@gieorgijewski I share your same opinion. Regarding burner I can’t help much, but the lipstick seems rudimental, the bell and damper inner cap look more modern design. If you remember or have photos of other stoves with wrong umlaut position please post them here or share a link. Thanks! Nicola
hm... I think - proper question is: - "is in german writing possible/known use thats dots inside O"...
@gieorgijewski I have searched for that and I didn’t find any example with umlaut inside O. äëïöü Nicola
@gieorgijewski is what I said at the beginning, so I agree with your point of view. If, for absurd, Phöbus was written correctly (or accepting a graphic design choice or a poetical license), we would be anyway missing other essential details. So, for now, we still stay in that terrible “limbo”: if fake->prove the fake or if original->prove the original. The only way to prove the originality is to have a maker marking (absent). Without maker marking, an object can’t be attributed to a maker just because an umlaut or a product name, fake or not fake, correct or not correct. So who will decide this? Will this stove stay forever in the “possible” world? Nicola
Hello, I want to put the focus on the burner. The Patent word on the stove could refer mainly to the burner, the tank and all fittings were already pretty common in 1901 when GB&R was created (1901-1916). So let’s focus on the lipstick burner. First patents about lipstick burners belong to G. Barthel: 1899: https://classiccampstoves.com/threads/se12812-barthel-1899-patent.48518/ 1900: https://classiccampstoves.com/threads/se-12457-g-barthel-1900-patent.49259/ The Barthel patented burners are patented 1/2 years before the GB&R foundation, they in any case seems prototypes of the burners that some time later we’ll see on Juwel 3 and 6A. As we know Barthel didn’t use a light brass burner bell as found, for example, on Primus 100 (which is similar to the bell of this Phobus Patent stove). Aktiebolaget Primus patented the first lipstick burner in 1902: https://classiccampstoves.com/threa...s-lindqvist-patent-se14415-jan-31-1902.49305/ This new burner in fact is found on Primus 100 starting from 1903 (earlier catalog reference). We know that GB&R made under license an Optimus 100 discus stove Austrian Optimus 100: But we also know that the earliest Optimus 100 was a collapsible 2 pints stove with regular burners, datable 1906-1910 as seen here Pre-1911 2 pint Optimus 100: So the Optimus 100 in his final discus shape and with the lipstick burner in Primus style probably arrived a little before 1910. And so produced by GB&R under license. So we are in 1910 and is legit to think that GB&R was already delivering the full branded Phöbus 1 with roarer burner as my gallery example. 2 pints roarer stoves were already extremely common in that period so I safely exclude the possibility that the museum unmarked Phobus Patent stove was made after 1910. So we have in a certain way filled the GB&R 1901-1916 existence. When the museum Phobus Patent stove could be located into this timeframe? GB&R patented the lipstick burner before Primus? For me, as @gieorgijewski said, the Patent word is a camouflage, also because I don’t see much that could be under a GB&R patent on the museum Phobus Patent stove. Nicola
@Nicola Francesco Elia Hi I've been thinking a lot about the Phöbus in the museum these days. This morning, I made a direct call to the German department at the Foreign Language University. I focused on asking about umlauts with two dots in the letter "O" that I was curious about. What the teaching assistant says to me after calling the professor and asking "I've seen it used in a few variations for design." However, for general notation, two dots must be added above the 'O'. As in the question, I have never seen an umlaut notation identical to a photograph." From the beginning I was able to predict their opinions. Transform the letters considering the design? The time is estimated to be just before 1900, but did you really choose the 'creative' umlaut notation over the general notation because of the design 120 years ago? That was the part I didn't understand. While the stories I had heard lingered in my ears, my mind continued to connect with the patent records I discovered the night before. It was a connection with the "Phöbus" brand (company name: Beese& co.) in Dresden, Germany, for which two patents were filed between 1895 and 1896. Mr. Radler says it's not relevant, but I don't think so. Phöbus was another name for Apollo, the god of light, so it was a common brand used everywhere. Possibility : Austria GB&R recognized the existence of the German brand "Phöbus" and, when creating the initial model, placed two dots inside the letter "O" to avoid overlapping with the German "Phöbus" of the same language. In this way, the meaning of the letters may be the same, but was it not to avoid pointing out that they were copied? After that, as the German Phöbus disappeared or became inactive, wouldn't it indicate "Phöbus" and attach "Vienna"? After GB&R, his son-in-law Rosenthal wrote 'Forverse', but the Vienna mark was omitted due to the brand's confidence. It might be criticized for being a novel, but a thought came to my mind as I was thinking about why they put two dots in the letter 'o'. If they did it just for design, there must be other "examples" we can see. Therefore, it is thought that there is some hidden intention in this strange umlaut notation. German Phöbus patent records confirmed with my own eyes Nicola's GB&R fuel cap Nicola's MJ&R fuel cap
@multi-cho I reply to your message in sequence. 1: Umlaut position. So basically at the university they confirmed that umlaut must stay above the letter O. They also said that, also if they have observed some creative graphical interpretation of the umlaut, they have never seen the dots used inside the O like in this case. As you said I would exclude too the creative graphical interpretation… if any graphic creativity was intended why focusing it on the umlaut and not maybe on other details. So for me the wrong umlaut position still represents an error. 2: Branding in relation to the Geese&Co Phöbus lamp. In this case I doubt they modified the umlaut position to differentiate them from the German Phöbus… Everyone is proud of their product name and I don’t think they would have used a modified product name at the beginning, if so they would have been the fake ones. To distinguish themselves from the German Phöbus they could have just used Phöbus Vienna on the museum stove and add their GB&R stamping on it. Nicola
Nicola So for me the wrong umlaut position still represents an error. Fair enough. Others, myself, may view it as without comparisons, inexplicable to-date (among the seemingly endless unknowns for early pressure stoves). Best way to find more unknowns / open questions... keep digging deeper for answers , this almost always leads to more questions (than answers). Keep up the good work, all such effort I find refreshing and I DO try to keep up. edit for below: Nicola yes my vote/thoughts mostly align with you and Gieorgi and that the museum likely has not represented this example accurately. : (
@OMC so three votes for the fake, me you and @gieorgijewski … Thanks for sharing your thoughts Nicola
@Nicola Francesco Elia Coincidentally, it is said that there is a border stone like a picture on the border between Austria and Germany. I also respect the opposing views of both people, including you. In time, the truth will come to light someday. In the "same" of the fuel cap and air valve parts I keep hope.
@multi-cho that stone has the correct umlaut So it’s an original German stone ahaha. I respect too your opinion and hope and the investigation doesn’t stop here, for sure. For me filler cap and air release key are too common to use them as distinctive features. Also wanting to look at knurling it seems different. The pump knob on both my Phöbus stoves is more elaborated and refined. Usually on the earlier examples we find the higher quality, in this case it seems the opposite. Nicola
