nsdap silver party badge

[slados28]

Very nice --- definitive "proof" that is for Matthew's eyes only. And the reason you don't want to share this revelation is because I'm a big meanie? Awww...

[reichenberg]

I saw one of these badges back in the late 1970s and was in a quandry if I should try to obtain it for my collection. It appeared to be identical, from my recollection, to the image posted of a supposed original. The swivel catch is what bothered me as I had never seen such an attachment on any enamelled badge.

I would rather see the information come to light and end the bickering over who owns the rights to the photos. If this is an original badge, I will have to retrace my steps and see if the badge is still owned my the colloctor who showed it to me. If it is a fake, or fake version, as Jo has described, I would surely like to know. It certainly is not a stretch to believe that an original exists and is not any stretch at all to believe someone has copied the pin. It would be adventageous to all collectors to get to the truth.

Bob Hritz

I also saw one of these in it's presentation case back in around 1970. I always thought they were original as they are mentioned in several older reference works, but having thought about it some more, it was exactly the time when the post war Souvals were beginning to appear here in the UK, such as the Deutscher Orden. The same dealer also had a cased one of these .

[Thomas Bendixen]

Thanks Matthew, for sharing the interesting photos and info

BR. Thomas

[Röhm1929]

No, I don't own his book, nor have I ever read it. Don't know why really, but I was never big on fiction novels.
Do I try to get Ailsby to agree with my position? What position is that? That his badge is not a genuine one? Not my problem really, it is not in my collection but I did voice my concerns with his piece being called what he calls them.
No, unfortunately I do not, nor have I ever owned one of those badges. The ones available for sale- I'm not crazy about, and the ones I like are not for sale- go figure!
I am not surprised with his approach. What else could he do to even partially save face? If archival facts are not 'meat' these days then we all should worry. Pretty soon the knowledge will have to be monopolized to those with microscopes and bad attitude.
I see you are pretty vocal about your buddy there, but instead of shooting your mouth over the screen, you should either bring something constructive to the discussion or perhaps sit this one out? I understand you're a previously banned member who came back under a different name and as such attaching photos is not that feasible but perhaps linking them to help with your side of the story (whatever that might be) would be another avenue to get your point across?

This isn't about the badge for me. It's about preventing volume, nastiness and willful ignorance of available evidence contrary to ones own opinion from being allowed to win an argument. Yes. I'm talking about you. I'm glad that the mods have allowed the thread to remain open despite your foul language because it remains an interesting discussion. Not that you are ever going to win of course because your argument is a the equivalent of a balsa wood model biplane spiralling slowly downward in flames. You will go down in flames - I am positive of that. Why? Because you have nothing of substance to say on this badge. You have an unlettered opinion and a photo that may or may not be what you say it is. The rest is just silly defensive vitriol.

Oh, you haven't read Rivett's book but yet you have an opinion on its content? Interesting!

I did laugh when your banning was mentioned earlier in the thread by the way. Not the squeaky clean "orator" you paint yourself as after all eh?

I have to say that I have some understanding for Jo Rivett's disappearance from the thread. He has, after all, laid his opinion out in print already and in advance which is almost infinitely more than you have done.

[Matthew]

I provided a dated, verifiable pictorial evidence for my claim, evidence that has existed for close to 70 years at multiple locations- one of them as shown.
Then I was asked to provide proof for my claim as the above was deemed 'nothing of substance'.

And this is your logic?

You're right. it is impossible to win some arguments.

[Röhm1929]

The date on which the photo was shot and the date on which that developed photo was archived are two separate things. You appear to be mentioning the latter only and have conceded that the actual date is unclear. Your evidence is by no means waterproof and final. Is it possible that the photo could be more recent than you think?

[Matthew]

Anything is possible but like I mentioned before- the only way they could admit something in their inventory was if it actually existed. If the admission date for the photograph is 1945 then obviously the photo existed in 1945.
Which means the items depicted in the photo existed in at least 1945.

Couple that with the fact that multiple sources confirm the same (or nearly the same) admission dates- it seems highly unlikely if not impossible that they copied the mistakes of the next guy- you would not be able to have a copy of this pic in 1945 if the place you got it from supposedly only got theirs in say 1966.

Watertight and final? Up to the individual to decide.

[Bob Hritz]

Are we now going to waste time debating the authenticity of the photo? If it is recent, I have to admit that Ms.Mitford has surely aged gracefully, not to mention resurrection from death. I would open another thread to discuss her secret of youth.

Does anyone have a good photo of the obverse and verso of the signed silver badge in a modern collection? It would be easier to compare what is considered a modern fake with a badge that may be period produced.

Bob Hritz

[Gaspare]

yes this is getting ridiculous, I see an interesting topic, some questions raised and I gotta buy a $100. book to get an answer?!
Jo I'm sure the book is wonderful, I don't own any pins anymore and the interest is not warranted me buying the book...
Maybe a short paraphrase from you, or someone that has it for us?

I'm kind of surprised it was only traced back to 68. But that was a time when 3rd reich collecting really started taking off,,or at least in my area. I bet a certain high end collector in L.I. NY had one, and the CA. guys too!

[fredswiss]

Originally Posted by Bob Hritz View Post
I saw one of these badges back in the late 1970s and was in a quandry if I should try to obtain it for my collection. It appeared to be identical, from my recollection, to the image posted of a supposed original. The swivel catch is what bothered me as I had never seen such an attachment on any enamelled badge.

I would rather see the information come to light and end the bickering over who owns the rights to the photos. If this is an original badge, I will have to retrace my steps and see if the badge is still owned my the colloctor who showed it to me. If it is a fake, or fake version, as Jo has described, I would surely like to know. It certainly is not a stretch to believe that an original exists and is not any stretch at all to believe someone has copied the pin. It would be adventageous to all collectors to get to the truth.

Bob Hritz

Isn't there a version of the Gold HJ Pin that has a swivel catch? Please let me know.

[Bob Hritz]

Isn't there a version of the Gold HJ Pin that has a swivel catch? Please let me know.[/QUOTE]

Yes, there is. I had never seen one, back then. That version of the HJ honor pin with the swivel catch is still on my want list.

Bob Hritz

[Röhm1929]

Are we now going to waste time debating the authenticity of the photo? If it is recent, I have to admit that Ms.Mitford has surely aged gracefully, not to mention resurrection from death.

I wasn't talking about that photo. Jeez...

[slados28]

As stated by Rivett- the ONLY CLEARLY VISIBLE BADGE as worn by Mitford was the NER pin.

This is Matthew supposedly quoting Jo Rivett. Well, I don't really know where that exact quote comes from but I know Rivett brought this topic up in 2013 on WRF and to me it seems he was spot on. This (Nun Erst Recht badge) truly is the ONLY CLEARLY VISIBLE BADGE that is actually 100% identifiable and shown to have been worn by Unity Mitford -- -at the very least in the context of looking for unquestionable period proof of the silver AH badge. Below are the photos that were initially provided by Rivett in his Dec. 2013 WRF thread:

SNF01spdf1_1630012a.jpg

unity.jpg

Now, the badge shown worn by Mitford in that other photo shared by Matthew (sourced from Ullstein Bild) looks just like any run of the mill sympathizer, unless you have a very vivid imagination or super secret proof that no one else can see.

The ONLY shot that is really interesting, imo, is the BPK image credited to the Hoffmann Archives, dated "Nov. 1945", showing an eclectic grouping of supposedly Hitler's own privately worn badges/part of his "estate"... therein shown the reverse, but no obverse, of a badge with the Adolf Hitler facsimile signature and the "Austrian" style pin attachment.

[slados28]

The BPK-images.de sourced photo of the supposed "Hitler nachlass", as mentioned above and earlier in this thread, for easier reference:

[Richard]

Knowing Hitler's penchant for not looking garish (he rarely wore much more than his EK1, BWB and party badge), I can't see a special badge in a lesser grade (in every other instance gold was looked at as a higher status than silver in badges/medals of the 3rd Reich) which would bear his own signature, being in his possession as any kind of a prized award. This makes no comment on the badge itself, but I have a hard time buying that this was a badge of Hitler's.
Richard V