New Addition - Possible maker connection - Rettenmaier = "Flatback" Maker

[Norm F]

@ Norm

sent you a pn in a few minutes

edit says: Norm we are not totally different you will see. Normaly i call would prefer a telephone call than writing in the internet. So often something could be misinterpreted.

I messaged back. Most "disagreements" are based upon communication difficulties, and I'm very happy that you agree we are definitely not that different.

Using different methods we find more pieces of the puzzle to fit together into the best picture. And like all good puzzles, there is pleasure in the process as well as the final result.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

i am not at home today and the next days. so i can not make a scan of the page... but here is the text

... Der Schwarzarbeiter erhält vom Meister die Rohbestandteile, die zur Herstellung des Schmuckstückes notwendig sind, wie Fassungen für die Steine (Kessel), Pressungen, Draht, Scharniere etc. zugewiesen. Seine Aufgabe ist es nun, nach einem gegebenen Muster aus den Bestandteilen durch Zusammenlöten den Schmuck die vorgegebene feste Form zu geben.

i think you can transfer it to the workers who works for S&L or other firms. I have no reason to believe that what function properly to the jewellery does not function properly for the badge production. A littele side note. The firm from which Andreas shows the catches told us that they must finish the badges for the firms who produce the badges. They have sample boards how they should finish it. Somehting that is the same i wrote above. (in 1960 or 1970th years a visitor from England bought all these sample boards)

at the moment i do more reasearch about such firms that are supplier for firms like S&L and other.

Must check my files when i am hat home about Berg & Nolte and S&L.

"The "black worker" (home worker) receives from the master the raw ingredients that are necessary for the production of jewelery, such as the assigned settings for the jewels, crimps, wire, hinges, etc.. His task now is to solder together the components to give the predetermined fixed form of the jewelry according to a supplied sample."

Very interesting. Basti, that was referring to jewellery making in Gablonz? Is this from a published source and if so, when was it written? By analogy, one could imagine a manufacturing company like S&L or FLL providing a completed badge as a sample, as well as a batch of die-struck planchets and supplies of hardware to the home worker who would assemble them to reproduce the look of the sample. It sounds like it's still the manufacturing company who would prescribe the components they wanted for their line of badges which could account for the different combinations of setups used on each maker's badges. It sounds like you're still researching the specifics for suppliers to Lüdenscheid companies to see if this was the case or not, and that this is a work in progress?

Are you suggesting that perhaps the "Lüdenscheid sample boards" discussed in the past might not have been souvenir boards for the G.I.'s as has been speculated, but instead may have been sample boards provided to home workers to guide them for assembly of the final products?

Best regards,
---Norm

P.S. That reminds me, my grandmother did something similar as a housewife in Kiel, sewing Navy uniforms from supplies and samples for extra money in hard times. My Dad told me about this years ago but I don't recall if it was before the war or during.

[BassD]

yes ist was Gablonz jewellery written in the 1950th

The way the firms told the home workers was for my understanding... here is the badge, here the hinges... nothing more or less. Today you use a zoom to find some scratches...something in the war nobody use a zoom to make the badge with the same sractches like the master pice

can not say sometghing about these sample boards... maybe these are sample boards, maybe not.. have an sample boar from Assmann from 1970 and this looks other... more like a real sample board and not like boar only full with awards. But that is my unprooven personal opinion

[Andreas Klein]

...but the way in which you and Andreas often completely dismiss and denigrate the study of the badges themselves is counterproductive to the hobby.

Hi Norm,

to be honest i would like to catch a beer with you and explain you some "why" and show some evidences live. I'm quite sure you would see why we react that hard sometimes ... it's all about basic knowledge.

Take the Souval letter i posted above as example:

This is only a little part of certain documents going around betwen Souval - Mr. Doehle and the Wehrmacht about 1 single man who was responsible for the crosses soldering in the whole Souval firm. Knowing what kind of person Mr. Doehle was in the third reich and what influence he had i can clearly classify if iron cross soldering was an easy job or not. You can believe me that no one would involve Mr. Doehle direct to get someone back from the eastern front if everyone else could to his job as well.

So there is no room for me in a discussion if you, Basti or someone else had a soldering training in the school and thinks he could solder crosses. We also had a talk to S&L about crosses soldering and they told us the same: it was not an easy job for everyone because of the heat stability of the black paint and the silver rim. An untrained worker could easily destroy the rim with to much heat.

So i need no long-winded discussion about cross soldering as counterargument against homeworkers in combat awards production, where they had to solder s simple catch onto a badge. This is comparing apples to pears.

Please note that we don't dismiss badge research in general ... we try to bring the badges together with the basic knowledge and there is on the other side the problem of the forensic research which most times ignore any basic knowledge.

If i know that some Lüdenscheid based makers were supllied by one the same setup maker, that S&L confirmed us that they never had something "own" and when i know what "System Lüdenscheid" meant, than it's not a dismiss to say to a forensic reserach: sorry what you say is gueswork, it isn't backed up by the basis we knew. Sometimes it seems to us that forensic reseach is only focused on one side of the medal. If i know and can prove that Baumeister and Kissing had exactly the same supply line as S&L, than the forensic reseach which only accepts S&L as maker of certain badges has to explain me how they can exclude Baumeister and Kissing. Based on pure forensic research around 100 PK numbers had never produced anything

In most cases this is the situation where Basti and i where called hard stubborn

Basti and I are not magicans working with a crystal ball .... nearly all things we know are written in books like the info about the Schwarzarbeiter ... but sometimes it seems that some forensic researchers don't spent a single minute to look in such a book.

In Oberstein (the home of Klein&Quenzer) there is still one wartime maker having the machines and tools as living museum. They are extremly friendly to people who are interested in the subject and told us everything about fire gilding for example. They showed us the machines and so one so that you could get a feeling for wartime work. The same goes to Carl Wild in Hamburg ... i have seen hundreds of iron crosses parts coming from a subcontractor with my own eyes. That's why we have a feeling for what was possible and was not.

Having all this in the background we can't accept certain things and they are guesswork. Btw. guesswork isn't bad so i don't understand why certain forensic fans react that edgy when you say that theit statement is gueswork.

To come to an end ... if you will be someday in germany feel invited to visit me and Basti and we pay the beer and show you what ever you want (and after some beers it could be possible that you a a poem of our unmarked Goethe).

[Norm F]

Hi Andreas,

Without doubt we have common ground, and I look forward to that beer!

So i need no long-winded discussion about cross soldering as counterargument against homeworkers in combat awards production, where they had to solder s simple catch onto a badge. This is comparing apples to pears.

No one is denying your evidence for the use of homeworkers -- indeed it's a valuable addition to the historical study. But from your research to date, we can't say whether home workers were used 100% of the time or 80% or 20%, nor does it detract from the forensic study of the badges - on the contrary, it enhances it and adds to our understanding.

If i know that some Lüdenscheid based makers were supplied by one the same setup maker, that S&L confirmed us that they never had something "own" and when i know what "System Lüdenscheid" meant, than it's not a dismiss to say to a forensic reserach: sorry what you say is guesswork, it isn't backed up by the basis we knew.

No one is denying that S&L and others bought 3rd party hardware for their products, but that doesn't preclude characteristic patterns of use of that hardware nor exclusive use of one particular piece of hardware by a particular maker. That's exactly why your excellent information must be combined with the observations of the badges themselves which show these recognizable patterns - this generates stronger hypotheses, not "guesswork". And this greater understanding evolves over time.

Please note that we don't dismiss badge research in general ... we try to bring the badges together with the basic knowledge and there is on the other side the problem of the forensic research which most times ignore any basic knowledge.

But we don't ignore the knowledge, we combine it with the forensic observations to achieve a greater understanding.

Based on pure forensic research around 100 PK numbers had never produced anything

No, although I haven't made a count, I think there are known products for more than half of the 142 makers on that list (not all combat badges of course). For the others, the forensics research doesn't claim they never produced anything -- it only says we don't yet have the physical evidence for combat badge production by these makers. Meanwhile, Schwerin, the pre-eminent KM badge maker, didn't even have a PK number so the significance of the PK number list with regards to combat badge production is unknown.

Basti and I are not magicans working with a crystal ball .... nearly all things we know are written in books like the info about the Schwarzarbeiter ... but sometimes it seems that some forensic researchers don't spent a single minute to look in such a book.

Unfortunately we don't all have access to the same resources, but we do our best. Fortunately, we have your and Basti's excellent research adding to our current and future knowledge.

To come to an end ... if you will be someday in germany feel invited to visit me and Basti and we pay the beer and show you what ever you want (and after some beers it could be possible that you a a poem of our unmarked Goethe).

I look forward to it, and I'm sure I'll learn a lot!

Best regards,
---Norm

[BassD]

@ Karsten

to asked your questions i want to have a quick look in GCA for my postings there, but suddenly i was no longer a Premium Member and later my login data are suddenly wrong... seems that GCA have some technical problems with my accout like Dietrich with his accout and some other

[Norm F]

The "Flattenmaier Theory"

Hi Guys,

This 17-page thread has wandered way off topic (albeit in a very interesting discussion) debating the relative merits and complementary nature of forensic and documentary investigations. I want to take a moment to draw it back to Tom's original theme which was the presentation of a hypothesis regarding the maker attribution of the flatback/greyback maker, including the "broken stem" IAB at the start of the thread.

It's worth a succinct summary of the evidence to date to draw it all together in a view postings, so here goes:

The “Flattenmaier Theory” goes as follows – It is hypothesized that Alois Rettenmaier of Schwäbisch-Gmund could be the “unknown flatback/greyback maker”. As noted before, there is no documented proof, only anecdotal and forensic evidence:

A) Anecotal/circumstantial evidence:

1) from Heukemes: Greyback Heeresflak hoard found in Schwäbisch-Gmund.
2) from Heukemes in 2006, Quote: “A few guys in Germany bought what was left of their [Rettenmaier’s] WWII stocks. I was in contact with one of these guys. Among some marked Rettenmaier items, such as EKs, there were a few examples of the unknown #11 GAB.
Not the final word on it, but a good hint I guess. Through the similarities of reverse finishing in the #11 GABs and the (or better some) Flatback PABs one can assume these were made by Rettenmair too. But again, no proof. There were no PABs among the Rettenmair remains. Which does not mean he never made them. Just no leftovers."
3) A U.S. Vet bringback from the Stuttgart area (30 miles from Schwäbisch-Gmund) included 4 different flatback/greyback combat badges along with unissued Rettenmaier marked police badges, Rettenmaier cased Mother’s crosses and a Rettenmaier marked EK2. (Also GWB and Narvik shield possibly by Rettenmaier based on design and circumstantial evidence.)

B) Forensic evidence:

1) Two different catches on the IAB that were also used by Rettenmaier on EK1s.
2) Both the flatback maker and Rettenmaier are among the few who would sometimes mount the catch opening to the left.
3) Multiple setups on the flatbacks and multiple setups on Rettenmaier’s known EK1s
4) Unusually shaped pin on the flatback U-Boat matches that on a Rettenmaier EK1
5) Striations on the back of the flatbacks similar to those seen on Rettenmaier’s EK1
6) Peculiar rune on a couple of flatback IABs and a variety of different mystical runes used on Rettenmaier’s EK1s

As has been noted many times before, each of the above points taken alone doesn’t mean much, but when you add them all up they have much greater weight to support the “Flattenmeier Theory”.

A few attachments to follow.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

3) A U.S. Vet bringback from the Stuttgart area (30 miles from Schwäbisch-Gmund) included 4 different flatback/greyback combat badges along with unissued Rettenmaier marked police badges, Rettenmaier cased Mother’s crosses and a Rettenmaier marked EK2. (Also GWB and Narvik shield possibly by Rettenmaier based on design and circumstantial evidence.)

Here's the U.S. Vet grouping previously posted by Jeff in the following threads:
It's Still Out There - Vet Family Buy Today - Heer Flak, PAB, IAB, CCC, EK2, HSF, Etc
High Seas Fleet Badge - Vet Pickup - Help Identifying Maker
Rettenmaier marked products are circled in red.

[Norm F]

1) Two different catches on the IAB that were also used by Rettenmaier on EK1s.
2) Both the flatback maker and Rettenmaier are among the few who would sometimes mount the catch opening to the left.
3) Multiple setups on the flatbacks and multiple setups on Rettenmaier’s known EK1s

...

[Norm F]

4) Unusually shaped pin on the flatback U-Boat matches that on a Rettenmaier EK1 (and same hinge).

...

[Norm F]

5) Striations on the back of the flatbacks similar to those seen on Rettenmaier’s EK1.

...

[Norm F]

6) Peculiar rune on a couple of flatback IABs and a variety of different mystical runes used on Rettenmaier’s EK1s.

...

[Norm F]

So there it is in summary - an interesting, definitely possible, maybe probable but as yet unproven hypothesis. The evidence and debate are presented in the previous pages and I think everything's been said that can be said. Now it's up to individual collectors to interpret it as they will.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Thomas Durante]

Hi Norm,

Good synopsis, thanks for putting it all together for us in a concise manner. Will make it much easier to add more evidence in the future when it may pop up.

Tom

[scott3000]

Way to go Norm