S&l ??

[Rich G]

Based just on what I've read on this and other Forums.

Looks like it could be another 'theory' for blowing apart.

I was just wondering that myself.


I had read the same theories as to their markers but nothing more than that. I don't recall seeing a marked example which is odd considering the PKZ numbering system was well established by then. I still don't know what percentage of awards had to have their PKZ code. I would have assumed all of them but reality shows this is not the case with so many examples of unmarked awards around.

[Sal Williams]

Based just on what I've read on this and other Forums.

Looks like it could be another 'theory' for blowing apart.

About the SKs on that board, nothing about the droop tail makes any sense. It doesn't fit an early production or late production theory. The only reasonable assumption it that it is a fake. If one wants to leave the door open for possible droop tail originality, this is not the cross to do it with.

[Sal Williams]

I hope Bob H will chime in, his experience is always an asset even when it doesn't go with popular thought.

[Robin Lumsden]

I don't recall seeing a marked example which is odd considering the PKZ numbering system was well established by then.

Richard.

Like you, I have never seen a marked example of the Guerrilla Warfare Badge either. Plenty of fakes with L/56 etc. marks, but no originals as far as I know.

Another example, I suppose, of a 'theory' which becomes 'accepted truth' if it's repeated enough times!

[Leroy]

About the SKs on that board, nothing about the droop tail makes any sense. It doesn't fit an early production or late production theory. The only reasonable assumption it that it is a fake. If one wants to leave the door open for possible droop tail originality, this is not the cross to do it with.

There is no factual basis at this time for this statement.
IF the SK with the down-tail, w/o swords IN GOLD, is original, it MUST be an early piece (even if manufactured in error).

[Sal Williams]

There is no factual basis at this time for this statement.
IF the SK with the down-tail, w/o swords IN GOLD, is original, it MUST be an early piece (even if manufactured in error).

Then why marked "4"? Why no silver mark?

There is much more factual basis for my statement than any for this being a wartime SK in gold without swords on a board put together who knows when by who knows who Leroy.

Don't get me wrong if there are original droop tails, I want to see them and own one. I have no good reason to think there are at this point, and this cross on this board doesn't help the case at all. If anything it hurts the case.

[Robin Lumsden]

That's why it's important to get other peoples' opinions on the other badges on these boards.

If all the other badges are deemed to be OK, then the chances are that the Spanish Cross is good as well.................with all that that entails.

If there is at least one other fake on the boards, then the legitimacy of the Spanish Cross and the rest must also come into question.

By the way................does this photo remind you of anything?

[DavidM]

Hello

I can't comment on the Spanish Crosses etc, but the S&L DKs, to me anyway, look to be the correct wartime made ones. I am one of those who believe that S&L did make the DK during the war, and that the ones marked with a '4' are the wartime made pieces. There is a quality about the two DKs from the boards that comes through, even in the photos. This is apparent on the rear finish of the pin etc, as well as the front, especially when compared to the early 57 version.

For comparison, here are some photos of the DKiS rear from the sample board, (the front views having being shown earlier in this thread). First up is the rear of the DKiS from the sample board.

Regards
David

[DavidM]

Makers mark on the S&L DKiS from the sample board

[DavidM]

Finally, the rear of an early 57 version of the DK by S&L

[Don D.]

The pabs look like Assmans.

[Leroy]

Then why marked "4"? Why no silver mark?

The lack of a silver mark does not bother me (although this cross COULD have one stamped on the reverse body) (which we have not yet seen) rather than the pin. In fact, it was more usual for the silver mark, if present, to be on the body than the pin on SK's, in my opinion, and not all were real silver.

The presence of the "4" is the curious thing. If the cross is a fake (and I will believe it could be if other pieces on the boards are as well) then the number means nothing. If it is real, it might tend to support the idea that PKZ numbers were used earlier than believed.

[Thomas Durante]

Hi guys,

Sorry for my late reply, been busy at work (which is a good thing lately )

Dave was very kind enough to send me the closeups of the CCCs, here they are. As far as I am concerned, these are wartime produced. The top one is an unmarked S&L. Textbook 1.16.4 S&L CCC, wartime construction, hardware, crimping and finish. The silver is a GWL 1.9.2. A few things are odd with it, like the finish being on the pin and a odd silver color not typical of GWL. GWL clasps are pretty rare, but all the silver ones I have encountered do not have the pin finished. So, its possible that this one has been refinished, but was definately done a long time ago atesting to the bubbling under the finish. And finally, the gold is an original FLL. The sheetmetal hinge is not characteristic of 99.9% of the wartime FLLs encountered, but plausible IMO as they are known to have used this type of hinge on other latewar badges such as their IABs, PABs, Pilot Badges, etc. Also, the sloppy soldering of the hinge is classic FLL. There does not appear to be the grenade die flaw that has been found on a very few FLL CCCs, so IMO this one is also of wartime manufacture.

So, in my opinion, all 3 CCCs are consistent with wartime produced CCCs, matching up quite well with finish, hardware, crimping and perfectly with die characteristics. If you look at 1957 CCCs (even the ones produced by S&L on the original wartime reverse dies), they are very different in base metal, hardware, crimping, and even color of finish used. So, to me, and based solely on the CCCs, these boards were most likely put together at the very end of the war or early post war.

Tom

[Thomas Durante]

r

[Steinar]

But who made these boards and why?

Its really exciting