5th Don Cossack - any hope?

[Stan]

5th Don Cossack Badge

Rick,

The dimensions of my badge are 46.8mm high and 47.0mm wide. The weight is 9.5g.

Stan

[Rick C]

For a badge or award that commands a value of more than $2,000 in 2008, the 5th Don Cossack badge or cross seemingly lacks any verifiablity. Attempt to find any empirical evidence as to documented manufacturer, correct configuration or features, number of dies or variants that existed & quantities issued & one finds only ‘opinions’ and ‘conjecture’ put forth by owners of each variation of the badge that ‘they’ happen to own. Accepted experts/authors (such as Detlev/Niemann or Forman have posted photos of examples, claimed to be authentic that, from one edition of their reference books to the next, change from one version to another based upon popular opinion of the day. For example, in Detlev edition that I own, the curly 9 is featured on page 794 whereas Daniel (grueni1208) points out that their latest edition features the ‘scar’ version. Apparently, acquiring an example for one’s collection is essentially an exercise in ‘faith based’ collecting.

A popularly acceptable version (at this writing) appears to be one having a die ‘flaw’ involving a scar (mentioned above) or indentation in the die to the left of the 5. The fact that this “flaw” is apparently damage to the die used in producing these variants, logically implies that the feature wasn’t intentional, perhaps resulting from overuse or damage to the die and thus, why would advocates (of this version) assume that before the damage to the die, that crosses weren’t produced not yet having this feature or flaw? Also curious would be ‘why’ there would be the ‘belief’ that there were only one maker or die ever used to manufacture this badge since, when searching the forums, I can’t even find any reference to the criteria for awarding the 5th Don Cossack badge or cross. It may well have been part of the uniform insignia provided to every cavalryman joining the Regiment such as the skull intended for wear with the 17th Braunschweig Husaren visors rather than requiring a feat of bravery equating it to the EK1 or 2 in which case there could have been more than 80,000 of these made!

What do we really know about these? They WERE made and worn - that we know. They were approximately 47mm square and were constructed in the fashion of a German ‘tinnie’ rather than any normal German badge or award although versions are seen now and again which appear die struck, use enamel versus paint and are stamped with German maker marks. These are deemed to be fakes although I can’t imagine any German Officer expected to wear this cross would (with their appreciation of awards & insignia) lower himself to wearing a piece of crap, aluminum tinnie. More likely, as in the case of the ‘Iron Cresent’, Germans had their own jewelers make suitable copies/awards for personal wear. That said, this is an effort to seek data on the aluminum type cross rather than ponder the better made, enameled, die struck “fakes”.

Stan’s been kind enough to share the dimensions of his ‘scar’ version. Would anyone else care to share dimensions of similar crosses they own or ones they feel are authentic?

Rick C.

[Wood]

Sorry to say that having only a tape measure I can offer no accurate measurement for my two, only that they appear to be nearer to Stans measurements & that my kitchen scales hardly notice it if I put both badges on at once.
Regards,
Pete

[Rick C]

Since I have this cross in my hands now I thought I might provide some accurate measurements for the record.

This style (or variant if you wish) is 46.96mm high by 47.10mm wide.

The top edge of the shield measures 32.92mm across.

From the top of the ‘5’ to the edge is .83mm while the ‘5’ itself appears to be 7.65mm high.

The ‘B’ in “HOB” is 4.84mm high while the ‘K’ in “KOHO” appears to be 4.9mm.

As the photo shows there are two distinct patterns of pebbling on the shield and a completely different pattern of detail within the black painted area on the cross. As for differences in how “pronounced” this pebbling is, it appears more to me that this may be resulting from the thickness or viscosity of the paint used than from any die characteristic. (any other thoughts on this observation?)

There appears to be a ‘powdering’ of the aluminum in areas similar to the oxidation I’ve seen on visor piping (luftwaffe officer cap) that was environmentally exposed for a period of years.

Any other confirmed measurements out there?