New Addition - Possible maker connection - Rettenmaier = "Flatback" Maker

[Thomas Durante]

Please go back to post #74 for the KVK and here is Rettenmaier attached (thanks to 5tefan):

No Andreas, this catch. This catch is very unique and found only on Deschler-marked IABs and the CCC in question. If you can show this catch was used by Rettenmaeir and Poellath then I will rethink my position on the Deschler connection.

If this catch was "supplied to Deschler and 1/3 of makers in the Third Reich" as you have said, then why don't we see it on any other badges? That to me is very odd.

Tom

[Dietrich Maerz]

We are the publisher of Franks book, but that not means that we have no other thinking about some connections. Frank is the autor and bring down his own thoughts.

Well, in these multiple cases the conclusions he presented where not "his own thoughts". What he presents was already published two years earlier in the book "The Iron Cross 1. Class" by Stimson/Maerz and the connections had been discussed on this and other fora. Frank just "forgot" to mention the source in his bibliography.

But the point I want to make is this: there are very clear cases where IMHO one can make a connection between the hardware and the possible maker. George and myself thought that in the cases of the Round 3, Wiedmann, and P&L this is sound and justified. I would think that you would agree in theses cases.

[Andreas Klein]

Hi Dietrich,

yes we would agree but there is one importent difference with your forensic work and how it is done by several other persons.

You, George and Frank didn't start form "0" and surprised the world with a new discovered maker by the used setup. In a first step you searched inside the NARA and Bundesarchiv for basic knowledge and there you found several documents with the name of makers which were involved in the iron cross production.

After that - with the proven name of a maker in mind - you went to the second step and looked for hardware.

To me this work is clearly different to what is done by several other people. Surely you could be wrong too but you have started with a proven hard evidence for a possible maker connection before you searched for hardware.

You don't say: "Hurray i found a nice catch on an IAB, now i have the evidence that all crosses with the same catch are from this IAB maker".

[Norm F]

No Andreas, this catch. This catch is very unique and found only on Deschler-marked IABs and the CCC in question. If you can show this catch was used by Rettenmaeir and Poellath then I will rethink my position on the Deschler connection.

If this catch was "supplied to Deschler and 1/3 of makers in the Third Reich" as you have said, then why don't we see it on any other badges? That to me is very odd.

Tom

Just to clarify further, the "double wire" catch that is associated with Deschler and shown here was certainly in extremely limited usage. The one catch that is similar is the post-war S&L catch that appears on badges from the 1960's (2nd attachment), but in that case the details of the wire cut and tooling are subtly but distinctly different.

Although it might have been a very limited production from a 3rd party catch producer who supplied only Deschler, one can easily imagine how such a catch can be made by Deschler without much specialized tooling: a coil of double round wire, a hammer or vise to flatten the base, some wire snips to cut off a piece and trim the ends, a pliers to bend it and your done. Maybe they were low on 3rd party supplies and just improvised for a while? And maybe S&L did the same in the 1960's with their similar yet different version which is a more uncommon variant compared with their standard setups.

So, even if in modern times the Deschler firm were to say "we bought our pin setups from other firms and never had the tooling to make them." would that prove that a clever 1944 Deschler worker never improvised some double wire catches in between orders? I don't doubt also that simple C-shaped cut round-wire catches with bevelled ends like appear on early Juncker badges need necessarily be farmed out to a 3rd party supplier -- there's practically nothing to making those.

As Basti and Andreas might correctly point out, we simply don't know for sure, but we do know this double catch is very uncommon compared with "standard" catches, and appears on Deschler marked products.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Andreas Klein]

Hi Norm,

interesting that you identified my silver wound badge as 1960 postwar production from S&L.... i have to say that timeline and maker is totally new for me

one can easily imagine how such a catch can be made by Deschler without much specialized tooling: a coil of double round wire, a hammer or vise to flatten the base, some wire snips to cut off a piece and trim the ends, a pliers to bend it and your done.

Please look at how many worksteps you have discribed and ask youself if this makes sense for an awards maker who has to produce thousands of badges. Not that logical if you are allready a customer of a setup maker who can provide you with everything you need so that your limited resources can be focused on your main job: badge making.

[Norm F]

Please look at how many worksteps you have described and ask yourself if this makes sense for an awards maker who has to produce thousands of badges. Not that logical if you are already a customer of a setup maker who can provide you with everything you need so that your limited resources can be focused on your main job: badge making.

Hi Andreas,

I agree, which maybe explains why we don't see it on thousands of badges? But of course you're right, it may simply have been a small line of production from a 3rd party company, and maybe only Deschler gave it a try on his badges -- maybe on a trial basis?

interesting that you identified my silver wound badge as 1960 postwar production from S&L.... i have to say that timeline and maker is totally new for me

My apologies, you're right I should have mentioned that! Am I correct in saying that your lovely "S&L-design" wound badge with "o"-mark below the catch (as shown here) is the only one to turn up so far with that setup typical of S&L's "57 version" badges?

Best regards,
---Norm

[Andreas Klein]

My apologies, you're right I should have mentioned that! Am I correct in saying that your lovely "S&L-design" wound badge with "o"-mark below the catch (as shown here) is the only one to turn up so far with that setup typical of S&L's "57 version" badges?

Hi Norm,

it's the only one i have .... but i saw another one sold lately. To be honest i see some differences in finish, catch, needle, hinge compared to your 57 badge.

And what you didn't show: the obverse of the wound badge doesn't show the typical signs of a S&L wound badge. Luckely S&L was one of the few makers with a completly different obverse so that you can easily identify a S&L die of the wound badge.

This badge doesn't have the signs .... i don't think that S&L produced a totally new die with swaz for a new production.

And what's about the "o" ??? Is this a sign of postwar S&L production?

[Norm F]

Hi Norm,

it's the only one i have .... but i saw another one sold lately. To be honest i see some differences in finish, catch, needle, hinge compared to your 57 badge.

And what you didn't show: the obverse of the wound badge doesn't show the typical signs of a S&L wound badge. Luckely S&L was one of the few makers with a completly different obverse so that you can easily identify a S&L die of the wound badge.

This badge doesn't have the signs .... i don't think that S&L produced a totally new die with swaz for a new production.

And what's about the "o" ??? Is this a sign of postwar S&L production?

Hi Andreas,

Well, the setup is the hinge and pin of the "very early" S&L '57 combined with the rare double catch of the "early" '57 S&L (see the 3 S&L '57 Minesweepers attached here).

But I have to defer to you on the obverse die issue since you're the expert on wound badges. All I knew was Hans had called it an S&L on your previous thread on GCA -- so you think it was a sister die?

The "o" mark is interesting on your wound badge. It appears on pre-war minis and may have appeared on late war zincers as well (usually associated with S&L but subject to debate), but is most common on S&L '57 production where it often has an assymetrical thickness to the outline like on your wound badge. I would have called the S&L attribution for the wound badge somewhere between a "very good theory" and "reasonable assumption" but not an "irrefutable fact".

Best regards,
---Norm

[Andreas Klein]

Hi Norm,

i don't have access to GCA so that i can't read what Hans wrote in that thread, but i'm quite sure he wouldn't link it to S&L if he had it in his hands because i doesn't have the "sawtooth" feeling like the rim of wartime badges which is the result of the S&L die.

Btw i have some doubts that the catches on your minesweepers are postwar. For me they look similiar to postwar ones but for sure with a clear vissible postwar finish.

[Norm F]

Further clarification. The "old o's" that appear on the TR-style zincers are generally quite uniform in thickness and of the same size (top image), whereas the '57 S&L's often show that assymetrical thickness and variable size like the '57 Luftwaffe Flak badge in the bottom image.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

Hi Norm,
Btw i have some doubts that the catches on your minesweepers are postwar. For me they look similiar to postwar ones but for sure with a clear visible postwar finish.

You mean the double wire catch on the middle '57 Minesweeper? I couldn't say when it was produced, only that appears on a variety of S&L '57 products (like Nigel's EK1 for example) whereas your silver wound badge was the only "TR-style" badge I had seen with the same one.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Andreas Klein]

Hi Norm,

i meant all three ... the catches left and right are looking to me like classic flatwire ones. I think the problem is that setups wich were wartime weren't changed in design postwar because they could do their job on a postwar 57 badge as good as on a wartime badge.

There was no need to reinvent the wheel.

[Thomas Durante]

Hi guys,

I concur with Norm, the hardware on Andreas's wound badge in post #171 is "early 1957" to my eye as well.

Tom

[Andreas Klein]

Has your eye an ecidence ???

So based on your thoughts Deschler produced this catch until 1957 and sold it to S&L - right?

[Thomas Durante]

Just an observation Andreas, take it or disregard it.

I would post some compares for you to prove my case, but what is the point? You will see what you want to see and believe what you want to believe.

That is why I post "my opinion" after my sentences. You should give us the same courtesy after yours.

Tom