SS 8 year Long Service - good or bad?

[ancientrelicsuk]

Hi Guys,

I bought this a long time ago and have no idea whether it's good or bad, so would be very grateful for opinions and comments. Thanks for looking and for your comments.

All the best, Guy

[ancientrelicsuk]

closeups......

[Antonio Scapini]

This badge is considered controversial, but it is often confused with another type.
A specimen of this pattern has a safe source from june '45.

[ancientrelicsuk]

Thanks Antonio, that's interesting. The ribbon looks period to me. Thanks again, Guy

[J C Gray]

I am not a fan of this type any more than I am a fan of the type that it often gets confused with...in my opinion they are very good attempts at copies in some ways, yet fall short in others. My opinions on the other similar type are well documented, so I will keep my evaluation to this type.
The main things that people tend to look at when evaluating these medals are the stippling, the suspension loop and the eyelet, along with the crispness of the die-striking; all of which are extremely accurate. That however, is as good as it gets as far as I am concerned.
The first thing that strikes me is the relatively modern looking overall 'style' of the detailing to both the obverse and reverse, which to the untrained eye may seem all well and good until one starts to take a closer look. On the obverse I can see that the side protruding leaves on the wreath are only present on the outer circumference, unlike the accepted originals which, although not as prominent as the outer ones are nevertheless also present on the inner circumference. To me, the whole centrepiece of wreath with flowery looking oakleaves and strangely rounded Runes looks totally incongruous to the background.
The lettering on the reverse is reasonably well executed and compared to the other 'controversial' type of this award definitely has a certain amount of style. It is, however, this 'style' that opens up a whole new can of worms; the contrast between the weight of down & cross strokes and the (relatively) modern looking rounded serifs may not be enough to condemn the lettering on its own, but when compared with our old friend the "Stepped Rune Fake" 4 year award I notice some strikingly similar details which suggest to me that the lettering was executed on both examples by the same person. Apart from the overall style/appearance of the inscriptions on the this 8 year and the stepped rune 4 year, the most obvious points of similarity are as follows:- The inside of the left hand downstroke of the 'U' runs straight down into the lower curve rather than sweeping and tapering gently round toward the central point of the curve. The leg of the 'R' has a distinctive upward flourish which is not present on any other accepted SS Service Awards...the bottom of this leg also appears to consistently sit above the lettering baseline. These points could, of course, be explained as acceptable variations in lettering styles, but given the context, I am of the strong opinion that they are typical 'rookie mistakes' which along with various rookie letter-spacing or kerning mistakes, are consistent in both of the aforementioned medals.
I am posting photos of this 8 year along with the stepped rune 4 year fake below for comparison (I don't know who owns the photos, but if there is a problem let me know) in which one can see other, more general similarities such as the stippling and the suspension hardware.

[J C Gray]

Reverse...

[J C Gray]

...and for what it's worth, this 8 year even made Detlev's 'Copy of the Week back in 2008.

[ancientrelicsuk]

Thanks JC - this is a very informative account of what to look for. I appreciate your comments. Thank you. Best regards, Guy


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Patrick W]

complete garbage and a fake that appears often as JC shows, also in the stepped rune 4 year type.,
Antonio, the safe source you mention I think must be a switch, I do not believe for a minute that this type of medal existed in 1945.