SUB BADGE w/ ASSMANN M.M........???

[Milton]

Hello folks. I picked up a few small badges today from a friend who bought them over the years at various antique shops, flea markets, yard sales, etc, and this one's got me a bit baffled. I know conventional wisdom in the collectors community holds that Assmann didn't produce sub badges, but I also can't find any reproduction examples either. The badge is zinc, and there's still a small amount of remaining gilt finish present on the rear of the badge, and along the inner edge of the wreath...virtually nothing remains on the obverse surface. There's also a good amount of the typical white oxidation we find w/ old zinc badges. The swastika is cut out. There's a round wire pin, and the "C" catch is soldered to a round base plate. The "Assmann" A appears centered on the sub. Is it remotely possible that Assmann did produce these badges? This example seems to have some real age to it, but I defer to those of you w/ an extensive knowledge of Kriegsmarine badges to enlighten me further. Thanks for everyone's time!

[Milton]

2

[Norm F]

Hi Milton,

Interesting badge and nicely done but not original IMO. I expect it looks aged because it's an old copy.

It appears to be an almost exact copy of a late zinc B. H. Mayer but with softer details, a cut-out swastika, wrong setup and a spurious Assmann mark.

On the oblique view, it looks like there's a rough groove along the inner margin of the cutout under the sub which doesn't look good either.

But definitely an interesting badge to post!

Best regards,
---Norm

[Milton]

Hello Norm. Thanks for writing. Yes, the age is from all appearances, legitimate. There's very little, if any gilt remaining on the obverse, and very little remaining on the reverse and interior of the wreath, however, for the finish to have been lost / absorbed into the badge would've taken quite a long time, if having occurred naturally. In person, this badge does appear quite convincing, however I've yet to see another by Assmann, whether original OR reproduction. Definitely an odd-ball, to say the least! I'll have to keep researching further. Thanks again for your post.

[BubbaZ]

Hi Milton,
This is undoubtful post war repro for the reasons mentioned by Norm.
No chances for this one, sorry
Kind regards,
Hubert

[Milton]

Thanks for writing Hubert. I'm still searching for other precedent (other "repro" examples w/ this marking). The photos might not truly show it, but there's some real age to this badge. Assuming it's a "post war repro", it must've been produced quite a long time ago, and the details as compared to known originals are (i.m.o), quite accurate. Funny how a repro maker would pick the marking of a maker who supposedly never actually produced the badge, isn't it? Thx for taking the time to write!

[Norm F]

...
Funny how a repro maker would pick the marking of a maker who supposedly never actually produced the badge, isn't it? Thx for taking the time to write!

Hi Milton,

There are lots of examples of fakers using maker marks of firms that never made those badges (for example the "Frank & Reif U-boat") so no conclusions to draw there.

With regards to the particular mark on your U-Boat, it doesn't match the vast majority of legitimate Assmann badge marks, but it is an exact match to the questionable mark that has been discussed before in the Luftwaffe forum.

Tom Durante could comment on what is the current thinking on this mark but seems it was highly suspect.

I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of a post-war assembly of leftover wartime bits and bobs for the souvenir market in Lüdenscheid, but that's really just giving it the benefit of the doubt.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Milton]

Hi again Norm. Yes, that could well be the case, and yes again, nothing really out of the ordinary for the "wrong" maker mark to be used (especially back in the days before collecting T.R. badges became such "rocket science"). I'm still searching for other examples like this using the Assmann mark, but as yet, no luck. Thanks again for taking the time to comment!

[Thomas Durante]

I'm still searching for other examples like this using the Assmann mark, but as yet, no luck.

There are plenty out there Milton, just have to look for them. I completely agree with Norm & Hubert, your badge is a fake. Along with the aforementioned reasons why your badge is fake, the porous nature of the obverse, questionable reverse hardware and fake Assmann mark are all red flags. The reverse hardware is not too bad, but this long barrel hinge and round wire catch on catchplate were never used on original Assmann badges. Assmann used short hinges and flatwire catches.

Combine that with the bogus maker mark, which is only to be found on fake badges. Here are a few for you, first on a fake flak badge and the other on a common fake airgunner badge.

Tom

[Thomas Durante]

Fake airgunner

[Milton]

Thanks for the examples Tom. I can appreciate those examples, but w/ all due respect, the details of this sub badge in my honest opionion, are by far more convincing than the two Luft examples shown. I have no doubt that there are plenty of repro badges w/ the Assmann mark, I've just yet to find another sub badge example (not that it really matters!) As for the "porous" nature of the front of the badge, it seems elatively consummate w/ other zincers minus their finish I've encountered, and it's definitely not lead. I do believe it's zinc or a similar non ferrous metal. As a "repro", I've got to believe it's a first-generation example, due to the honest age it exhibits, and perhaps was struck from original dies?? Thanks to all for your informative replies!