'Juncker' Army Para Badge

[Philippe]

Hi,

Oberfeldwebel Weskop (Zug-Führer 11./FJR 3) , wearing his 2nd pattern aluminium APB.



Always the same..

Regards,
Philippe
(majorplm@bigfoot.com)

[Prosper Keating]

Andy,

Don't take this the wrong way or anything, but this issue of hallmarks really is a red herring which - perhaps you've forgotten or you were unaware - has been dealt with previously.

The real issue, from which this red herring is diverting attention, is this: is the badge bought by Chris Sheppard a genuine C E Juncker-marked 2nd pattern aluminium Army Parachutist Badge?

In my opinion, it was not struck on the dies used in the manufacture of 2nd pattern APBs known to have been produced by C E Juncker. So why does it have a C E Juncker hallmark?

And why does it not look like any 2nd pattern APB - 1937/38 and 1943 issues - seen being worn in prewar and wartime photographs? Look at the picture of Heinrich Weskop, for example. Check that wing tip!

Neither Eric nor I were seeking to apply "rules" when we wrote this article. We were just sharing our experience with others. The majority of people who have read the article understand this.

Prosper Keating

[Greg S]

Looking at the wingtip, do you mean the wingtip extends further past the wreath in the photo above than in the photo of Chris's badge?

[Prosper Keating]

Exactly. In every photo I have ever seen - and I have seen one helluva lot of them! - of holders of the Army Para Badge wearing their APBs - 1st or 2nd pattern - the tip of the rear, uppermost wing of the diving eagle extends over the inner edge of the wreath, reaching the central row of oakleaves.

As on this original and much-repaired 2nd pattern aluminium APB owned by Oberfeldwebel Ludwig, which is also the only one known with a C E Juncker hallmark. Look at the hallmark. It's the same as the ones on the 1st pattern aluminium APBs. Not at all like the 'longer' one on Chris Sheppard's APB.



I have NEVER seen any prewar or wartime photograph featuring an APB on which the wingtip in question fell short of the wreath as it does on Chris Sheppard's badge. It simply wasn't how the badge was designed. And they were hot on sticking to offically-approved design when it came to medals and badges. That's why they set up a powerful official body to regulate such issues: the LDO. The inaccurate positioning of the diving eagle in relation to the wreath is, however, a feature of several types of fake APB in existence.

The Fallschirmschützenabzeichen des Heeres has always been very rare. Even during WW2! So it's been extensively faked since the 1950s. Maybe even earlier. All those GIs - and Suffolk Regiment Tommies - wandering about looking to swop cigarettes and other luxuries for mementoes. Someone had to supply the market!

Some people have suggested that the APB owned by Chris Sheppard is a type of fake made since the 1960s and that perhaps Dr Kleitmann was involved. I don't know about the latter part of that statement. His wife ran Godet and was involved in monkey business or, rather, the fake business in the '60s and '70s but I don't know if he was bent.

All I know is that I personally prefer to stick with the APBs I KNOW to be originals as a result of careful research and experience over time. And when I mention 'veterans' in relation to the APB, I mean men who received the badge, not former allied soldiers who claim they brought all the badges in their shoebox or in a frame on their study wall back from the war.

Prosper Keating

[Luftm40]

OK, I'll stand by my comments regarding your article though

Cheers

[Prosper Keating]

Fair enough! And there, for those of you who were so offensive and rude to Eric and me about our article or because we refused to "see it your way", is an example of mature argument, discussion and conclusion. Anyway, keep the opinions coming. This is getting interesting.

Prosper

[Philippe]

Hi,

Generalleutnant Richard Heidrich Kommandeur of 1. Fallschirmjäger-Division, wearing his 2nd pattern Army Parachutist Badge. (left: Hauptmann Rischer - background: Major Reinhard Egger)





Close-up is a little fuzzy, but check that wing tip extends over the inner edge of the wreath.

To follow..

Philippe
(majorplm@bigfoot.com)

[Warren O]

Prosper,
The 2 points of difference you refer to are the angle of the Eagle and it's wingtip length which now I see your point, what of the wreath not a whole lot of difference there. And what is wrong with the theroy of a third die, for the eagle? The facts are they (Juncker) had to find a replacement for the flawed 1st pattern why would there be only one die? Where are LDO specs stating the upper wing had to touch the wreath?
Keep up the good answers I'm learning here!
Warren

[Eric Queen]

Well, I was considering myself fortunate to be able to access the forum from Japan until I saw this. Here we go again with the cries of “small sampling”.

I have spoken to this a number of times but I guess I am compelled to do so again.

Andy, let me ask you a question, are you for some reason under the impression that I have only seen 9 army paratrooper badges in my life? This is in fact not true. I have seen hundreds over the years. Some of which ( like Peters ) are original in my opinion, and many ( by far the majority ) of which are not ( in my opinion ). I did in fact though see 10 badges ( soon to be 11 ) which came directly from the original owners which common sense dictates I use as a benchmark of originality ( common elements / common processes ). OK, so this 11 is an estimated 0.5 % of the badges that were produced. Have you seen 0.5% of the RK’s ( or whatever it is that you collect ) that were made that are still in the hands of the original recipients? Have you seen even 0.1%? Let’s look at the equivalent ( 0.5% ) in terms of other badges. There were probably at least 500,000 GAB’s produced. Have you ( or anyone ) seen 0.5% ( or 2,500 )in the hands of the original owners? Or even 0.5% period ( let alone knowing for sure that they are original or not )

You are correct though, the other 99.5% that I didn’t see could all have been hallmarked. They could also all have had pink eagles and purple wreaths, no way to know for sure I guess. It all goes back to what Prosper said “ what is POSSIBLE vs. what is PROBABLE”.

So the flat die plate or “beard” on Peters badge was not tooled for some reason( intentional or non-intentional, to guess would only be conjecture and both possibilities would make sense ). So what? This is ( in my opinion ) an acceptable anomaly on an original badge. Nothing more, nothing less.( this anomoly does NOT constitute a die alteration NOR suggest an additional production run ) This is NOT a variation. A friend of mine the other day showed me a USMC Raider patch with the skull slightly off center. Does this make it a variation? Absolutely not. Just a production anomaly. If the skull had a knife in its mouth it would be a variation.

I will say this again for the 1000th time.

PROSPER AND I DID NOT SAY THAT ALL BADGES WITH HALLMARKS ARE FAKES. Anyone who has actually read the article should be aware of this. It’s a matter of process, finishing, detail, what type of hallmark, what type of catch, etc. that we have gone over again and again.

Its disheartening to a degree that we have tried to share these observations ( not inflexible “rules” ( more on this later ) ) with people to give them a base from which they can make somewhat informed decisions, and we are constantly called to task by people who don’t know the first thing about what they are talking about, and have never seen even one army paratrooper badge that they knew was original ( let alone from the vet ).

The bottom line is this:

It’s fine to use these observations as basic “rules” or guidelines, but please use common sense and a moderate degree of intelligence when asking yourself. “is this an acceptable, LOGICAL anomaly to an original badge, or something that is totally anomalous in terms of process, components, dies, finishes, etc.?”

Surely you and most people can see the difference here.

Do Prosper and I know everything there is to know about the APB? Absolutely not. But I do think we have offered the most comprehensive work on the subject to date. It will certainly be updated and augmented as new information is available ( like this type of small detailing anomaly, and the more substantial interim step to reconfigure the die to reinforce the talon ( which occurred on both aluminum and 800 silver versions. An example of which can already be seen in the article ( Eger’s badge ) ) ) .

Again, I am not sure where this ridiculous “small sample “ argument comes from. Not one of the authors of any of the articles on this site have seen the percentage of original material ( that they are writing about ) from the veterans that I have ( remember, we are talking about unquestionable examples from the original owners here, NOT from collectors, etc. ). Not even close. Should all the articles be dismissed based on “small sampling”? If not, why should ours? because the actual number that equates to the percentage is considered “small”? Of course the number that correlates to the percentage will be small if the overall number of examples produced was very small. This argument truly defies logic and is not worth further comment.

Mark Miller,

I absolutely disagree with you when you say even one exception to a rule makes it no longer a rule. I don’t see this at all. I think, as in all things, we have to make room for some logical deviations. You have been silent for most of this. I would really like to hear your true thoughts on the subject. You had/have a badge very similar to the one in question, and have also found one that resembles the ones we feel are original. Holding them both, how do they really compare? ( detail finishing, etc. )

John Garcia, I would like to hear your thoughts as well.

It’s too bad that we have somehow reached the point where we can’t think for ourselves. It seems so many people are more apt to buy the dealer than the piece. This in my opinion is very dangerous. BUY THE PIECE, NOT THE DEALER OR THE RULE” Detlev has had things I wouldn’t touch and Kai Winkler has had some outstanding original pieces I have bought ( and visa versa of course ). I don’t care who is selling it, I only care about the piece. People who look at the dealer first, and the piece secondary need to learn more about what they are buying.

EQ

[Luftm40]

Like I said, OK. We beg to differ regarding the logic behind some of your assertions in the article. You wrote the article, I said my 2 cents worth and thats alright!

[jgarcia]

I have a badge similar to the one in question here and I've had the opportunity to compare it with a known original. The questionable badge has a totally different finish compared with the known original and it lacks in detail. This badge also has the midwar hallmark and the "?" shaped catch.

We know that aluminum badges were made prewar, then why would an aluminum badge have a midwar hallmark? Original aluminum badges have a "C" shaped catch. Why do these questionable badges have the "?" shaped catch.

I would like to ask the advanced Luftwaffe badge collectors if they would buy an early first pattern Junckers Pilot Badge that has a midwar hallmark? What about the rest of the Luftwaffe badges in aluminum, why don't we see any with the midwar hallmark?

Eric, I would be glad to send my questionable badge to you. I think it might help if you post an image of this badge with a known original side by side. If anything I believe everyone will be able to see the difference in detail and the finish.

Philippe makes a good point regarding the position of the eagle, when we compare these badges to photographs there is a clear difference.

I believe these badges have been around for a long time and are now excepted as originals by most respected dealers and advance collectors, but it's hard to ignore all the facts.

John Garcia

[Prosper Keating]

Warren,

As I have said many times now, it is entirely POSSIBLE that there could have been another set of dies for the APB at C E Juncker but the question remains: is it PROBABLE?

I think not, given the absolute lack of evidence of the existence before May 1945 of any badges conforming to the appearance of Mr Sheppard's APB, with its different angle and wingtip falling short of the wreath.

These are not, by the way, the only two differences although you seem to feel that I have identified them as such. And we do not really need to study LDO directives in thsi debate.

The 1st and 2nd pattern APBs were designed before the LDO took a hand in regulating medal and badge manufacture in 1941. The APB design would have been approved in the normal manner by OKW in 1936/37.

The badges produced by C E Juncker can be safely assumed to conform to OKW wishes and directives. We do not need to study this paperwork…assuming an inclination to search for it.

But why don't you do something constructive? Why don't YOU contact the relevant department in the German government and see if they can locate and send these documents to you. Then you can post them here!



Prosper Keating

[mmiller]

Eric,

Welcome back. I'm sorry you took offense to my post about the beard. It wasn't intended to be an attack of any sort. If it came accross that way, sorry.

The reason I noticed the small detail of the beard on the (Peter's) First Pattern Para, was only because of your (Prosper included) 'The Article'. I appreciate the time and effort you both put into it. (Enuf kissing up.)

I don't consider the article a bible or a gospel. It is your opinion. From the information you have gathered and have shared with us, we are free to choose what we like.....all, nothing, or somewhere in between. Personally, I buy most of what you say. Thanks to your article, I chose to send back my second pattern aluminum para badge with the dark 'primer coat' and the mid war hallmark. Thanks to whom I purchased it from, they quickly replaced it with a beautiful mid-war zinker. This was their suggestion. They said 'wait till the dust settles on the aluminum badges'. Pretty decent for a dealer, I think.

Since then, I have acquired another aluminum 2nd Pattern badge. (Yes, I'm a real masochist!) Unmarked. Posted side by side, both the aluminum badge and the zinc badge appear to be from the same die. Weren't they, after all! There are slight variations in the mounting angle of the diving eagle. On both badges, however, the tip of the upper feathers merges over the wreath.

As for a hallmark, as John has stated, I would ONLY EVER OWN A FIRST OR SECOND MODEL HEER PARA BADGE WITH THE EARLY STYLE C.E.JUNCKER BERLIN SW HALLMARK. It makes no sense that Juncker would put a mid war hallmark on a badge made in 37. My Opinion.

As to Peter's badge (which is a beauty, by the way), and the rule thing, I guess we have learned that a First Model Badge CAN have a beard. I guess I would call this version a 'transitional' piece. It has a First Pattern Eagle attached to a Second Pattern Wreath. It is logical and it makes sense.

Here are my badges. I will bare all. We're all in this mess together.

Mark

[Warren O]

Prosper,
If the relevant department still exsisted I don't think there would be any debate.
Warren

[Prosper Keating]

Oh…so you had a look, did you? That was fast work. Mind you, I could have saved you the effort. The LDO ceased to exist in 1945. What I meant was that you could do us all a favour by going off and making enquiries of the relevant German authorities to see what happened to all the paperwork relating to the Fallschirmschützenabzeichen des Heeres for the 1937-38 and 1943-45 periods. Of course, we can safely assume that badges such as the ones worn by Witzig (1st pattern), Weskop (2nd pattern) and Heidrich (2nd pattern), who was the 'Father of the Army Airborne' represent the designs as officially approved. And if you go to our article, you will see a Brandenburger wearing a 2nd pattern Army Para Badge which, logically, would be a 1943 issue in zinc. It looks exactly the same as the ones worn by Weskop and Heidrich. Anyway, why don't you go off and find some evidence that APBs like the one bought by Chris Sheppard were made and worn before May 1945? As much for your own education as for our benefit. After all, you did write:

"I think your badge is good the die charecteristics between the marked and unmarked badges are exactly the same. My only problem is I have not held these badges in my hands to compare so with this in mind I will not buy one until I can study these items in hand.
Its been said that the marked badges could be cast from originals which I believe is incorrect, even with modern dental materials a new mold would have to be made for nearly every badge produced because the material cannot with stand multiple uses with molten metal. I can mention other flaws with casting but I believe I've made my point."

…which suggests that you need to find out more about APBs before you buy one and also that you need to find out more about molding methodology. Don't take that the wrong way. I'm just trying to be helpful.



Prosper Keating