Cool, thats three different packagings. Its oddly difficult to find copyright registration numbers online (21.192 in this case). The "Set of Modern Chessmen" font dates from the late 30s ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronet_(typeface) ), so the box can't be older than that. I'll do some more digging on the copyright registration later.
Jugendstil, space age, what else?
Sort:
The latest issue of the Chess Collector magazine features my recent article on the origins of the ACF set, which is an interesting bit of history. The result of my research may be surprising for many collectors. Here is the download link to the article. Enjoy!
PS: @ungewichtet, Till, this is the article I was working on. Thanks for the pictures. I now believe that the two Schlicht-Schach sets we have are closely related and are both super rare. I have not seen any other so far.
nice work
@greghunt, thanks!!!
Check out the State Library Victoria: In the 1944 photo below, there's an ACF set in lower right corner. It was taken by Norman Smith, and the soldiers are in New Guinea. However, I am also curious about what sort of sets the other soldiers are using.
https://viewer.slv.vic.gov.au/?entity=IE745270&mode=browse
https://viewer.slv.vic.gov.au/?entity=IE709231&mode=browse
you can just feel the new Chess set collecting chasm opening beneath our feet
I want to say thank you to Holger for an incredibly engaging article which he kindly shared with us, you can read it following his link in #24.
I have checked out if the stacking instruction for the version B, as seen in the drawings sent in for the patent and as demonstrated by Holger with his 'B' would work for my taller - presumably - Schlicht Schach A version, as well, and it does. That is very practical, pieces don't rattle or fall in the box.
I want to draw attention to the third of the sets that appeared in Germany online. I have posted it already in #1 and #15, and here it is again:
The only story I have of this set is, I have seen it offered online to be picked up for free, but in a part of Germany far away from where I am. I sent an offer to the woman who wanted to give it away and she was surprised- 'o, really?' and for a moment it seemed I might get it, but in the end, I think, she just gave it away. Luckily for us, on the one picture she made, every piece is perfectly visible.
The remarkable thing are the clear interconnections to the other sets German and Australian we know. We have here the queen with a calyx, like in the Australian sets, we have rooks, that are not like Schlicht Schach A or B rooks, but like the rooks in the Australian sets, with two rings and a delayed widening downwards. Most notably, the knight is the Australian knight, very obviously. Whereas the bishop is clearly close in design to the bishop of the set I found and presented in this thread, the taller version, possibly Schlicht Schach A. The pawns are like in all sets, the king has a dot or a knob or a finial that is new in this family of sets. Maybe note that the king has a rounded head under the finial, as rounded as in the ACF war memorial set.
The board could very well be a typical German folding board of the time early to mid- 20th century, but of course it needn't be. The box is not like the nice boxes both Holger's and my sets have, into which the pieces can be so neatly packed, but that one could be lost. The pieces, regarding their wood, finish, lacquer and felt would be in line with the Schlicht Schachs A and B. So, from mere appearance, I would think this is a third German set, and the Australian set would nearly be a reproduction of this would-be Schlicht Schach C, a very true reproduction which makes only two changes, omitting the king's finial and changing the bishop's rounded rocket head or flower stamp shape into a priest's hat. Only two, but very effective changes, changing the relations within the set and its overall expression.
We have seen in Holger's article, that the Australian set, for the time line, would have to be a version of Ludwig Zacherl's Schlicht Schachs. Now this third set could either be a third Australian set, like the super rare bird that did not make it into production, but exists only in a prototype- and that has the same production traits as the German sets. Or it could be another one of the line that has the two Schlicht Schachs A and B.
It is a little difficult, from the wooziness of this one photograph, to see in it a Schlicht Schach in line with the more orderly and calm sets A and B. The name 'schlicht', which probably best translates as simple, unpretentious, may have joined the party later and only fit the versions A and B. While this 3rd may be a first try with a much more vivid, vital and passionate outlook, causing the more functional and ornamental versions to draw the name 'schlicht' in comparison. Pretty incredible none of these three sets made it into any relevant production: they appear so scarcely, so far we have three times one sighting. Holger's idea is best, that they had no chance because of the start of the Bundesform project, and remained the small scale enterprise of an artist trying to support the Nazi system- or his country- with his vision of chessmen. Zacherl probably made a small number of each set to present them, or a small edition of a few dozen, or a hundred sets..
Interestingly, I recently saw the same lid box that contains the pieces of Schlicht Schach B and (presumably) A so well. It contained some nice, unrelated Romanian chessmen, but it was stamped inside much in the same way we find 'Schlicht Schach B' stamped into Holger's box. Only that it read 'Thing-Schach A'. 'Ein Thing' is an old Germanic gathering of people to hold court, preferably under a linden tree, 'die Gerichtslinde'. There was a Thing movement in Germany in the 1920ies reaching into the mid-1930ies when it was discouraged by the Nazis. I just had a second look at the photo and for once my jaw dropped, because I read the name stamped into it, that I only just got to know in Holger's article: Ludwig Zacherl.
Complete with address 
Now, unless he made even more chess sets, I think it is at least a plausible assumption for my set or the third set or both to be a 'Thing Schach', if only because of the linden tree, which would explain the shape of the bishops in my set and the third set, while Holger's set is a 'Schlicht Schach B'.
Maybe there is a way to discover that the third set is, if not originally Australian, a synthesis made later by guys who knew both the ACF and the original Zacherl sets. Then, the knight and queen could be genuinely Australian as much as the ACF bishop.
In either case, the work of Karl Bittman, né Sobel, the Australian Robin Hood from Bukovina, can not be praised highly enough, because his- or his and Julian Rose's- slightly altered design was the one to reach the people. What would Zacherl's sets be but curious and beautiful missed opportunities, were it not for the success of the ACF modern chessmen. So that, with what scant little but concrete traces of its start we're glad it has left in Germany, this family of chess sets is as much Australian as it is German.
Hello, at the end of my last post my intuition for the English language let me down, normally I check rare words with a dictionary. So I just want to say I edited the last few lines in the post before (I was thinking 'spurious' meant 'fine and elusive', while it means 'having an irregular origin, not properly constituted')! 
Now the message should come out more clearly. I hope I also inserted the photo of my set stacked like Holger's, like in the instructions!
Let me reprise! Using the file date of the photo I had saved, I was lucky to find my way back to the online offer of the lid box with the two interesting stampings. It was still available, and I have got it! It does not contain further hints, so far. I can say that the size is exactly the same size as of my first box, 16,5 x 16,5 x 8 cm. The ciphers under 'Thing-Schach A' and 'D,R.P,' (which might mean Deutsches Reichspatent, patent of the German Reich) seem to be the lowercase letters 'ang'. In absence of any faint remains of other letters left and right, 'ang' could be short for 'Patent angemeldet' (patent applied for, patent pending).The seller, an antiques shop in Hessen, could not provide further info on the box or lead me to its previous owner. So, sadly, there seems to be no new lead to the pieces.
But let me illustrate a point- If Zacherl called a chess set 'Thing-Schach' and we have bishops in the form of a lime tree, linden tree- and the set I own, and even more so what I call the third set or single photo set seem to have such bishops- that may indicate that these sets are 'Thing-Schachs'. Some of you may laugh, some may say 'of course':
In the year 1911, when Karl Sobel was born in Czernowitz, Ludwig Zacherl, then 40, may have seen the 1st exhibition of Franz Marc's and Wassily Kandinsky's group Der blaue Reiter in Munich.
On the outbreak of World War One, Kandinsky, as Russian, had to leave Germany, Franz Marc and group member August Macke were drafted and fell.
Marc drew these horses, which remind me of the second knight, and which may well have been an inspiration of Zacherl.
The black knights are from Powder's 'modern chessmen'.
This is just to say I find it plausible that the third set is a Zacherl set, too, in view of the knight design, which may reflect cubism, expressionism, Jugendstil. While it could really be a later mix of ACF and Thing- or even a prototype of the Australian sets that was not produced. It would be helpful, if the forms of the queen's crown or the appearance of the ACF knight could be traced in Australian artifacts or imagery of that time. It struck me when utpic, an artist himself, saw an Aboriginal vibe in the ACF modern chessmen. I am just a dummy and do not want to preclude anything. I just try to bring in what I found; and I'd love to hear the voice of Australia.
I want to close with a linguistic observation. If we think of the Germanic 'Thing' (pronounced 'ting') as a place of participation and justice: According to old customs, court had to be held outside, and the linden tree gave shelter, sun, snow or rain- then a Thing-Schach, featuring linden bishops, can add to the scene, because chess is an extremely fair game, and not even the smallest pawn is neglected. The sides exchange arguments and both learn, and whatever the result, the pieces will be set up for a new game. There is something very Solomonic in chess. Now, if we look back at Holger's pieces, their box is stamped 'Schlicht-Schach B'. What if 'Schlicht' is not an adjective, meaning 'simple, unpretentious', but is a stem of a verb- 'schlichten', meaning to settle, reconcile, arbitrate? If Ludwig Zacherl had that in mind, he chose a hard time to try to relaunch chess with that message. If Zacherl got to participate in several exhibitions under the cultural regime of the National Socialists he must have been a supporter, or a very determined partisan. In any case, 'Schlicht-Schach' reminds me of the peace that is active in chess.
Here’s my box
