Here is a cloth item that I have little or no experience with. It is the Small battle badge of the Kreigsmarine. I would appreciate any coments pro or con as to the authenticity of this badge.
-
-
REVERSE OF THE SMALL BATTLE BADGE
Reverse. -
Sawfish
No doubt it´s good quality, but it´s not the same style as those sold as originals in Germany (both Winkler and Weitze have one for sale).
I have one that is original and it´s not like this one; thin cotton thread which makes the complete badge much thinner. Not so detailed.Comment
-
Re: Sawfish
The lower grades of these badges were reported to have been produced and issued in great numbers from late November of 1944 to the end of the war. Therefore, it can be assumed that more than one firm produced these cloth badges and probably many different variations in material and construction was employed. I have seen many of the thin types, bullion variations, but never come across one like the one posted save one example Dr. Klietmann had in his reference files back in the 70's. I just can't get a definite answer as to the authenticity of the type I have. It might be a modern reproduction, but I will keep it as representative reference piece. I still hope that I can get additional opinions and I thank you for yours.Originally posted by Ludwig
No doubt it´s good quality, but it´s not the same style as those sold as originals in Germany (both Winkler and Weitze have one for sale).
I have one that is original and it´s not like this one; thin cotton thread which makes the complete badge much thinner. Not so detailed.Comment
-
Note to self: Stump quotes Klietmann as reference (which is fine by me for some items).
Comment
-
KLIETMANN'S EXAMPLE
This is the example Dr. Klietmann had and featured in his book AUSZEICHNUNGEN DES DEUTSCHEN REICH 1936-1945. Note that the eye of the sawfish is larger on his example than on mine, but the detail is overall much the same. It had a backing much the same as mine to the best of my memory.Comment
-
Bill
It looks like the upper and lower fins in front of the tail are divided on your example and not on Klietmann's.GeorgeComment
-
Re: Bill
Yes, the Klietmann design is different, but the quality of production is similar. The sawfish on both are finely crafted with tight stitching. I have found many different types of construction used in these, but can't satisfy myself if they are post war or war time produced.Originally posted by George Stimson
It looks like the upper and lower fins in front of the tail are divided on your example and not on Klietmann's.Comment
-
I think on many of these patches you just have to have the faith or not have it on these loose mint items. Common thought has it that many were 'liberated' in warehouses on the docks of Hamburg, etc. So unless it comes off a uniform and matches a particular mint example, it's just plain going to be tough.Comment
-
I would really like to see one taken or on a uniform or one that is acknowledged as being an original war time produced badge. If one was found unissued on the docks of Hamburg and it was proven to be of war time manufacture, I would be more than happy to have it. The problem for me is finding an undisputed original to go by.Originally posted by Brian S
I think on many of these patches you just have to have the faith or not have it on these loose mint items. Common thought has it that many were 'liberated' in warehouses on the docks of Hamburg, etc. So unless it comes off a uniform and matches a particular mint example, it's just plain going to be tough.Comment
-
Precisely. Put an ad on the e-stand in addition to the discussion here and maybe someone will pop out of the woodwork with a patch or two sewed on. That would be great. I see lots of KM patches and haven't got a clue what is or isn't right.Comment
-
I'm fairly certain this is a reproduction.
Look at the sawfish "nose" it is just a crude series of zig-zags. On any originals I have seen this area has been more anatomically accurate, a long straight "blade", with cross bar "teeth" at right angles to the "blade"
Here is my "probationary" grade.
Note the same style "saw" as Klietmanns photo.
Here is a current copy being sold on EPier as a copy
Note the zig-zag snout, and the "circle" of rope behind the Sawfish squashed out of shape.Comment
-
Thanks my friend for you opinion. I highly respect your knowledge on the cloth items. The example I have will go into the reproduction research files and I will look for an example like yours and Dr. K's. I would like to have a more accepted version or one that has a province.Originally posted by Gordon Williamson
I'm fairly certain this is a reproduction.
Look at the sawfish "nose" it is just a crude series of zig-zags. On any originals I have seen this area has been more anatomically accurate, a long straight "blade", with cross bar "teeth" at right angles to the "blade"
Here is my "probationary" grade.
Note the same style "saw" as Klietmanns photo.
Here is a current copy being sold on EPier as a copy
Note the zig-zag snout, and the "circle" of rope behind the Sawfish squashed out of shape.
PS: The seller of this item was from the Neatherlands and informed me the following about the badge: "The badge is original and no repro. It was in a lot that came from the E-boat / K- boat supplies bunker in IJmuiden/ Noord Holland."Last edited by W. C. Stump; 04-03-2003, 08:50 PM.Comment
-
Sawfish
In my opinion the badge that Gordon Williamson shows us is the correct style.
I have seen worn examples of this one. I can´t swear that every single thread was identical to Gordons, but in general.
Also, in my opinion, Dr. Klietmann wasn´t 100% reliable.Comment
-
And that's why I brought up Mr. Stump's use of Klietmann's photo. I think much of his research was useful. We need to however sift through what was self serving and what is original. For example, I would doubt we could rely on items Godet could have manufactured in his 'original' photos but I would rely on most anything else as good. But that's where Mr. Stump's opinion would be very useful in seperating the two.Comment
Comment