S-Boat badge... opinions?

[Norm F]

..
Some actually believe that in British-occupied Ludenscheid, new actual die stamping began in the immediate postwar years (as in 1946,47,etc.). I personally think, as do people such as Andreas Klein, who actually interviewed people who were there at the time, that no such thing took place and that it would have been, under the circumstances and political climate then-existing, virtually suicidal for anyone to do that. Much later, yes, but not then.

These boards, according to what was related at the original auction in England, were acquired by a British Intelligence officer in the months right after the war. (Their contents, by the way, mirror acquistions by the Imperial War Museum directly from the War Department in 1946.)

Very, very interesting. So the circumstantial evidence would indeed suggest that the "o" mark and the "post-war scrape" were present in Lüdenscheid already right after the war. So once again we're left with a situation very analogous to Souval, a transition from wartime leftover badges to post-war assembly of wartime leftovers to (later) production. And as always, it's up to the collector what they wish to add to their collection.

Thanks for the additional info.

[Leroy]

Exactly so, Norm.

[Thomas Durante]

Hi guys,

I wouldn't judge any type of tool mark at the pin based off these grainy photos. The tool marks are hard enough to judge accurately even with good photos, so I am not sure we are looking at a true 1957 scrape or not.

The fact is that we know of very early 1957 badges that have the "wartime dimple" on the pin, so that is strong evidence to say that it was this type of mark that was used by S&L at the end of the war and that some of these wartime pins survived long enough to be used on the earliest 1957 badges. The 1957 scrape is found in abundance on the majority of 57 badges, so that too is strong evidence that the tool they were using in 1957 was different than the tool they used at the end of the war.

The fact that the "wartime dimple" pins can be found on early 1957 badges is very good evidence to support Leroy's contention that S&L didn't start new, mass-produced reproductions until the 1960s. If there were enough wartime pins (with wartime dimples) left over to be used on the early 1957 badges, that means they weren't all used up in the 1940s and early 50's making reproductions.

Tom

[Leroy]

Photos of the badge are still "up" on the "emedals" site (http://www.emedals.ca/catalog.asp?item=GRN317#bigPic). I can't copy them, but based on what I see, the mark on the pin is NOT the "post-war scrape" as I understand it. Tom, please confirm. (The best photo is sixth from the top, on the right. It will enlarge if you click on it.)

[Norm F]

Photos of the badge are still "up" on the "emedals" site (http://www.emedals.ca/catalog.asp?item=GRN317#bigPic). I can't copy them, but based on what I see, the mark on the pin is NOT the "post-war scrape" as I understand it. Tom, please confirm. (The best photo is sixth from the top, on the right. It will enlarge if you click on it.)

Hm. Looks like the classic "57-scrape" to me...? A '57 attached below it for comparison. But regardless, this is the one from the Lüdenscheid sample board.

[Leroy]

Norm - Thanks for copying that! I thought at first it was close to the "scrape", but when I blew it up, it appears way too deep to be that. Or are we seeing a deep "scrape" which occured at the end of the war and then shows up in "softer" form on 57 pieces? This is very interesting!

[Leroy]

Here are 2 more examples of the "57 scrape". Not so deep.

[Norm F]

Norm - Thanks for copying that! I thought at first it was close to the "scrape", but when I blew it up, it appears way too deep to be that. Or are we seeing a deep "scrape" which occured at the end of the war and then shows up in "softer" form on 57 pieces? This is very interesting!

I don't know if we say much about the depth since the black finish caught in the crevice may be making it look deeper. But borrowing another of Tom's images for this comparison, I do think it's the "57-scrape".

[Leroy]

Digital photographs are the worst way to judge anything and we really need to see the badge in person to tell. Although you could be right, I still see real depth to this mark (shown best in Post # 37) which does not correlate to that seen on any 57 badge.

In any case, JohnT's badge (which also has the raised "O") has a pin with what seems pretty clearly to be what Tom calls the "wartime dimple". NOW it is really confusing....

[Norm F]

...
In any case, JohnT's badge (which also has the raised "O") has a pin with what seems pretty clearly to be what Tom calls the "wartime dimple". NOW it is really confusing....

The "57-scrape" is never found on that round sheet metal hinge setup, so it's never helpful as an indicator in those S-Boat badges that Gordon was always referring to. These hinge/pin combinations are presumed to be leftover parts from wartime.

In fact, the scrape is only seen in it's classic form in the setups with bent round-wire main pins soldered side-on to the central barrel of the hinge, and so it's only useful in badges with that kind of setup, although occasionally there's something similar seen in a wide pin.

And unfortunately, the absence of the "57-scrape" doesn't confirm wartime provenance; only the presence of the scrape raises the question about time of assembly.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Leroy]

I'm afraid this is a mystery that will continue for quite a while....

Do you believe that any "S&L type" S-Boat with a raised "O" is bad, or do you believe that mark only makes it suspect? If there are such S-Boats made with legitimate leftover hinge/pin structures as well as ones which have the supposed "scrape", is there a 3rd version you think might be correct?

[Thomas Durante]

Hi guys,

I think we need to see the tool mark straight on to make a determination of wether its a 57-scrape or not. But based on the angled shot, I have to admit it does look pretty close to the 57-scrape mark. The "classic" 57 scrape mark has a circular dent at the top of the mark, then a long scrape down the pin (just fyi).

I would want to see it straight on to be sure, and the pics have to be clear because this is a pretty important find. Until today, I have yet to find this "57-scrape" on any confirmed, wartime S&L badge. Also the fact that "wartime dimpled" pins were still left over after the war, and used on early 57 badges speaks volumes about the types of pins used by S&L at the end of the war. So finding a 57-scrape on an UNQUESTIONABLE wartime badge would be a very big find IMO.

Once we determine if it is indeed a true 57 scrape or not, then we can move on to the rest of the questions:

1. What date is the souvenier board from? (Is it immediately postwar, or could it be from 1950s or 1960s)?

2. Are there other questionable aspects to the badge, other than the pin that would point to postwar production (i.e., weird finish, weird catch, weird tool marks, etc. that are not consistent with wartime production)?

To prove the "1957-scrape" theory incorrect, we would need to find definative evidence that says this type of s-boat badge was made during the war, and put together during the war (or very soon after) IMO.

Tom

[Thomas Durante]

Gentry, do we know the history of the souvenier board that emedals has for sale?

Thanks

Tom

[Leroy]

Tom - The only history I know is that reported by a member here who was present at the original auction in England: brought back by a British Intelligence officer who obtained them in the months (not years) following the war. I believe Barry Turk has also confirmed this version.

P.S. Just checked the original thread. The member here was "DaveB" from the UK. He and a friend attended the auction and bid on each of the boards, but won none of them. At the auction, it was related that the British officer had had them in his possession until the sale (which was in mid-2008).

[Thomas Durante]

Hi guys,

Gentry, thanks for the history of the board, and more specifically this badge.

So, it sounds like the story is that a British vet brought this board home soon after the war. It would be good if this could be verified somehow since it is now 3rd or 4th hand information at this point.

If we were to say that the tool mark on the pin is indeed the "1957- scrape", which I am not even sure it is, then this badge could be the badge we are looking for to put my scrape-theory to the test. I put forward my theory over a year ago, and this is the first time a badge has been presented that challenges it. From the beginning, I have always said that we would need to find an "unquestionably authentic wartime" badge featuring the scrape mark to disprove my theory. Every badge that has been put forward up until now (and there have been hundreds and hundreds I have tested) all have helped confirm the theory.

So, with that said, lets focus on the badge in question. Other than the scrape, is there any other "questionable" aspects to this badge?

1. I would say that the fact that its a 1st Pattern S-boat badge is a questionable aspect. As has been mentioned, what would a 1st Pattern S-boat badge be doing on a post-war souvenier board (since they were no longer made after January 1943)?

2. The "o" mark is another questionable aspect. Based on other S&L badges (both wartime and 57 badges), it seems that S&L predominently used this mark on their post-war 1957 badges. None of their mass-produced and vet-obtained wartime-produced badges feature this "o" mark (such as the PAB, GAB, CCC, IAB, Para, etc). The only few wartime S&L badges that feature the "o" mark are possibly the LW flight clasps, which may or may not be wartime-produced. I happen to think they are wartime produced, but late-war based on their extreme rarity and the use of zinc as a base metal. So it would seem that if S&L did use the "o" mark during the war, it was likely done late in the war and therefore finding it on an 1st Pattern S-Boat badge, which stopped production in early 1943 is weird and questionable.

3. The fact that 1st Pattern S-boat badges are very rare, but yet these S&L S-boat badges are pretty common and come with stories about being dumped on the market in the 60s and 70s is also a questionable aspect that must be considered.

I don't doubt the accuracy of the story that this board came from a British Vet at very soon after the war. However, a lot of time has passed since then and I have seen quite a number of vet stories that turned out to be downright lies, or at best, exaggerated. Therefore, I place very little faith in vet stories, and rather concentrate on the badges themselves. For a true test of the "1957-scrape" theory, we need to find some UNQUESIONABLE AUTHENTIC wartime badges with it. In my opinion, this S-Boat badge is not unquestionable authentic, and has some other issues with it.

Tom