Hej Michael,
your bags are original, no doubt. But - with greatest respect - I can't see a refutation of my opinion. Yours have a typical period lettering. Left one, the Henckels: Of course is "Fahrtenme
sser" only correct spelled with double-s, because the "sharp s", the ß, was only used at the end of a word, if "short spoken". Never "Me
ßer", which would be completely wrong. So all is fine here.
Right one, the Louper: everything perfect, the "vorschriftmä
ßiges" (because "long spoken", derived from "Maß") as well as "Gu
ßstahl" (short spoken, end of the word "Guß"). In both cases the "ß" is correct and was used here.
Not in my example: The font is rather modern looking and like plotted, not printed. There is no shining/gloss of the printing ink. And why should the maker use the correct "Gu
ßstahl", but should forget the "ß" in "vorschriftsmä
ßig" at the same time and type "vorschriftmä
ssig" instead of the correct form??? This makes no sense to me. And these rules of correct German spelling were abolished only in 1998.
And if you look at the close-up picture, you see some mysterious coloured metallic particles in the very rough paper which I think to be modern too.
Second argument: My pic above in the previous post shows a perfect spelled and period looking counterpart of the Schüttelhöfer, with an old fashioned font. So they exist, the period Schüttelhöfer bags ;-).
Kind Regards,
Jack
You don't have permission to view attachments.