Closed eyes SS cap skull.

[Johndevon]

I recently acquired this cap skull which I believe matches other few known examples I've seen but there are questions I can't find the answers to regarding the design maker and use of this particular skull and wondered if anyone on the forum may no more. I think it's of earlier manufacture due to the metal used nickel silver? Also why is the prong placement so different to other skulls and why are the eye and nose Sockets not stamped out? I've also seen some of these with black painted eyes and nose and others like mine without, are these skulls considered unfinished? And would anyone no a possible maker. Any additional information would be great and as always all opinions are welcome.

Cheers john

[bsiwula1]

Hello it's trying to be a Deschler skull. But even without the cutouts the front is way off, proximity and size of nostril opening to eyes is disproportionate. Also the vertical prong configuration was never used by any cap badge manufacturer for either skulls or adler's or at least none i ve ever seen. Best regards.

Brian

[Johndevon]

Thank you for your input Brian , I have found an older thread on the forum opinions on this Totenkopf which shows another example and answers some of my questions there is also a link to another thread on WAF which I will take a look at later. The prong placement is very strange and it makes me wonder if this type was some sort of prototype maybe? Also as you mention it seems many believeed these to be an unmarked Deschler. I hope there will be others who no more

Cheers john

[bsiwula1]

Very interesting John! I hope for you it is deemed ok. Learn something new everyday. Sid will stumble across this discussion I'm certain, i would absolutely defer to his opinion of the authenticity of the badge. I ve looked briefly at the ones from WAF, supposedly they were an attempt to manufacture skulls more cheaply. They look similar to your example, but have a different finish than yours. Perhaps it's throwing off the finer details like the cracks over the nostrils between the eyes, the less defined fractures in the skull? It's an interesting topic I'm hoping for the best for you. Kindest regards.

Brian

[Johndevon]

Thanks Brian, I've also had a look at the ones on WAF now and they do seem the same apart from the finish as you say. The original pictures I posted were the sellers and don't show the natural colour very well, here's one I've just taken which I hope shows the skulls finish in better light. I've also found another example on emedals website which was sold some time ago but unfortunately the description doesn't answer any more of my questions hopefully other opinions will help.

All the best
John

[bsiwula1]

Wow! You bet, the light absolutely makes a huge difference. If the others are indeed real John I d say I like your odds! You made me a believer. Much nicer looking from that photo. It still looks alot like a Deschler skull to me. Good thread! I hope all turns out well for you. Kindest regards.

Brian

[bsiwula1]

It s nearly humorous when you compare the differences a quality photo makes. If time allows perhaps include a similar image of the reverse please? Thanks in advance.

Brian

[stakeside]

Concerning the OP skull, certainly a better quality image of the backside would make it even more interesting. Better yet, please add a side view of the parting line. The juxtaposition of the two in bsiwula1 's post #7 is worth a thousand words. It certainly appears to have been struck/stamped. The prong/splint/tine attachments have been discussed at length in many other threads and posts. I would only like to comment that all four manufacturers approached this attachment in many different ways, indicating that it was perhaps a weakness in the design, and many methods were labor intensive. The three prong skull is a related discussion as it would cut costs. F-B also comments, correctly so, that more documentation is needed on the actual sales catalogues of these manufacturers. Many versions were undoubtedly offered with a range of prices depending on the metals, finishes, and other factors. Consequently, in spite of an early or late war chronology, I would expect any manufacturer to try to contain labor costs. This OP skull/scull could have been struck on purpose with a different weight range of blanks, less tonnage, and the dies not "pushing the envelope" to close completely to eject the chaff from the eyes and nose. This would ensure that the dies would risk less damage. Overall crispness of the image would suffer, but the manufacturer could offer a cheaper version in his catalogue. The lack of any apparent marks on the backside might be problematic, but experts have also analyzed this in other threads and posts. I am no expert, so take my opinions with a grain of salt.....Doug

[Johndevon]

The light is not very good today but here are some extra pics that I hope show the skulls finish and detail better. I'm almost sure it's a good original as it does seem to match all the others I've seen. My first reaction to seeing the skull was the same as you Brian solid eyes and completely different prong arrangement to anything I had seen before instantly made me think junk but on looking closer I could see details that were similar to original skulls also the base metal and finish made me take that chance on it so I'm hoping I did the right thing.

Best regards
John

[Johndevon]

Very interesting Doug thank you, the thread regarding these skulls on WAF mentions the skulls found on some caps but I am yet to see any period photos showing this and it was also mentioned to me that these skulls may have been used on the covers of photo albums but again I can find no evidence of this. I do believe these were produced for use on caps and a short lived attempt as you say to speed up production as well as cutting costs but who knows for sure, all very interesting theory's and opinions. I hope the new pictures will show the skulls details in a better light.

Cheers john