Burkard Behr

[Igor]

Everything you always wanted to know about Burkard Behr but were afraid to ask https://wp.me/p461yQ-6dt
P.S. Perhaps this article will help find his descendants. Please use Google Translate
Photo: Hendrik Fr?hauf.

[chapmen]

As always, I can only marvel at the work you do. Unbelievable.

[algmule]

Hello

Trademark "CZAR": "Anmeldung vom 23. 4. [18]98. Eintragung 1. 6. [18]98." "Mehrlader-Pistolen und Schreckpatronen f?r Radfahrer." Burkard Behr, Stuttgart.

EDIT: forgot the square brackets. They are my addition (first quoatation). Square brackets are used when you want to add to a quotation and the addition within them are not part of the quoatation. Also, the question mark in the second quoatation is not part of the quoatation either. Replace it with a u and add an umlaut above the u.

Peter

[chapmen]

Igor, there are some articles behind an passwort wall if i go via translator. How can i get access to these?

[Igor]

Igor, there are some articles behind an passwort wall if i go via translator. How can i get access to these?

I just saw the question. I'm sorry. What articles interested you? I'll send you the passwords

[Igor]

Hello

Trademark "CZAR": "Anmeldung vom 23. 4. [18]98. Eintragung 1. 6. [18]98." "Mehrlader-Pistolen und Schreckpatronen f?r Radfahrer." Burkard Behr, Stuttgart.

EDIT: forgot the square brackets. They are my addition (first quoatation). Square brackets are used when you want to add to a quotation and the addition within them are not part of the quoatation. Also, the question mark in the second quoatation is not part of the quoatation either. Replace it with a u and add an umlaut above the u.

Peter

Thank you. This information is in the article (chapter Suhl)

[algmule]

Hello

Thank you. This information is in the article (chapter Suhl)

If so, Google Translate translates 1898 to 1908 as it still says 1908 in the article when translated to English. Besides, in my research the CZAR trademark/tradename was registered in 1898. I beleive the BEHR trademark/tradename was registered in 1902 but I have no decent source for that and could well be in the wrong for that one. For the CZAR one I have the registration. Behr (Suhl) had another trademark/tradename registered in 1907, for Gewehre, Pistolen and a whole lot of other wares. I have the registration for that one as well. The only source I know of for the tradenames/trademarks BEHR and CZAR being registered in 1908 is a publication from 1908 that lists tradenames/trademarks. Maybe it was compulsory to re-register tradenames/trademarks after some time, I do not know, but tradename/trademark CZAR was first registered in 1898 (see date in my post earlier in the thread. Stuttgart, however, is correct. Anyway, it is your article.

Peter

[algmule]

Hello

Google translates correctly. In the article - 1908. I will, of course, correct it if you document that you are right. Thank you.

No need to. I already know the CZAR tradename/trademark was registered in 1898. Also, I see no source for your images. All I see are two images and I could of course be in the wrong but I still believe you have used a compilation from 1908. Anyway, it is your article. I am content with knowing that the trademark/tradename CZAR was registered (eingetragen) in 1898. In future I shall refrain to bother you with information.

I shall now go to your site and see if there perhaps is an image showing info from the Handelsregister on Max Knoll, and, if so, also see who you gave as source for that image.

EDIT: I apologize, there was no image from the Handelsregister on Max Knoll on your site.


Peter

[Igor]

CZAR - 1898, BEHR - 1902 Thank you for bringing this to attention. I have already made the appropriate changes

[Igor]

The story with Behr didn't end there

[algmule]

Hello

Here is your source for 1908. Also: I cannot vouch for 1902 and the tradename/trademark BEHR. I believe 1902 but I still do not have a decent source, so until I have a decent source it is what I believe. 1898 and CZAR, however, that is carved in stone. There was another Behr with tradenames/trademarks for bicycles, Alfred something, from K/C?then.

01-smurf.jpg

Peter

[Igor]

1902 and BEHR, however, that is carved in stone. If you know how to use Google search engine, you can easily find this stone. Good luck!

[algmule]

Hello

1902 and BEHR, however, that is carved in stone. If you know how to use Google search engine, you can easily find this stone. Good luck!

Oh, I was under the impression that you already had me down as an Internet researcher. That is what I conclude from your posts in the Ruttmann/Ansbach thread. Apparently, I was good enough researcher to clearly see that you had not checked your Internet source regarding the tradenames/trademarks BEHR and CZAR. I am sorry but coming out 10 years incorrect is what happens when one regards himself as too clever a-researcher. Besides, your Behr-story still contains holes but I shall not bother to interfere further. I am not really researching Behr. He just happened to turn up while I was researching some other things and I for a short while "digressed" from my main research. As for Behr in Suhl, I have what I believe to be the full story and a long list of names of the people involved. Complicated story if you ask me, which I advise against as I am considered to be a not so serious researcher. An Internet researcher. Good enough to spot your 10-year error it must be mentioned. Sources for the Suhl info I have as well. I have been contemplating giving them to Mr. Schuknecht over at the "Apel-site", but why? They will end up on someone's site on the Internet, or worse, driven by bus to another board/forum and twisted into something they certainly are not.


Sources: people cry out for sources. Left, right and centre, across, above and below, or so it seems. Apparently, it all depends on who is behind the information. Again, or so it seems. Glossy magazine articles in which the accuracy of the gospel is not exactly near what actually took place. After the publication of mentioned articles, the content in the articles is regarded as being the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Amen. So, without there being a single hint of acknowledgement that the articles may contain holes in the story, or even worse, that actual facts have been misinterpreted or is slightly missing the “target” is now “out there”. How is it even possible? If someone should have the impudence to point out any mistakes in the articles or is willing to add to what is in the article in order to correct things or at least coming nearer the truth, to be of help, that someone is, at best, immediately asked about sources. Or, most of the times, ignored (believe me, I know). The above goes for articles on-line too.

Igor,
I remember when you told me that when you are doing research you are doing it for the benefits of people like me. Assumedly ignorant people. Nothing wrong with using the Internet when researching if you ask me. What is important when using the Internet in one’s research is to interpret the sources correctly, not to mention using the correct sources. This of course goes for all sources, not only Internet sources. Your date “1908” for the trademark “CZAR” was incorrect. I have stated you used a source that contains a compilation of trademarks and that source was published in 1908. Ten years after the fact. This begs the question: who is the serious researcher? You or me? Another thing is, if I remember correctly, I have helped you in the past. Please correct me if I again am in the wrong and I shall apologize.

I often post information on various forums. I seldom give sources for the information I post. That does not mean I do not have sources. I just do not post them because there are some people on-line that use said information to further themselves (the main reason it seems) and their own postings on forums, or articles on-line. I am not really thin-skinned about it but I ask for some decency and I willingly admit that on occasion it irks me. I may have sinned myself in the past but I do try to behave and there is at least one person that I sometimes correspond with via e-mail that can vouch for me asking permission for use of material, either sent to me or found in posts on forums. I may not have to, but that is the way I was brought up. Always try to do the right thing, even if you sometimes fail. I sometimes send information to other people researching Germanic guns. Even when I am not asked. I do this mainly because I myself have genuine interest in Germanic guns and their history (not so much in myself). Some appreciate it, others do not. Will it stop me? Nope. After all, I am the annoying one.

Research is a funny thing. Funny peculiar that is. Not funny ha-ha, although some research is outright laughable, especially the multi-post rants on certain Internet forums. Research is peculiar in that if someone is going into research in order to confirm what one believes (s)he already knows, it will undoubtedly become a cock-up. My main guiding star when researching is the Greek philosopher, Socrates. He claimed that the only thing he knew for certain was that he did not know anything, and therefore he was the wisest human in the world, even wiser than the oracle at Delphi. So, the first thing I do when I get out of bed in the morning is to tell myself that I know nothing, and the know-nothing is how I start my research(es). I do realize that this post may come back and bite me in the behind. I am actually that wise, believe it or not. As for Socrates, he also meant that marriage is an absolute must for men. He claimed that if a man married a good woman, he would lead a happy life, and if he married a wicked woman, he would become a philosopher. So, it was a win-win situation no matter what kind of wife. Apparently, considering Xanthippe, he at least knew this so he may not have been as wise as he claimed. I know I am not.

The Internet is also a peculiar thing. It is full of information. Some correct, a lot incorrect. After the introduction of the Internet people changed. They became more like goats, i.e., they would eat anything. Unlike goats, however, the “anything”, to start with, at least, needed to be packaged in something fancy but these days the fancy bit is no longer needed. People have become less picky, like goats. In the real world, outside (of) the Internet, fancy packaging is still needed but it has started to change back to the old truth – lie as much as your conscience allow you to, or you will not be believed. My advice is, have your medication adjusted. My medicine is cognac and after reading on the Internet the dose certainly needs to be increased.

I have not checked your site/article today which means you may already have included the tradename/trademark from 1907 that I mentioned in an earlier post. Anyway, here it is and you did not even have to use the little word please. Enjoy.

01-Smurf-2.jpg

If you wonder. I have nothing against your site or your articles. I do however have bother with Google Translate and I object to being mistrusted when trying to help.

EDIT: 56468 is the registration number for Burkard Behr's tradename/trademark from 1902, not 56458. Forgot to tell you. Those Internet researchers.............

Peter

[chapmen]

I just saw the question. I'm sorry. What articles interested you? I'll send you the passwords

I was going just through the hole site and was not able to open this or that. I thought there is an general password.

[Igor]

I was going just through the hole site and was not able to open this or that. I thought there is an general password.

Dear Michael, I closed some publications at the request of the editors of the magazine that is going to publish them. If you are interested in something, please message me and I will send you the password