Legion Condor Tank Badge - The Silver Test Results

[AZartman]

P. Keating

[AZartman]

there you have it. Thanks everyone.

[Sal Williams]

Thank you Alex this is the right direction in my opinion.
Best, Sal

[WBallok]

Good morning! Here are two photos from a thread the same as this on another forum where Brian S was trying to get validation for his LCTB. My thanks to the member who explained how to do this.



This is a wartime photo of a Condor Legion veteran that shows his LCTB in quite clear detail. Brian S believes that his badge is this type and his badge of course does resemble this type of badge. Many fakes resemble the real thing. Many fakes are quite convincing!



Here is the page from the famous catalog. The badge worn by the Condor veteran looks very similar to the badge in the catalog. Some people think the catalog image is a drawing. Others think that it is a retouched photograph. It was normal practice in those days to retouch catalog photographs to the point where they look like drawings. Just look at any automobile catalog of the 1930s and 1940s. I doubt if this is a drawing. I think the art department of the firm producing the catalog photographed a badge and then "tidied it up". To say that it is a drawing could be an attempt to explain the differences between the details of this badge and the one Brian is trying to "rehabilitate".

As Dave says, it is frustrating to see these younger collectors trying desperately to validate things we saw as they appeared in the marketplace back in the 70's and 80's. Maybe we should not bother because some of them do not wish to hear voices of experience. They make fun of us instead. Or they insult us. That is okay. It is all to do with market forces. There are not enough originals to supply the demand so some more "originals" must be found! It reminds me of the debate about what you call the "rounder" Knight's Cross.

There were two basic types of LCTB. The first type was made in Lisbon and and second type in Germany when the award was made official by the OKW. There were in fact two variants of the first type because of a problem with the die. The late William Stump explained this well in an article he wrote. Then there was the type awarded to Condor veterans. This is the type you describe here as the Keating badge. William Stump had one of these too and so do other collectors. And there is the type in the photo above but we cannot use this photo to achieve a positive identifcation of any similar badges. If we accept that the Otto Schickle catalog is authentic, we can assume that the man in the photo is wearing a badge by this maker, that he probably bought because all the awarded badges from veterans and their families are identical to the "Keating Badge" that came from the Z******252;ndorf estate. I know this because I met holders of the badge in the 60's and 70's before they all started dying. That is one of the problems today, that the younger collectors do not have these opportunities.

The awarded badge might have been made by the Wernstein company. Some early Wernstein assault badges have identical hinges that do not fit these badges well. They were maybe using up stocks of these hinges. The Lisbon badges had such hinges because the hinge is typical of some Spanish and Portuguese badges but not typical of German badges. It does look like the hinges on some early Deschler u. Sohn badges but the pin is not the same. Probable that the Wernstein company received one of the Lisbon badges as a model but increased the dimensions and changed the design a bit, especially the bones.

It is clear that at least one firm made badges for sale to veterans and the evidence is strong that it was Otto Schickle. But only 415 men received the LCTB so why would there be all these variant badges that people want to validate as authentic? The firm commanded to make the badges for the official award ceremonies in 1939 did not make thousands of badges for 415 men. They maybe made 1000 or 1500. Probably 1000. As holders acquired doubles or replacements for various reasons, another firm maybe saw a business opportunity and made some for the retail market. This was probably the Otto Schickle firm. But I never saw one of these badges in the hands or on the jacket of a veteran who served in Spain! All I saw were Lisbon badges and the type shown here from the Keating collection. Some veterans had copies because they lost their originals but we know these copies. They are good because they were commanded by the veterans association from a German firm but they are different than the real ones.

Now we need to identify an original Otto Schickle LCTB.

Bill

[AZartman]

This is a wartime photo of a Condor Legion veteran that shows his LCTB in quite clear detail.

Great photo. The detail is better then I have seen so far in period photos BUT...

"And there is the type in the photo above but we cannot use this photo to achieve a positive identifcation of any similar badges."

I would agree 100 %.

"If we accept that the Otto Schickle catalog is authentic, we can assume that the man in the photo is wearing a badge by this maker, that he probably bought because all the awarded badges from veterans and their families are identical to the "Keating Badge" that came from the Zündorf estate."

I think no one here wants to assume anything. There is nothing I can see in that photo that can clearly show that the badge the soldier is wearing is a Keating Badge or an Otto S. If I am mistaken, and I have been before, what in that photo clearly shows us it is an Otto S. or a P. Keating?

"The awarded badge might have been made by the Wernstein company. Some early Wernstein assault badges have identical hinges that do not fit these badges well. They were maybe using up stocks of these hinges. The Lisbon badges had such hinges because the hinge is typical of some Spanish and Portuguese badges but not typical of German badges. It does look like the hinges on some early Deschler u. Sohn badges but the pin is not the same. Probable that the Wernstein company received one of the Lisbon badges as a model but increased the dimensions and changed the design a bit, especially the bones."

The above comments is a discussion that has not occured thus far here and photos of these types and their respective hinges/pins etc. would be a welcome addition to this thread.

It is clear that at least one firm made badges for sale to veterans and the evidence is strong that it was Otto Schickle. But only 415 men received the LCTB so why would there be all these variant badges that people want to validate as authentic?

One reason might be that the posted photo of the obverse of the LCTB in the OTTO S. catalog more close matches the "800 marked" from the obverse only. We don't know about the reverse. But what I see is a lack of detail in the Otto S. catalog photo in the "cracks" and 'creases" in the skull and the lack of dimples at least on mine. The posted Otto S. photo makes these details appear smoothed out. A distinct difference from the very visible lines in the Keating.

But more obvious to me, the Otto S. photo shows thinner "width" in the ribbons on the bow then the Keating. The Keating also exhibits not only a fatter ribbon but much more depth and detail in the ribbon creases.

One of the most obvious differences as well is that the Otto S. features the "headlights" on the outer edges of the tanks. It is clearly different . They are spaced farther apart. On the Keating they are spaced closer to the center of the tank and tighter together. If the photo is retouched that would be a significant retouch. if it is a die struck piece that would also indicate a different die. That is my take on it. Just look at pg. 6 carefully and then back to the Otto S. photo on Pg. 7.

Whether the badge I have is authentic is questionable, BUT, there are differences I see between the Keating and the image we have of the Otto S. And the badge I own has qualities that MORE closely resembles the Otto S. then the Keating.

Now we need to identify an original Otto Schickle LCTB.

That would be nice.

Bill[/quote]

[Frank Heukemes]

I think you guys are so intimidated by the LC tank badge that you now think every presented badge is different. I thought there was no need to mention it as it is obvious, but I am probably wrong.

To make it clear:

Prosper Keating Badge = Don Doering Badge = Frank Heukemes Badge. Not as in VERY same badge but as in same maker. I could name a couple more collectors on this site with the very same maker badge. Btw, Bill Stump's badge was also of that type.

The "Wernstein"-Association stands, diplomatically speaking, on thin ice. Firstly, hinges like these have not just been used by "Wernstein." Secondly, the ones found on ******220;******220; marked badges are just VAGUALLY similar to the ones found on the "Keating type." The whole lower part is different, "pointy" on the "Keating type" badges instead of round on the ******220;******220; badges.

[AZartman]

I think you guys are so intimidated by the LC tank badge that you now think every presented badge is different. I thought there was no need to mention it as it is obvious, but I am probably wrong.

To make it clear:

Prosper Keating Badge = Don Doering Badge = Frank Heukemes Badge. Not as in VERY same badge but as in same maker. I could name a couple more collectors on this site with the very same maker badge. Btw, Bill Stump's badge was also of that type.


The "Wernstein"-Association stands, diplomatically speaking, on thin ice. Firstly, hinges like these have not just been used by "Wernstein." Secondly, the ones found on ******220;******220; marked badges are just VAGUALLY similar to the ones found on the "Keating type." The whole lower part is different, "pointy" on the "Keating type" badges instead of round on the ******220;******220; badges.

Not sure what you mean by that? There is nothing to be intimidated about that I can think of. I tried to show in the photos exaclty what you point out. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I thought the photos spoke for themselves. Prosper Keating Badge = Don Doering Badge = Frank Heukemes Badge. They all looked the same to me essentially. Like you said the same maker. You all chose to purchase that type, so they are all alike and good looking. Thanks to those of you who posted, once again.

I can't speak to the Wernstein issue. BUT...again,

I think my point in my prevous post is valid. There are NO real differences between the Keating Badge = Don Doering Badge = Frank Heukemes Badge because it is one maker. BUT, the Otto S. exhibits different characteristics and that was simply what I was trying to point out. No more no less. It just so happens that those differences are visible in the 800 marked, and not on the Keating Badge = Don Doering Badge = Frank Heukemes Badge. That's all. Check the bow and check the headlights. Those are the most obvious to me.

And if I didn't say so before congrats to Keating, Don Doering and Frank Heukemes and all the others that share this same maker badge. It is a nice looking badge with the best provenance that we currently know of.

I appreciate the period photo being shown, but there is no way in my opinion that one can accurately say from the photo what maker the badge being is worn is from. That's all. Could be a Keating Badge = Don Doering Badge = Frank Heukemes Badge.

[Frank Heukemes]

Thanks, Alex, my last post was more adressed to Bill who simply ignored other badges posted and made it seem that the Keating badge and the Bill Stump badge were the only known examples of that type. These threads are also read by beginners who want to learn and these things should be expressed without room for doubt.

[WBallok]

I am focusing on the question of the Otto Schickle badges and whether or not the badge shown by Brian S is an original example of such a badge. I think that it is quite clear that the badge worn by the man in the photo I have shown is not like the type of badge owned by Stump, Heukemes, Keating, Don D and others. If you look at the top of the wreath on the badge in the wartime photo you can see where two leaves stick out a bit more than the others. This is a characteristic shared by the badge shown in the Otto Schickle catalog. The shape of the deathshead is also similar, making allowances for the angle of the photograph.

The "Wernstein"-Association stands, diplomatically speaking, on thin ice. Firstly, hinges like these have not just been used by "Wernstein." Secondly, the ones found on ÜÜ marked badges are just VAGUALLY similar to the ones found on the "Keating type." The whole lower part is different, "pointy" on the "Keating type" badges instead of round on the ÜÜ badges.

The pin is shorter with a round instead of pointed end but this might be because it was shortened. The hinge plate is the interesting thing here because there is no need for the cut out, which was present on the hinge plates of LCTB so that the hinge plate would not be seen when looking at the LCTB from the front. There is no need for it on this badge. In fact, the corners should have been cut away to clear the wreath! For me, this is the same kind of hinge plate as the LCTB. The way in which the pin is attached to the cross-shaft is the same too. This is not the same as the Deschler hinge on early DK and some early EK1. I agree that this does not mean that the awarded LCTBs were made by Wernstein. In 1939, it would be more likely that it was Juncker or a firm like that. The hinge is quite "Iberian" in design, if you study some Spanish and Portuguese awards of the early 20th century.

Bill

[AZartman]

"I am focusing on the question of the Otto Schickle badges and whether or not the badge shown by Brian S is an original example of such a badge. I think that it is quite clear that the badge worn by the man in the photo I have shown is not like the type of badge owned by Stump, Heukemes, Keating, Don D and others. If you look at the top of the wreath on the badge in the wartime photo you can see where two leaves stick out a bit more than the others. This is a characteristic shared by the badge shown in the Otto Schickle catalog. The shape of the deathshead is also similar, making allowances for the angle of the photograph."
------

I see that now Bill. Whew, i would not want to prove that in the "people's court"

...but it is intriguing. Possible...I'll file it away.

Nevertheless, I'm not hearing people comment about the similarities of the "headlights" on the tank in terms of their placement in relation to the body of the tank. Brian S's badge and mine both share that characteristic. And it matches the "retouched photo/illustration" in the OTTO S. catalog. It is curious and obvious.

No other badge posted, aside from what I have termed the "800 marked" that Brian and I both own, seem to match as well. The wreath again is of a thinner ribbon variety with less detail that also matches the OTTO S. retouched photo/illustration.

For what is worth, and it doesn't seem to be much.

Until I see another badge posted that clearly shares the same two/three variations that I have pointed out (headlight placement (width apart), wreath shape&size, and ribbon width [skinny and long vs. short detailed and fat ] then what we have here are two unattributable badges, that VERY closely match the OTTO S. "retouched photo/illustration".

Clear and obvious differences that point to a different die being used.

Whether it is a fakers die or a legitimate die the jury is still out in my opinion.

[AZartman]

This can lead to a number of conclusions, one possibly being that the fakers have an original OTTO S. and don't even realize it, and are simply copying it very well (possible).

Why hasn't a confirmed OTTO S. ever been found and deemed original? Seems there are quite a few original "P. Keating, Frank H, Don etc" 1939 issues out there?

Or the fakers have a copy of the OTTO S. catalog and are able to create a remarkable copy from a grainy photo (doubtful at best)

or

Brian S. and I have possibly an original OTTO S. and until we get a confirmed OTTO S. somehow, and see the reverse side, we will never know for sure.

[Robin Lumsden]

Just harking back to the bit about the catalogue again, and whether the illustration can be relied upon for comparative purposes.

If anyone has access to one of the reprinted Assmann catalogues - take a look at the illustration of the RAD Medal near the back of the catalogue. The wording on the reverse of the medal is MIS-SPELLED. So, that illustration is either a drawing or a botched touch-up.

The point is.......illustrations in these catalogues can not be used for comparison when looking at fine details etc.

The same holds good when comparing RKs to those shown in wartime catalogues. But that's another story! Rounders etc.

[Pieter Verbruggen]

Dear forummembers, I would like to have your attention on a few observations...because I'm really getting fed up with it.

1° The only statement I made is that the badge shown by Brian is NOT the same as the one from the Otto Schickle cataloge. That's the only thing. I never said anything about the originality of the badge...I wanted to stay polite and I did.

2° For doing this I got insulted in about every reply posted by BS...even after al the editig , he couldn't resist calling me a stalker. Not that I care what he sais or even thinks. But forumers start to think it's all about getting at eachother between Bs and me. e.g Sal, wy do you need a new thread without me participating, I just gave my opinion, the of topic reactions came from an other side... or am I seeing this wrong?

3° Be serious, who really believes that these two badges are the same?
e.g. look at the tank , distance between the tracks, turret, window style at the front of the tank....

Pieter.

[AZartman]

Just harking back to the bit about the catalogue again, and whether the illustration can be relied upon for comparative purposes.

If anyone has access to one of the reprinted Assmann catalogues - take a look at the illustration of the RAD Medal near the back of the catalogue. The wording on the reverse of the medal is MIS-SPELLED. So, that illustration is either a drawing or a botched touch-up.

I personally am not familiar with those.

The point is.......illustrations in these catalogues can not be used for comparison when looking at fine details etc.

It is the best I have Robin, and again, the size of the headlights in the illustration (diameter of each circle) and its placement are eerily similar, IMO. The ribbon style is eerily similar IMO. We sadly don't have a period photo of one, so again, it remains an egnima.

Furthermore, if we cannot compare details in the OTTO S. catalog "illustration" then in what way will anyone be able to determine an authentic example if one ever turns up? Say someone get's a vet acquired example with rock solid provenance and it does not match at all the pin, catch, hinge and obverse details of the "1939 P. Keating/Frank/Don etc."Style, then what reference will we look to?

I would presume people will look at period photos (which none exist with a nice detailed close up of the badge obverse and reverse that we are aware of) AND at the OTTO S. catalog to see if anything matches. I guess at that point the illustration's details will have weight, because it will be the only other period reference from a manufacturer that we can refer to. Maybe one day...

The same holds good when comparing RKs to those shown in wartime catalogues. But that's another story! Rounders etc.

Cannot comment on that.

[WBallok]

Why hasn't a confirmed OTTO S. ever been found and deemed original? Seems there are quite a few original "P. Keating, Frank H, Don etc" 1939 issues out there?

Perhaps it is because no "Otto Schickle" LCTB is known with provenance to a recipient of the badge. Clearly there was a badge that differed to the German-produced LCTB as awarded in 1939 and 1940 to Condor veterans but we cannot prove, based on the photograph, that the badges owned by Brian S and yourself are examples of this wartime variant, which looks like the badge pictured in the Otto Schickle catalog. What we can prove, as Pieter Verbruggen has just pointed out, is that Brian S's badge is very different than the one in the catalog. If your badge is the same as Briain S's badge, then it too is unlikely to be an Otto Schickle-produced badge because it is very improbable that the Otto Schickle firm had more than one set of dies to produce a badge for a very limited market. By the way, there are not "quite a few original...1939 issues out there". There are very few. The badge is very rare. There are even less of the Lisbon issue known to have survived.

Or the fakers have a copy of the OTTO S. catalog and are able to create a remarkable copy from a grainy photo (doubtful at best)

It is not a remarkable copy. It is an inaccurate copy. The faker did not reproduce the lines of the badge as they are in the photograph. Several of the leaves are shaped totally different than the photo and other details differ too, like Pieter Verbruggen says.



Here is another catalog image without the black background. You can see the details clearly. The badge on the black background has more metal removed between the bones and the wreath. But this is not the point. A good diecutter could reproduce the shapes of the leaves and the other details very well from this image. All he would need is the measurements of the badge in millimeters. The badge is about the same size from top to bottom as the Panzerkampfabzeichen.

Bill