the thirties.
What it is must be obvious from what I posted. Show me one catalogue from the TR-period where
buckles as the shown one are being offered! This is for me the most important.

It is for me still a question why collectors do look up what is said in the books from Nash and Angolia.
Both wrote a book, but in my opinion do not have the needed knowledge. I do not know all of it,
but I have learned and visited manufacturer's. The both wrote from what they heard in the collecting
community.

PS: by the way. The shown buckle is NOT the same one as from the Angolia-book.

[Rossi]

Just after the war when they made good quality buckles then and had better skills as in later years.
They knew how to produce, as they had gotten their skills since the thirties.
What it is must be obvious from what I posted. Show me one catalogue from the TR-period where
buckles as the shown one are being offered! This is for me the most important.

It is for me still a question why collectors do look up what is said in the books from Nash and Angolia.
Both wrote a book, but in my opinion do not have the needed knowledge. I do not know all of it,
but I have learned and visited manufacturer's. The both wrote from what they heard in the collecting
community.

PS: by the way. The shown buckle is NOT the same one as from the Angolia-book.

Wim,

Respectfully...I said in an earlier thread the buckle in my estimation that the buckle was of 1937 vintage in my opinion. I did not EVER specifically state this buckle was of the third reich vintage but that it was a period buckle putting it around the war years. I only posted the Angolia Photo as you brought it up in an earlier thread. You are correct. My buckle is not the same in Angolia's book. It is the one in my hand and collection that I have inspected and have more saying it is pre-war and good than not good. So far you and Markus have said Post-War but have given me nothing else to show or prove it is of Postwar Vintage. So far 10 collectors and Dealers I have consulted with. Only 2 (you and Markus say Post War). I guess I will agree to disagree with you both on this one.

PS...You and Markus say Post-War. Show the collecting community evidence that explains why this is not a pre-war 1937 vintage buckle I stated and others I have consulted with have stated. You want me to show you a catalog with this buckle in the TR. Show me it in a catalog pre-war or post war? I need more than just "post war" stated in your review. If you like I can send to you for inspection. Its good

Rossi

[Wilhelm Saris]

This type and others were made after the war. Then there were no
leaflets or catalogues, as there was no money for it. I know what
was told to me by manufacturers: they were made for police.
The boxes were there, stocks of them (from old productions),
the only thing needed was to make new insets.

As said before, those dealers and others should come with a page from
a TR catalogue to prove what they say. Read also what Angolia says
(page 33). He was not far from the truth.

I will not further discuss this type of buckle, as it does not make sense.
It is no contra yes. Whatever! What was discussed with manufacturers
in the 1970's was not recorded, so I have no proof about what they have
told me!

[Rossi]

This type and others were made after the war. Then there were no
leaflets or catalogues, as there was no money for it. I know what
was told to me by manufacturers: they were made for police.
The boxes were there, stocks of them (from old productions),
the only thing needed was to make new insets.

As said before, those dealers and others should come with a page from
a TR catalogue to prove what they say. Read also what Angolia says
(page 33). He was not far from the truth.

I will not further discuss this type of buckle, as it does not make sense.
It is no contra yes. Whatever! What was discussed with manufacturers
in the 1970's was not recorded, so I have no proof about what they have
told me!

Thanks Wim,

Again we can respectfully disagree on this. There is not enough evidence to prove it is post war. I will move on as well. It is just fine that we can not see eye to eye on this one.

[yellow12]

Noch einmal

Polizei buckle. Hannover or Braunschweig?

Hello Ben,

no it is Westfalen !

Here other examples , one made from WH steel buckle :



And now finaly the Hannover Braunschweig :

[HPL2008]

As I have said in the past many times on "rare or oddities" that are not seen often enough..."If it is accepted as a period piece from the opinions of the collecting community, one must take it as authentic". Of course there are "Blunders" rarely where proof was uncovered to dispute the community, but in large if the item is published in a respectable reference book, given positive replies from the most respected dealers & collectors, then we must deem it as "real". Unless someone can PROOVE something to be post war or reproduction, that's the way it is & always was

No offense, but I have to respectfully disagree with this statement.

Again, I have to stress that this has nothing to do with the actual buckle at hand - about which I cannot comment - but is a general observation.

Depending on the circumstances, actual proof for an item's existence/authenticity/vintage can be found in period primary sources, by incontestable, documented provenance or even by forensic examination, but publication in a reference book or general consensus is never proof.

Books are written by people, and people make mistakes.

All too often, an incorrect bit of information originates from a single source, gets accepted at face value - because said source is considerd to be an authority - and then gets cited, copied and re-copied countless times over the years in various media (more books, forums, word of mouth...) until it becomes "generally accepted", without anybody ever questioning just what source the originator had.

(Speaking of Angolia, he is an author who has always been particularly bad at indexing what (if any) period sources he has utilized to come to his findings, unlike superior authors like Andrew Mollo or Wim.)

Of course, there are always pieces about which no conclusive judgment can be made either way, but I see nothing wrong with questioning anything.

Let's not forget: Just a few hundred years ago, it was commonly accepted knowledge that the Sun circled around the Earth, and every reputable standard reference said so, too...