Golden party badge

[Br. James]

Dear Erich,

Please provide me with one further word of understanding: when you wrote "My set came in and were probably kept in this box by the original owner," did you mean that this matched set of Deschler and Fuess-marked GPBs was received by the original owner in the box shown, or that the badges were received by you as a set in this box? I think this is a significant question, as I have always wondered about whether matched sets which included both the large Deschler and the small Fuess-marked badge were boxed together, or if the Fuess piece was received separately after the original small Deschler badge had been broken or lost, and so the matched set only existed in the Deschler/Fuess form?

Br. James

[Wim Vangossum]

I think they came standard both in the combiation Deschler-Deschler and Deschler-Fuess. IMO Fuess was allowed to make (or let made them) because his strong background with the early days of the party. I think they wanted to do him a pleasure. It must have been more easy if Deschler simply produced the whole bunch, but they diden't.

According to Jo Rivett, Fuess even had not the tools to do this job so possible let them made -under his supervising- by another firm. This makes it completly more dificult than let the entire job for one manufacturer: Deschler.

I cannot proof this, it are simply my thoughts about this case.


Regards, Wim



Freedom is not for Free

[ErichS]

Dear Erich,

Please provide me with one further word of understanding: when you wrote "My set came in and were probably kept in this box by the original owner," did you mean that this matched set of Deschler and Fuess-marked GPBs was received by the original owner in the box shown, or that the badges were received by you as a set in this box? I think this is a significant question, as I have always wondered about whether matched sets which included both the large Deschler and the small Fuess-marked badge were boxed together, or if the Fuess piece was received separately after the original small Deschler badge had been broken or lost, and so the matched set only existed in the Deschler/Fuess form?

Br. James

James, my set came in the case from a picker in Germany. IMO, it was where the recipient probably stored them due to them being in mint condition and probably not worn much or at all. I also think that the Deschler/Fuess combination was sent to the recipients as a matter of course as much as the Deschler/Deschler combination.

[Br. James]

many thanks for the clarification, Erich. My head is swimming from trying to understand these things!

Br. James

[Br. James]

Hi Wim,

Thanks for your good comment about how the GPBs were sent out to the recipients: Deschler/Deschler and also Deschler/Fuess. I certainly agree that this would have made for potential delays and confusion since badges from two different manufacturers had to be matched together and then packaged up for shipping. In his book, "German Medal Markers & Their Marks 1813-1957," Second Edition 2010, Mark Woods (who I believe has been active on WAF) concurs with Jo Rivett that Josef Fuess' small jewelry firm did not have the ability to turn out the GPB that bears his name since he didn't have his own press machinery. Woods says: "It is more likely that Fuess worked with the Party to arrive at the design of the gilded oak leaves surround." I am not aware of any hard documentation as to how the GPB in either the Deschler or the Fuess design came into being; the most we have is from Hitler himself in his reference in "Mein Kampf" to Fuess creating the final design of the standard circular Party badge in its color combination, but this does not tie Fuess directly to designing either of the GPB badges. And if Fuess did not produce the GPB that bears his name, then that would cast doubt on the First Issue Blood Order as being produced by his firm either; it may well be that Fuess originally designed the BO and at least the GPB that bears his name, and another firm produced it. I have seen reference to the only other execution of the GPB as a badge -- this being the centerpiece of the German Order in slightly smaller format -- and I have read somewhere that only one manufacturer -- Wilhelm Deumer of Lüdenscheid -- is known to have produced the German Order, though in very small numbers, of course, given it's rarity in that only eleven awards were ever made. But if Deumer produced the German Order then that would be some degree of possible proof that his firm also produced the Fuess-marked GPB, which was of the same design pattern, and I guess possibly the BO, as well?

A fascinating subject!!

Br. James

[Br. James]

Dear Joe,

GREAT documentation on the original process behind the GPB awards!! This is certainly great headway in our understanding of how the order and supply process functioned as regards the GPB, as well as how many badges were sent to each original applicant -- TWO!

Many thanks again, my friend,

Br. James

[JoeW]

Thank you for the compliments Br. James.

In discussing the activities of Fuess regarding the GPBs, remember the discussion last year regarding Fuess and the production or "assembly" of GPBs?

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...er#post4709932

One cannot say that Fuess did not have the ability to turn out GPBs if the Frau Winter ordered them in 1937. And again I point out the German propensity of farming out the production of an item. There could have been other producers of GPB parts with final assembly by the firms that put their name on them.

[ErichS]

James, it is a known fact that Fuess only designed the BO and did not produce it. It is interesting though that his MM was removed from the 2nd issue of the award.

[Br. James]

Thanks so much, Joe -- and yes, I do recall the previous discussion on this subject, though I guess I still have so many unanswered questions about the GPB that they keep popping up in my mind! Did anyone ever respond to my question about why there were two so-distinctly-different designs for the GPB (Deschler and Fuess) in play at the same time? To my way of thinking, this is a very un-German way of doing things!

And thank you, too, Erich. Since neither issue of the BO is maker-marked, is it known who did make these? It would seem to me that the fact that Fuess had his name on the BO as the designer and not as the manufacturer, this may be a good indication that his name appears on the GPB for the same reason. But in both cases -- the GPB and the BO -- that would mean that the true maker(s) of those badges agreed not to add his logo or name to his product.

Sorry if I seem a bit obtuse regarding the BO (or anything else, for that matter!), but I have never owned nor had the opportunity to own an example of either issue, and I suppose my education about them has been lacking.

Br. James

[JoeW]

The four or five personal files of GPB holders that I have researched over the years reveal the following procedure and documentation:

1. An individual prepared an Antrag auf Verleihung des Reichs-Ehrenzeichen (Application for Award of the National Honor Badge) and submitted it to their respective Gaugesschaeftsstelle (Gau Procedural Office) for processing. The application was verified with Gau records and then sent to the Reichsschatzmeister's office, more specifically the Kartei-Ehrenzeichen Abteilung. The application was verified with the membership lists in Munich. If everything was in order, the two badges were ordered and returned along with the Besitzurkunde to the Gau office for further disposition to the recipient. The Gau Konto Ehrenzeichen (Honor Badge Bank Account) was charged by the Reichsschatmeister's office by transfer. This Uberweisung procedure is still used in banking in Germany today. This procedure and terms used above are specifically spelled out in the documentation I have.

In the paperwork I found for one of my GPB Besitzurkunde, the above procedure was followed. In that particular instance, the applicant of was informed by the Gau that he did not have unbroken membership. The applicant protested the decision in July 1934 and the Gau asked the Reich file office if they had any information. The question was decided in Spring 1935 when the application was approved and badges were created. The Besitzurkunde and two badges were forwarded to the Gau for distribution to the individual and the Gau's account charged. I believe this demonstrates that two badges were distributed on first delivery. Subsequent requests for additional badges specified sizes and were charged to the individual's account in the end.

In continuing the information presented above, I have documentation from the party correspondance files relating to and SS-OGF that the individual requested in December 1933 to be issued the Honor Awards for Party Members under 100 000. The request was received and an application completed for him January 12, 1934. It is not clear whether he completed the application or one was completed for him. The two badges were made and sent to him on March 19, 1934 along with the Besitzurkunde and a Payment request card for the amount of RM 2,50. Weitzel requested additional badges in following years. From these notations, it can be determined that the price for a large badge was RM 1,50 and for a small badge RM 1,00. Thus the total charge of RM 2, 50 for the first two badges indicates a large and small badge.

[ErichS]

Joe, proof that the party didn't give anything away as you show.

[JoeW]

It surprised me Erich. Guess it was that penny pinching Schwarz. If they collected two and two-bits Reichsmarks on the GPBs, I wouldn't put it past them going after the BO applicants too. I only have the files of one BO holder, so I don't have much to go on for research.

[Br. James]

Wow! Great information, Joe! I guess it's true that even having paid dues regularly for quite a few years, in good times and in bad, didn't secure a set of GPBs for "free" even for an Altekämpfer! Many thanks for sharing this!

Br. James

[der-hase-fee]

The two badges were made and sent to him on March 19, 1934 along with the Besitzurkunde and a Payment request card for the amount of RM 2,50.

So who paid for the set: Weitzel himself or his Gau office ? If Weitzel, this must be the famous exception to the rule.

[JoeW]

So who paid for the set: Weitzel himself or his Gau office ? If Weitzel, this must be the famous exception to the rule.

The badges and urkunde were returned directly to him with a payment request card. The package did not go through NSDAP intermediaries at any level. There is no indication that he tried to book it as a business expense through his office, though even if he did, it would be irrelevant to this discussion. The party didn't care who paid it; but the recipient was billed. This evidence coupled with the receipt of a request for payment by Pg. Gollner for his original two badges and urkunde after satisfying membership requirements would indicate to me that payment for the original two badges and urkunde by the recipient was the rule, not the exception.