A closer look at an early "800' S&L

[Dietrich Maerz]

I'm sure some members still remember this thread:

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.net/foru...d.php?t=116830

A heated discussion about the genuity of this cross.

[Dietrich Maerz]

and the reverse

[Dietrich Maerz]

The cross has w/o any doubt an A-Type frame. The usual design characteristics as well as the very small details are all there. here's the lower right corner (obverse).

[Dietrich Maerz]

The typical 'benchmark' for the identification of the A-Type: the 9 o'clock flaw. The cross is very "dirty' and some of the details don't come out as clear as I could see them under the 3D microscope.

[Dietrich Maerz]

The 3 o'clok arem (rotated for bettwer viewing) shows no sign of any flaws - not even the staring one on thel lower portion and not even a sign of it.

[Dietrich Maerz]

The paint shows the typical coarse structure one would exspect.

[Dietrich Maerz]

The opaint thickness is also what one would exspect.

[Dietrich Maerz]

The dimensions are 48.26 mm wide and 48.00 mm high. The rim thickness is 1.4 mm, indicating the use of a 0.6 mm thick silver sheet plate. The weight is 29.9 mm with loop.

These dimensions (and others) go together very well with other A-Types.

The cross is magnetic, the loop is unmarked and I don't know the material.

[Dietrich Maerz]

The cross is marked "800" in the usual spot.

[Dietrich Maerz]

The swastika is high and nicely doen. The dimension are within what one would exspect, i.e. 10 mm square and 2.3 mm arm width.

[Dietrich Maerz]

BUT, the numerals seem to be different.

As the original discussion already unveiled, the numerals are thinner than the ones we know from other A-Type.

However, they are not as thin as one would believe looking at the cross without looking in detail. As one can see the cross is very "dusty, dirty" andf the base part of the numerals is covered heavy with this dust, giving the impression of very thin numbers.

[Dietrich Maerz]

A combined picture, puzzled together with several microscopic shots, gives a better idea of the actual situation.

[Dietrich Maerz]

A detailled picture of the base of the "1" and "9" shows that the numerals are wider than they appear in a regular picture, BUT still not the same as a 'normal' S&L core.

[Dietrich Maerz]

So the core is (still) different.

Two possible theories always emerge at this point of an RK discussion:

1. A-Type with a different iron core (most likely early, since not encountered so far), or

2. Postwar assembled cross with whatever core using an A-Type frame.


The second opinion is always the easy way out! No further investigation necessary, no revision of "what's known and accepted by us", keeping the "Status Quo".

A re-assembled cross would show signs of dismanteling the original frame and also signs of re-assembling. Solder head, scratches, disturbances in the aging, lot's of signs.

This cross does not show any of this and especially the 'dirt' helps here a great deal. It's everywhere, underneath the rims, evenly distributed and 'grown' in a way that only time can allow. The rim soldering line is undisturbed as far as I can tell under 50x magnification.

This leaves the possible sceptics only with one thing: the cross was put together as described under point 2 a long time ago. I cannot dispute that, but I don't believe it.

I for myself have accepted the existence of an early A-Type S&L with a different (early) core and I find this very interesting and not disturbing at all.

This cross has 'been there" and is a magnificient example! I congragulate the owner for this rare gem!

Dietrich

[Luftm40]

I have always felt that cross to be a wartime SL, and I see nothing here to change my views. I have no direct explanation for the core details, but we have no primary source data on these things either, ie factory specs, production data or even first hand accounts from the craftsmen who made them. In fact, this dirth of primary data extends to all TR badges and medals. We are like blind men at the zoo feeling the toe of an elephant and trying to describe what the whole animal looks like. Anyway, one possible explanation is that the numerals were hand enhanced after they came out of the die to give them a more finished look. This practice was common w/ other badges, daggers etc etc. I don't know, but I still think the cross is original. Do the reverse numbers match the standard pattern?