Gau München Erinnerungsabzeichen--Opinions?

[Rommel1942]

Here is an example purchased back in 1973 from an antique store in Innsbruck for 5 Shillings.

Not too shabby!! And yes, i have seen a few of these with what i guess have been messy stamps. I didnt know that they were the same markings as shown on ours, but now i know!

Regards

[Br. James]

Is the presence of this mark really a "flaw" or a production error of some kind, or is it there intentionally? Deschler & Son was a major jewelry and badge producer -- among many other products, they carried the predominant amount of production of the Golden Party Badge -- and though this piece dates from before the RZM system was up and running, the internal checks and quality controls established by the Deschler firm must have been stringent. If indeed there have been 'many examples of this badge seen with this mark on the reverse,' it sounds to me like it may have been part of the design itself? I have no idea how one would find out more about this mark and the related questions it raises, but it is a fascinating study!

Br. James

[J. M. C.]

Here's the only picture that I have left of one that I had last year. It's now with a valued customer in New York. The mark looks a bit different on this one.

[David North]

Well, I must say this (through gritted teeth) and I am fully expecting to hear the howls of derision. Quite simply and towards the variation of this enigmatic little badge, I just do not feel comfortable with it. It is only recently that I have seen the type with the mysterious mark on one of the swastika arms. What really strikes me though is the overall poor quality of the reverse and this is not what I would expect from Deschler. The rendition of the Deschler name and address is consistently awful to my eyes. Soft detail, inconsistent lettering and actually, with parts of the lettering clearly missing.

This is Deschler for goodness sake.

We now know that this is only an event pin, however I cannot recall one single SA Tagungsabzeichen within my collection which has reverse markings as crude as this.

One very important point though is the pin. Whenever I have seen this badge in a more "traditional" form, the pin invariably displays a series of minor indentations. The badges that are being discussed here I think (perhaps someone may confirm), have the same type of indented pins and which make matters even more confusing.

Regards,

David

[J. M. C.]

Here's one more...


http://www.germanmilitaria.com/Polit...s/N044966.html

[David North]

Indeed Jim and complete with an almost indiscernible "ch" within the declared name of Deschler.

Regards,

David

[Br. James]

I know how you feel, David, and thanks so much for adding to your earlier note. My own example of this badge -- which I regret that I cannot share with you via photos because I have neither the machinery nor the technological aptitude to produce them -- is what I would call a "normal" example of work expected from the Deschler firm, including sharp, clean detail on the obverse overall and clear, evenly-raised lettering on their name and city on the reverse. It continues to surprise me that what I would consider an anomaly would be seen as acceptable!

Br. James

[ETN]

I do disagree with you that the examples with the damaged deschler markings are in way suspect.

These are tinnies, not Knights Crosses. The same standard for for quality doesn't exist. If the front is fine, I hardly think a company out to make money would bother being worried about a damaged or clogged die producing some funny anomalies on the back.

Just my opinion.

[John T]

I think the badges with light markings result from the die getting worn, also keep in mind that we had at least two reverse dies, one with the "&" used while the other used, "u." in the makaer name. I do not know which resulted first, a member, Tony, did a good study on these at an outside link but I can not find it now...at times the maker mark is so light you can barely make it portions of the inscription.

[tgn]

I think the badges with light markings result from the die getting worn, also keep in mind that we had at least two reverse dies, one with the "&" used while the other used, "u." in the makaer name. I do not know which resulted first, a member, Tony, did a good study on these at an outside link but I can not find it now...at times the maker mark is so light you can barely make it portions of the inscription.

I agree with this and ETN's comments. These are just mass produced pins, not Rembrandt works of art. I hate to tell you all out there, but the Germans were NOT perfect, and neither were their manufactured items.

There are not anomalies at all. They seem to be the norm. It is the perfect ones that are an anomaly.

Tom

[David North]

A very interesting thread and perhaps now it has staggered down the same old path as the "S over the R" SA Treffen Braunschweig 1931 debate. Those who think that the only acceptable examples are those where the S and the R are aligned, whilst others beg to differ. I suppose that opinion is strongly formed as to which one you actually hold and of course, have paid for!

I have just gone through my entire collection of SA Tagungsabzeichen which date from 1931 to 1941 and have picked out those with makers markings. Not one displays anything like the same truly awful rendition of a makers mark as the badge in question. Not one. I think that there was an eye for detail and quality by the makers of these essentially "throw away" event badges and I cannot agree with some of the earlier comments in suggesting otherwise.

It just seems so difficult to believe that Deschler of all manufacturers would allow the issue of a sub standard (reverse) die stamping on such an important, significant and nationally advertised events badge. The company proudly put their name to the badge and for whatever reason, however in relation to the badge that we are talking about, surely Deschler would have considered the mixed rendition as totally unacceptable and a decidedly poor reflection on their otherwise superior manufacturing standards?

Regards,

David

[ETN]

surely Deschler would have considered the mixed rendition as totally unacceptable and a decidedly poor reflection on their otherwise superior manufacturing standards?

Regards,

David

In my opinion, what is being applied, are the aesthetic expectations of collectors. We all want the maker's mark to be sharp and crisp, but a company may not have been concerned with that detail while trying to get an order out or making a profit or any reason it saw fit to release these.

Yes, Deschler was a company with an excellent reputation for quality, but that doesn't mean that they didn't have their bad days or one offs in production. They were a company tyring to make money and I highly doubt they would stop production to rework the back of die when the front is perfectly fine. Again, these were just tinnies and they meant to be worn for one day (even if these particular ones were worn longer).

[Br. James]

Perhaps I'm mistaken here, but I assume that the badge in question was SOLD, not given away free to anyone wanting one...or more. As we have seen in many such discussions, the NSDAP on any level -- and here I assume that this event and its badge were sponsored by Adolf Wagner's Gau München-Oberbayern -- and therefore income and cash flow were always major considerations. For Deschler & Son to get a contract to produce a badge that was intended to be sold to all and sundry at the event, there was the company's reputation to consider, as well as the look of the piece being sold. An unattractive or shoddily-produced badge would not have sold well, and this badge was obviously designed to be an attention-getter. The mere presence of the powerful motto of the National Socialist Revolution -- "Und Ihr Habt Dock Gesiegt” -- and yet you have conquered -- would seemingly demand a rendering that would speak well for the Party as well as for Gau München-Oberbayern. And then there was the possibility of getting other contracts in the future to consider...

As for the existence of more than one anomaly on this one badge -- the uneven rendering of the maker's name, as well as this odd "O" or "Q" on one arm of the swas -- seems almost beyond the realm of acceptance, especially from a firm like Deschler. That there seem to be a number of examples of this badge in collections today which have one or both of these attributions, what are we to think?

Br. James

[Richard]

This doesn't appear to be a die flaw but an intentional engraving in the die. The die doesn't appear to be cracked/filled or scratched. The form is not random enought to justify calling it something indicative of damage to the die. I too find this marking a bit strange even though the obverse of the badge seems to conform to an original. Most badges I have seen have a clean reverse to the swastika portion with this "flaw" being absent.

I also cannot imagine the purpose for this marking on any manufacturer's die since it is obviously not a maker's mark. What ever that mark is, it is intentionally engraved into the die for what ever purpose. Seems very unlike Deschler or, for that matter, any manufacturer. Show me some common day badges where a "flaw" this large and obvious is present in great numbers. Not to say this badge is not genuine, but it is difficult to believe this mark was an accident.
Richard V

[tgn]

This doesn't appear to be a die flaw but an intentional engraving in the die. The die doesn't appear to be cracked/filled or scratched. The form is not random enought to justify calling it something indicative of damage to the die. I too find this marking a bit strange even though the obverse of the badge seems to conform to an original. Most badges I have seen have a clean reverse to the swastika portion with this "flaw" being absent.

I also cannot imagine the purpose for this marking on any manufacturer's die since it is obviously not a maker's mark. What ever that mark is, it is intentionally engraved into the die for what ever purpose. Seems very unlike Deschler or, for that matter, any manufacturer. Show me some common day badges where a "flaw" this large and obvious is present in great numbers. Not to say this badge is not genuine, but it is difficult to believe this mark was an accident.
Richard V

Since I purchased my example in 1973 for about $5.00 from an antique store in Innsbruck, I am totally confident it is original. Furthermore, most of the examples I have seen have this same mark. I too think the mark is intentional. It is an "O" and stands for "Original". If yours doesn't have it, it is suspect IMO.

Tom