Announcement

**James Noble** · 08-29-2002, 03:04 AM

IMO it must likely was a corporate decision at the time to save money by leaveing the name off or just changing the logo. Lets face it they didn't have any idea we would be collecting these badges 57+years later so makeing it easier on us was the farthest thing on their minds at that time.

**Joseph D'Errico** · 08-30-2002, 10:21 PM

Thanks for the response Mr. Noble, however, with no disrepect to your reply. I feel that your reply has merit,but is thier any concrete information on this? I can't imagine the Junkers proud Prussians would ever produce a badge without thier Mark. I mean this question can rival some of the earlier concepts surrounding the identification of unmarked badges. Do you subscribe to this theory? Maybe they out sourced them and didn't want thier Mark on them simply because they didn't produce it at all? I feel this is an important question, as to why any Maker wouldn't mark thie badges,just call it pride of workmanship. I'm disappointed this thread hasn't received more responses. but thanks for your interests.
Joe

**Tim B.** · 08-31-2002, 12:36 AM

Joe,

I don't think JNoble meant any harm in his comments. I agree that the last thing on the manufacturer's minds as the war progressed was who would be collecting these down the road 50+ years from then. But, I also feel it's possible that early on (maybe prewar) some manufacturers did foresee the day when their pieces would become collectable, as there are often small design features or marks obscurely hidden in the design and this might have been deliberate to some degree to differentiate the originals from the fakes for those manufacturers down the road. Everything's a collectable if you wait long enough.

This is one of those things that makes this hobby interesting, confusing, and dangerous at times due to the differences in maker's marks and the over abundance of fakes that keep coming into play. As the faker's get better and learn all the little quirks of a known original, it gets harder to distinguish good from bad.

That's why it's important to know what original marks look like from known makers and the changes, if any, that may have occurred. Every maker's mark has certain traits that you have to get to know and take it as "textbook". It's like the slanted "L" in Berlin on the Juncker Luftwaffe badges or the extended "T" in the Imperial Walter Shott marked U-boat badges.

As far as why marks changed, we may never really know the whole story as most of these firms either lost the records or refuse to divulge past design traits. That information would be invaluable to today's collectors and repo manufactures to say the least.

Speculation:

- Did Juncker ever subcontract badges out and use different dies for those pieces? Did they sell parts to other firms for their badges?

- Did Juncker have to change from the letters "CEJ" to the full spelling of their firm due to changing requirements, or just decide that the logo should be spelled out for potential customers that liked the quality of their workmanship? Good sales strategy if you ask me. Who is CEJ? Spelled out, they know who made the badge.

- Did the place of manufacture have to relocate sometime due to the war progression and the die stamps lost or temporarily misplaced? Not going to hold up production just because the maker's mark isn't there are you?

Who knows for sure and if anyone does, their not talking.

Hope that helps and hang in there, you're not alone.

Tim

**Eric Stahlhut** · 08-31-2002, 12:54 AM

Perhaps.

What do you guys think about incused versus stamped hallmarks? I tend to veer towards the assumption that incused marks were hand struck and that the regular 'stamped' marks were machine generated. I have seen this very same occurrence with certain brands of 1914 EK1 makers. The higher quality versions always seemed to have an incuse makers' stamp.

I know that comparing Imperial stuff to 3rd reich stuff is a bit disproportionate, but Juncker on the whole was a venerable firm that seemed to adhere to a strict methodology for as long as possible. Granted, exceptions do exist, and perhaps due to their high standards they simply would not allow anyone to take the 'master stamper's ' place when he was absent. Or perhaps he was the first guy to go. I dunno. I can hear the master saying,

"Hallmarks? We don't need no steeenkin' hallmarks! We are Juncker! Our products speak for themselves!!"

Seriously, though. It is my opinion that incused means early.

**James Noble** · 08-31-2002, 05:11 AM

Well gentlemen this is a question that as of now has no definite answer just opinions. Maybe these proud Prussians didn't mark these later badges do to the poorer quality material they were forced to use as the war progressed even though the design and workmanship was the same . They knew this badges wouldn't hold up to the test of time as the earlier high end badges would.
Or maybe these badges slipped though quality control during or right after an airraid. So when someone says it's a unmarked Junckers badge I say wheres the proof. Like I said before no answers just opinions.

**Mark S.** · 08-31-2002, 12:07 PM

now for my opinion..

I think you guys are putting way too much thought into why these were or weren't maker marked. You are applying modern day collecting mentality a completely different era and attitude. By todays standards, yes, they are quality works of art, but by the standards of that era, it is what was expected.

These arent Swiss watches or Tiffany lamps we are talking about here, they are military badges, made in the most part out of non-precious metals. If you think about it, Germany was actually at the bottom end when it comes to quality medal and badge production. Americans were using sterling silver for aviator wings and marksmanship medals, as were the Brits for all their medals of significance. The Germans used silver sparingly, and usually only on very high end awards.

Naturally the detail we see on these badges is awe inspiring, especially by todays standards. In our modern fast paced world, we rarely see such detail attributed to anything. The items out there that do afford such craftsmanship are priced accordingly.

If you look at other items coming out of Germany, at the same time period or before, you will see a great amount of detail applied to any handcrafted item. In our modern day we call it "Old world craftsmanship" as the skills that it took to produce such items was learned and passed down from generation to generation. Ever see a Black Forest wood carving or a hand made Cuckoo clock? The detail is amazing. How about hand painted cameo jewelry?

The 1930's was an era that was populated by scores of these "old world" types. This quite possibly was the last generation of these types. Older skilled craftsmen who were more than happy to apply their trade working for Juncker on a mass produced scale. Of course, with in this scenario you will find some badges more hand worked than others, an amazing amount of attention paid to detail. When you have a skilled craftsman doing the work, it is only natural that you would find such detail. That is, until the shop foreman told him to pick up the pace when it was noticed that he was only finishing two badges to the other guys ten. I also think that such quality control had as much to do with not risking to lose a very lucrative government contract as it did with maintaining the elevated stature of the company.

I seriously dont think that such "hyper-detail" has as much to do with the company as it does with the hand finisher. The maker marks are just that, maker marks. Not corporate calling cards. If Juncker was as high end as we seem to think it was, then they would have been well known with in the industry already. Adding an address would have been unnecessary. If an address was such an important thing, I think all would have it, from Aurich to Zimmerman, not just the large scale producers. As a matter of fact, I think the small shops would have more to gain from it than the large companies.

**Joseph D'Errico** · 08-31-2002, 01:46 PM

O.K.

I think that I can rationalize that thought. I think you really hit it on the head when you say we or I tend to look at these badges in contemporary terms. Your certainly right about "Old World Craftsmanship" was more the standard than the exception in the 30s. Thanks for the response and perspective. I think part of the problem for me is when I buy a CEJ and pay the premium for it, I want to see the Mark. I know,but that's me.
Thanks
Joe

**mott5ranch** · 08-31-2002, 02:08 PM

The same problems with "Hallmarks" or "Makers Marks" exist with American badges and wings. For example Balfour(one of a dozen wing makers) farmed out contracts to smaller companies that would make the badge for less than the original manufacturer could. Simply sending the work from a pro union state to a right to work state could mean a big difference in the bottom line. Balfour had several locations for the construction of badges, one on the east coast and another on the west coast for sure. I've heard there were even more. If a few of them farmed out a few thousand here and there who would know or care? These makers had to make enough badges for thousands of soldiers.

I wonder if the German makers farmed out work to other companies? This has already been asked in this thread. It seems like a common business decision and I think it most likely happened. Cloth items were farmed out all over the place even to the concentration camps in the end. Why wouldn't the badges be farmed out as well? Perhaps that is one explanation for all the different Juncker marks that everyone seems to accept and the everything else that some have called early war, pre war, late war that is always questioned. Oh the questions are endless.

Did each maker have only one die? Many say the makers could have had only one die because they were too expensive to make but these same makers could pop out a different tinne every other month and hand them out for pennies. Yes, the process is somewhat different but still a stamped tinnie had to come from a die. Salesmen hit the streets and got the business and kept the makers making badges and tinnies. We've all noticed the detail in many tinnies. I question that arguement that each maker had one die. That's just not good business. I think Juncker was the most aggressive and successful. Since this business was booming I'm guessing that may be a reason for the different marks or lack of them. Different production locations, farming out big orders, these guys do it cheaper, etc., could be just a few of the reasonable guesses.

Were the marks always placed in the same spot? No, not always. Why did the Prussian Juncker family have so many marker variations and the other makers didn't? Or did they? Perhaps they added their address towards the end to hopefully get another sale later down the road. New world marketing added to old world craftmanship? Again, it's fun to discuss and ponder.

Great thread, Joe! I love it when when everyone adds to the discussion. Many valid points were brought up here.

**Tim Calvert** · 08-31-2002, 04:10 PM

Just how many Juncker marks are you guys accepting??
Also wondering which unmarked badges you believe are actually Junckers or really just speculated to be Juncker.

**Joseph D'Errico** · 08-31-2002, 04:13 PM

I hate to add fuel to the fire. But could it be possible that Junkers did stamp everything they made and evreything else that is a "So called unmarked variation Junkers" is a less known maker attempting to achive the same qualiyi standards as Junkers, in hopes of aqiuring more business with the stipulation that they couldn't mark thier badges as a result of ,no more licenses were being isuued. I know this is theory,but so is everything else we have heard thus far. With respect. Goods points but not enough facts. Boy, I wish I had the time to really dig into this. I will attempt to pose this question to some of my contacts in Germany two of which are veterans maybe that will turn something new up. Sorry if I'm upsetting some of you with those unmarked Junkers, but I also have some and I'm curious.
Thanks
Joe

**mott5ranch** · 08-31-2002, 04:48 PM

Joe, Your guess is as good as anyone elses. I never thought of that possibility. Again, who knows.

Hello Tim, What marks are you not accepting? Some say the 68 numbered badges are all bogus....other members say not so. Hell, I don't know because I am no expert on any of these. I just gather them.

I think we all agree the C.E.Juncker mark without the periods after the first two letters is questionable. Do any others come to mind? I think the discussion is warming up. More input is more education for us all.

Let me get my helmet.

**Mark S.** · 08-31-2002, 05:02 PM

Tim makes a good point, and is actually more in line with the threads initial thought. Joe, I am presuming you are refering to the Juncker company as CEJ, and not the mark CEJ, as there cant possibly be an unmarked CEJ, since that is the maker mark. No mark, but resemblence, only makes it an unmarked Juncker, not an unmarked CEJ...follow me?

At any rate...what badges are we refering to as unmarked Junckers? There are only a few I know of..Heer Flak and Luft Flak seem to be out there...and then we have what very well could be the Auxiliary Cruiser badge that quite possibly was also made by Juncker, but with out a marked one to compare, this will be just a theory. Are there unmarked Spanish Crosses, Pilot badges, or Observer badges that are spot on identical to a marked Juncker badge? And thats just it..it has to be exactly identical in every way to be even considered a match. "juncker style" doesnt mean anything. I dont recall seeing any unmarked Coastal Artillery badges that are claimed as a Juncker.

So what are the unmarked badges you refer to, Joe? I think if the badges are identical in every way to a real Juncker, then it is a Juncker. Of course you would be paying more for a marked badge, especially ones marked CEJ, as that would make it a solid "textbook" example, with out any hypothosis.

**Frank Heukemes** · 08-31-2002, 05:05 PM

I think it is quite easy. There are good badges and bad badges. Every Juncker hallmark variation on a good badge must be considered a valid variation hallmark. Just stick to your gut and "stomach" feelings. And if you don´t have one, grow one! It comes with age (and good food)!

Cheers, Frank H.

**Joseph D'Errico** · 08-31-2002, 09:40 PM

Yes , I meant CEJ/ Junkers the company not the mark (sorry for the confusion on that if it created any)and the badges I'm refering to are the ones Tim mentioned,LW Flak, Heer Flak and the Auxilary Cruiser badge. Why would these three always be the unmarked Junkers? Anyway, the Aux. Cruiser badge was the one I was most concerned with because I recently sold one and someone mentioned it in another thread as an as a" Classic unmarked Junkers"meaning that it was typicaql that Junkers made badges at times with no mark. just seems odd to me that's all. And if I'm understanding you , Junkers didn't make any other LW pilots badges unmarked, right? I'm asking for advice in a grey area, so please don't misunderstand me.You'll have to forgive me,but I'm the classic "Hey dad,why is the sky blue" type of person.
As usual guys thanks for the help.
Joe

Announcement

Junkers Badges

Junkers Badges

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread