Golden Party Badge doc

[Simon O.]

I've no real opinion on this doc as political items hold little interest for me but i have a question.

As München, 30 januar. 1938 is printed and there exists at least one blank it follows that the suggestion is there was a mass awarding at the time.

If so, this should be reflected in other documentation. So, the question is, is there a cluster of awards specifically from 30 Jan.38?

[Br. James]

Dear Simon,

Yes, 30 January 1938 was one of the several dates on which the Honorary AH GPB was presented, and that is established by Klaus Patzwall in his 2004 book on the subject. Having also checked that source to establish this document's credibility prior to my first response, I was initially further encouraged to believe that the document could have been genuine. Thanks for raising that question.

Br. James

[max history]

Dear Simon,

Yes, 30 January 1938 was one of the several dates on which the Honorary AH GPB was presented, and that is established by Klaus Patzwall in his 2004 book on the subject. Having also checked that source to establish this document's credibility prior to my first response, I was initially further encouraged to believe that the document could have been genuine. Thanks for raising that question.

Br. James

It is a well known fact that Party promotions and awards were given on significant Party anniversaries: 9th November, 30th January, 20th April, etc. It is also a well known fact that people who create fantasy items, such as I believe this one to be, usually use one of these anniversary dates.
I am intrigued as to what encouraged you "to believe that the document could have been genuine." Please explain.
I'm also intrigued by the fact that, out of all the occasions upon which the GPB was awarded, not one original example of a completed GPB document as this example purports to be, has ever surfaced. Not even in the complete Nachlass of those people who were given the award. And not a mention of this document in any of the accepted files on the award of the GPB. Is it possible that Angolia was fooled back in the 1970s and the myth has been innocently perpetuated ever since? God forbid!!
Max.

[ValhallaMilitaria]

Sad, very sad....IF it was to sell it would sell cheap and with an entire lot of items(listed for sale now for 75.00) and most likely as a fake, I am not ignoring other opinions, just insanely busy and I have read yours along with others comments. I will NOT sell this as original.
I resent the accusations you make and refute them.
Regards,
Eric
PS- Max- sorry for the negative waves....I am NOT a greedy bloodsucking dealer looking to cheat people, the entire lot is 50.00 and I am not even assigning this item any real value.Thanks for your time and efforts!

There's nothing interesting about a fantasy piece and Br. James admits his information comes from another questionable example in a somewhat non-academic book.
I've accessed the files at the Bundesarchiv relating to GPBs and there was absolutely no evidence pointing to such a document. In fact all the pertinent paperwork had some sort of GPB motif which makes perfect sense.
No doubt you are hoping to sell it and that's why you appear to be ignoring alternative opinions, but I could be mistaken.

[max history]

Eric,
As is usual on the internet, you have totally misunderstood my meaning and have reacted in an oversensitive manner. I am not accusing you or anyone else of anything. Read my post again after this one. If you were considering selling the document, it is only natural that you would want it to be genuine and would look upon favourable comments in a more positive light than negative comments. That's human nature and the only thing of which you might be guilty. Everyone is the same. Nothing sad about that. Br. James made positive comments about the document and you thanked him and praised his expertise. Absolutely no reference to other posters who expressed doubts. I have every confidence that you are an honest dealer, otherwise you would not have posted the piece asking for comments in the first place. And I accept your last statement edited in as a postscript. BTW, I was NOT aware that you were selling it.
I thank you for posting the document which has triggered a useful discussion. I remain of the opinion that this is one of those well produced fantasy documents, designed to fool the not-so-informed collector, but which has also taken in more creditable authors such as Angolia and Patzwall. I hope it proves genuine, but somehow I don't think so. As I said before, I could be mistaken.
Max.

[ValhallaMilitaria]

Max-no worries man, were good and I appreciate everyones time! I skimmed through the posts yesterday without really reading all that was said-my fault. Time has NOT been on my side lately and it bit me in the butt this time.
Take care,
Eric

[JoeW]

I agree that this has been a most productive discussion that serves well to illustrate the problems with "reference books" that are/were considered "bibles" to many of us older collectors. As I mentioned to Eric in a PM, the format (eagle, font, layout) of this document reminds me of a number of "Death Notice" associated with Waffen SS units that appeared ten or more years ago I believe (the years are beginning to run together). That might be a subject for an interesting thread.

[max history]

Joe,
I'd forgotten all about those death notices. They were very well produced and fooled a lot of learned people. There have been a few variations on the theme over the years, but thankfully most fantasy forgeries have been revealed for what they are. The down side is that nowadays technology has advanced to a point where really sophisticated forgeries are becoming even harder to detect.
Best regards,
Max.

[Br. James]

I want to respond to Max History's question addressed to me in his note #18 below, asking what had encouraged me to believe that the document could have been genuine. As I tried to lay out in my previous notes on this thread, I had no personal knowledge or experience with this document, so I went to my library of works on this subject and was able to locate positive presentations of other copies of this document from Jack Angolia and Adrian Forman. That is the full extent of the source of my assumption that this document could have been genuine. With senior collectors and authors such as Angolia and Forman presenting this document, or a copy of it, as genuine in their reference works, that alone gave it at least some degree of credibility in my view. And as I have noted now twice before, my original response to this document began with "Your document appears to be..." I hope and trust that you can understand my thinking as I sought to provide information from creditable authors on the document as presented to us. I cannot and am not defending it as a genuine piece from the period; I only tried to provide an answer to another collector's question based upon the research of well-known authors on the subject. All I can add is "please don't kill the messenger!"

Br. James

[max history]

I want to respond to Max History's question addressed to me in his note #18 below, asking what had encouraged me to believe that the document could have been genuine. As I tried to lay out in my previous notes on this thread, I had no personal knowledge or experience with this document, so I went to my library of works on this subject and was able to locate positive presentations of other copies of this document from Jack Angolia and Adrian Forman. That is the full extent of the source of my assumption that this document could have been genuine. With senior collectors and authors such as Angolia and Forman presenting this document, or a copy of it, as genuine in their reference works, that alone gave it at least some degree of credibility in my view. And as I have noted now twice before, my original response to this document began with "Your document appears to be..." I hope and trust that you can understand my thinking as I sought to provide information from creditable authors on the document as presented to us. I cannot and am not defending it as a genuine piece from the period; I only tried to provide an answer to another collector's question based upon the research of well-known authors on the subject. All I can add is "please don't kill the messenger!"
Br. James

Thank you for replying, but my question appears to remain unanswered. Your statement was...

Dear Simon,
Yes, 30 January 1938 was one of the several dates on which the Honorary AH GPB was presented, and that is established by Klaus Patzwall in his 2004 book on the subject. Having also checked that source to establish this document's credibility prior to my first response, I was initially further encouraged to believe that the document could have been genuine.
Br. James

This clearly indicates that you were encouraged to believe that the document was genuine after reading Patzwall, albeit before your initial post. I was wondering what it was in Patzwall that made you believe in the possibility of it being genuine. No criticism intended and no requirement to shoot the messenger! Just interested in the discussion on this and other fantasy pieces.
Max.

[Br. James]

I must apologize if I have failed to be as clear as I had attempted to be. My reference to Patzwall's book on the Honorary GPB was made in regard to the date of 30 January 1938 as established by Patzwall as one of the dates on which the Honorary GPB was awarded, and this in reference to the date on the document in discussion. Again, taken at face value -- which, in our hobby, is admittedly not always what it appears to be! -- I was compiling the references known to me to refer to this document and its text contents in order to provide an answer to Eric's initial question.

I am grateful for your patience with me in this process and I greatly respect the knowledge and experience of my seniors in our hobby. As Joe opined, we are living at a time when factual information is more readily available than ever before, but we also possess reference works that, in at least some cases, have been succeeded by more current research and have not always proved to be as authoritative as they were when they were written some decades ago -- the problem is realized in recognizing when something has proved to be true and when it has been found to be a misunderstanding of the original material!

Br. James

[max history]

......As Joe opined, we are living at a time when factual information is more readily available than ever before, but we also possess reference works that, in at least some cases, have been succeeded by more current research and have not always proved to be as authoritative as they were when they were written some decades ago......
Br. James

Actually, it was me who brought this up in post #9 and Joe later agreed it's good to highlight it.
There is no need to apologise. I was just interested in case I'd missed something in Patzwall that you had noticed. Thank you for taking the time to answer my question. I don't consider anyone to be a "senior" as you put it....we are all equals here and it's not too late for anyone to learn.
Max.

[Br. James]

Yes, I now see your original reference in your post #9 and I agree. My reference to "seniors" has to do with each person's familiarity with the subject at hand, whatever that is at the moment. I have been a student and collector for over 50 years but I readily admit that I am not familiar with every facet of our hobby, even so. And I certainly agree that each of us comes with his own range of experiences and I greatly respect the input of those who have more experience with a given subject or article than I do. I hope I am always open to learning more -- which is what this website is all about! Thank you, Max, for your understanding.

Br. James

[der-hase-fee]

Sorry for joining the party so late. Checking my picture library, I can contribute this. Beware - I am not making a statement concerning this or the document posted at the beginning of this thread.

[max history]

I've seen this one somewhere before, but can't remember where. Amazing; yet another unsigned document. Hitler obviously ran out of ink or lost his pen during his holiday in Neverland in 1938!
Max.