..
-
-
Thanks Chen for the explanation in excerpts. So the denazified image was from the Jörg Nimmergut book?
I wonder where the "pre-" photo came from (ie. before Ailsby's blog). Also apparently Dönitz never got his badge back so I wonder where Nimmergut got the photo of the denazified form - presumably it was in Britain somewhere? If it's still around it really should be in a museum, but obviously some mysteries remain...
I think of badges being denazified so they can continue to be worn by their recipients, so it's seems somewhat strange to me that the badge would be confiscated and denazified with no intention of return, especially when it was obviously such a valuable trophy. But then again emotions were undoubtedly running high at the time and there could have been significant symbolism to the act.
Best regards,
---NormLast edited by Norm F; 08-03-2013, 12:42 PM.Comment
-
The only thing I would trust in "Awarded for Bravery" are the page numbers - but only after checking!
I am sure you noted the documentary picture of the Balloon Observer Badge on page 342 .....
DietrichComment
-
Hi Dietrich,Originally posted by Dietrich Maerz View Post
Thanks for pointing out the the book cover and photo in post #107 were from the book "Awarded for Bravery" by R. Friedrich in 2007, not from Nimmergut's book.
But do you know if the image of the denazified badge (and the non-denazified image too for that matter) was also in Nimmergut's book or whether it appeared for the first time in Friedrich's?
Best regards,
---NormComment
-
The badge was pictured in Nimmergut's book before Friedrich's book. And it seems to be different (which does not surprise me).
DietrichLast edited by Dietrich Maerz; 08-03-2013, 12:05 PM.Comment
-
here the Friedrich badge again in full view....Comment
-
Oh my gosh! Look at the heads of those eagles! The one in Nimmergut's photo looks like a parrot hatchling not an eagle. I would think that considering what this award was going to be and who it was going to the sculpture would have made it look a bit more imperial or predator like. Those beaks couldn't crack a sunflower seed.
JAndrew
BTW, my theory about the swastika is that it was not an attempt to denazify anything but a quick way to get some diamonds to sell. Don't forget that most European economies were shattered at the end of the war, even many of the allies'. I've seen a lot of gold class awards were the backs have been scratched down to the base metal to see if they were solid gold or not. Back then collector value was nil, sentimental value wasn't there yet but precious metal/materials value was sure considered. Just a thought.
JAndrewComment
-
Well.. this has certainly become an IMPRESSIVE reference thread, after the excellent and very complete analysis made by Norm.
Thanks for all the info you've provided, and also to the other members who came here to add
Regards,
Sepp.Comment
-
Don't know if this helps.. but here's a close up on Dönitz badge during the war.Comment
-
-
Hi Dietrich,Originally posted by Dietrich Maerz View Post
Thanks for the images. Time for a little photo forensics.
Actually, they are the same image! Firstly, when you look at the Nimmergut images you can see that the obverse image is defective with many deletions from the margins when compared to the reverse photo.
Secondly, when you compare it side-to-side to the R. Friedrich (Honts) image you can see that aside from missing margins they're the same image with the same details, flaws and shading. So either Nimmergut mangled the original image or Friedrich touched up the image depending on how it started.
Best regards,
---NormComment
-
And just as interesting, the photo from the Ailsby blog with the swastika is even more obviously the same image as Nimmergut's with the same details and shading.
When you blow up the swastika it pixelates differently from the rest of the badge and the upper corner is cut off, so it's clear the photo was doctored with the addition of the diamond swastika.
So now we know the swastika image is definitely faked and the jury is still out as to whether the Nimmergut/Honts images of the denazified badge have any basis in reality. Perhaps they were simply intended as illustrations of what Dönitz's badge would have looked like to give the reader a general idea. At any rate, I think we can move on now from this topic.
Best regards,
---NormLast edited by Norm F; 08-03-2013, 10:54 PM.Comment
-
So now back to the known U-Boat with diamonds badges and bit more study.
Looking at some more comparisons I can now see other evidence that the "Type 2" with larger swastika is indeed the later version than the "Type 1" with smaller swastika.
Here you see the Type 1 diamond badge (smaller swastika) compared to a regular maker marked Schwerin, Type 2 in timeline classification.
Also the Type 2 diamond badge (larger swastike) compared to a later unmarked zinc Schwerin, Type 5 in the timeline classification.
It's apparent that the Type 1 diamond badge matches closely to the Tombak badge and the Type 2 diamond badge matches more closely to the later zinc badge. More in the next post.Comment
-
On the eagle closeups, it's even more compelling that the earlier Tombak Schwerin shares die characteristics with the Type 1 diamond badge while the later zinc Schwerin shares die characteristics with the Type 2 diamond badge. Note the shape of the eye opening, the neck feathers and the wing feathers.
It's not clear whether the two types represent closely related sister dies or progressive wear in the same die, but regardless of the scenario it's clear the diamond badges with larger swastika correlate with the later production Schwerin badges.
Best regards,
---NormComment
-
Not realy my field of interest, but a very good reference thread.
I have a photo, taken 1980 in the collection room of Marineschule Muerwik in Flensburg during my active service in the navy.
Shown is the uboat-badge with diamonds from Mützelburg, beside his Knightscross and oakleaves.
A bad picture, but not modified in any way, perhaps someone can recognize the type of badge.
Regards
MarkusComment
Comment