Opinions on campaign shields

[Kenny80a]

I got these the other day in a bunch of stuff and I would like y'alls opinions on them. I think the Krim shield has a shot but I'm not so sure about the Cholm or the Lappland shields.

[Kenny80a]

More pics

[Pascal H.]

Both the Krim and the Cholm are definitely fake.
The Lappland is always tricky but I'm not a big fan of this type either.


Kr
Pascal

[Zheleznyi]

if I'm not mistaken, then the Cholm is referred to the early 1957 production of S & L.
On the remaining answers I agree with Pascal

[Yubari]

if I'm not mistaken, then the Cholm is referred to the early 1957 production of S & L.
On the remaining answers I agree with Pascal

early 57 with swaz??

[Zheleznyi]

Yes.

[Zheleznyi]

Seller Comments:
"For sale is this ultra rare S&L postwar made Cholm shield. This piece closes the gap between the 57er S&L Cholm shield without swaz and the postwar S&L souvenir production. Typical S&L product.
Very rare piece!"

[Kenny80a]

Where is this posted for sale?

[Zheleznyi]

The old post from GCA.

[Pascal H.]

Seller Comments:
"For sale is this ultra rare S&L postwar made Cholm shield. This piece closes the gap between the 57er S&L Cholm shield without swaz and the postwar S&L souvenir production. Typical S&L product.
Very rare piece!"

"Ultra rare", you wonder what they come up with next.
Here is the same "ultra rare" type but now with a JFS stamp. Sold on eBay a while ago.


Kr
Pascal

[Zheleznyi]

I agree, think that this is a fake.

[Simon O.]

The Lappland is possible, i have seen this style a few of times, every time with the same type of backing and attachment.

[Wolfe8918]

Lappland's are a curiosity. The one in my collection (which I got along with the soldiers Wehrpass) was made in the POW camp and is crudely stamped out. Most originals are of poor and varying quality, made with whatever materials the men were allowed in camp. They are often found on their own or uniform removed, since they did not usually get made with backing plates or on such perfectly cut cloth. The four holes (rather than tabs) are a good sign, but it is very shiny and clean looking. The eagle also does not seem quite right to me. Also, there have been noted fakes which used that exact tactic of sewing in the holes to get past collectors. It may be the 57 version, which were much cleaner and well known. Especially with the existing backing cloth I would be more inclined to say post war.

That is my opinion based on my experience. My usual disclaimer: I could be wrong.