Super rare Luftschutz service medal 1. class with ribbon

[Norm F]

And here's the same example on the left compared with an unmarked example from Weitze's "S&L sales case" on the right. Again, unflawed and showing the same crisp pebbling pattern.

The medal on the right, as described by Weitze, is from a "sample case of the firm of Steinhauer & Lück Lüdenscheid" and states "almost all awards come from the company Steinhauer & Lück, except the Flakabzeichen by the company Assmann."

[Norm F]

And here too for reference is the Tombak S&L marked "L/16" in the bottom edge, and a side-by-side with the zinc "4"-marked example showing the same crisp pebbling pattern. There was no degradation in the crisp quality from the earlier Tombak version to the late-war zincer.

[Norm F]

Here's something interesting. Alex's medal on the right, the "late war or post-war S&L" with the strange surface flaws on the reverse, is not unique. Here's another example with exactly the same "mis-strike" and the source is somewhat concerning - Staegemeir. Of course, not absolutely everything Staegemeir sells is fake -- he throws in a smattering of originals, sometimes refinished etc. -- so perhaps these were both from a small cache of S&L rejects leftover at the end of the war. At least they're different from the Staegemeir cast repros in post #33, but it makes sense the Luftschutz 1. Stufe Ehrenzeichen would be a target for Staegemeir -- expensive and not much analysis on the forums (up until now).

[Norm F]

Here's an unfinished planchet of the zinc unflawed S&L design, described by the seller as "aus einer Lüdenscheider Ordensfabrik", 40 x 43 mm. Interesting to see before the internal cutouts.

[Norm F]

Another example of the S&L-type, previously posted by Ian Hulley with a nice anecdote of how he acquired it in a small lot of poorly stored, damaged and dusty old original medals from an attendee of the Malvern Military Fair three years ago.

[Norm F]

It's actually the medal in the middle that seems most interesting to me. It is identical to the Souval pattern but without the saw marks usually found on postwar Souval made LS1. I'll have another look at it, but it didn't seem to vary much in size or thickness compared to the "saw mark" Souval medal. Seems like an earlier Souval variant than the ones with the mark. It would be interesting to know exactly how early.

Best regards,
Alex

Back to Alex's middle badge from post #52 - the one that similar to the Souval but without the "notch flaws".

After looking around I've found some blurry images of one other badge that I suspect is the same type as Alex's. This one has an L/12 mark in the edge...

[Norm F]

On the side-by-side, although the resolution of the image is poor, it looks like they share a shallow groove in the upper arm of the cross and "prominent pixel" in the inner flange of the right arm that I don't see on the Souval badge.

[Norm F]

The plot thickens. Here's the same type as the "L/12" but with an "L/11" mark. When you compare the bottom edges you can see the same markings from the casting, so these are the same type of repro but with different spurious maker marks.

Not sure if these are the same as Alex's or not. Alex, are you able to show a closeup of the bottom edge of your middle badge?

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

And another, previously posted by Stan (with no claims of originality). Again "L/11" and the same surface irregularities on the lower edge as the other two "L/11" and "L/12" examples. Presumably all three cast repros, and nicely done.

[Alex W.]

Hi Norm,

great work so far. Here is an additional pic of the LS1 you requested. The bottom of the edge seems different from the ones you show with L/11 and L/12 marking.

Best regards,
Alex

[Norm F]

Hi Norm,

great work so far. Here is an additional pic of the LS1 you requested. The bottom of the edge seems different from the ones you show with L/11 and L/12 marking.

Best regards,
Alex

Hi Alex,

No, those additional pictures are of your Souval example (the one on the left of your group shot with the "Souval notches"). I was talking about the middle one -- the one without the "Souval notches".

Could you show the bottom edge of that one?

Best regards,
---Norm

[Alex W.]

Hi Alex,

No, those additional pictures are of your Souval example (the one on the left of your group shot with the "Souval notches"). I was talking about the middle one -- the one without the "Souval notches".

Could you show the bottom edge of that one?

Best regards,
---Norm

Sorry Norm, I got it mixed up. Here are the ones you request. still, it doesn't show the marks of the wrongly stamped L/11 or L/12 pieces.

[Norm F]

it doesn't show the marks of the wrongly stamped L/11 or L/12 pieces.

Hi Alex,

I agree, the cast "LDO-marked" examples are different from your "middle" example (comparison attached). I've attached also a comparison of your Souval (with all the usual stigmata) to your "middle" badge which is un-notched.

The "LDO-marked" fakes show some "finishing notches" that are different from the Souval pattern, indicating that they were cast from a different original than the one used for the Souval mold.

So where does that leave your unflawed one? All of these badges are based upon the S&L design as we can see from the stippling patterns but are less distinct and of thinner construction. I still suspect your unflawed "middle" one is a casting, based on the fact that the stippling pattern between the lettering and on the inner arms of the cross is less detailed than what we see on wartime-compatible S&L badges. I suppose one might make an argument for using a worn wartime die, but in that case I don't see why the stippling in the hard to reach recesses between the letters would be more worn than the stippling of the outer crosses -- that feature favours a casting process in my opinion.

So far in this thread we've seen:
1) probable wartime S&L examples in Tombak (marked) and zinc (marked and unmarked)
2) the Souval post-war version (sometimes marked L/58 in the ring) cast from an S&L-design medal and showing consistent stigmata of the 8 notches and scratch pattern.
3) Another post-war casting of the S&L-design with a different notch pattern and consistent flaws in the lower edge and the spurious LDO marks L/11 and L/12.
4) Yet another S&L-design (Alex's one example), unflawed but thin like the other castings and less detailed than wartime production.

All of these are the S&L-design, described previously by Giel and Antonio as the "open-M" design. (Not discussed in this thread is the rare unmarked Tombak "close-M" design -- the wartime cadillac of all LS1 medals -- which is a discussion for another day.)

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

Here's another potential match to Alex's un-notched "middle" badge, posted last year by afrikasandman here. Again we're limited by poor photos but this one appears similarly un-notched but is marked "L/13" in the ring. There's a similar style defect in the lower cross arm of the "L/13" to that seen on the left cross arm on Alex's.

[Norm F]

L/13 in ring. The suspension loop is oddly bent and looks tampered with, unfortunately.