Gautages Berlin Tinnie - SA and SS

[munsongary]

Just acquired this tinnie for my SA tinnie grouping. Would like feedback on it as I am not familiar with the Gautag it references. Thank you!

[Matthew]

Sadly the above shown tinnie is a reproduction.

cheers

Matt

[munsongary]

Hmmm - not the information I was looking for. Really wanted to know info about the Gautag.

What makes you believe this to be a reproduction? Do you have some documentation for that?

Sadly the above shown tinnie is a reproduction.

cheers

Matt

[Matthew]

District Berlin celebrated its 10th Anniversary in 1936 and so presumably the Gautag you're seeking info about will be from that year.
As for why this is a reproduction- the pin utilizes the infamous 'coffin pin plate'.

cheers

Matt

[munsongary]

Just to be clear - you are stating that this attachment device always is indicative of a reproduction?

I will post 6 pictures of this type attachment device, on TR items fully vetted through experts as original to period. Notice anything that is similiar?

District Berlin celebrated its 10th Anniversary in 1936 and so presumably the Gautag you're seeking info about will be from that year.
As for why this is a reproduction- the pin utilizes the infamous 'coffin pin plate'.

cheers

Matt

[munsongary]

Next 2

[munsongary]

Final two

[Matthew]

You're right. Your badge is original.
Congrats.

Matt

[munsongary]

I appreciate your information - and I appreciate being able to exchange information on this site. This is not about me being right or wrong - if the tinnie is not right, then I want to know that. But, even more important, I want to know the basis for the information that determines whether a tinnie, or badge or medal is not right. If an opinion is passed, there should be something available that documents it - and we all should be open to discuss what our basis is for our opinions.

For instance, I saw a post - in the past - that stated "I can tell any NSDAP enamel is a repo by the attachment device on the back". What the responder called a repro was a standard Party Badge with what I call a variant of the coffin-style attachment device - that is either oval, or square. When I asked him about documentation, he could not produce anything - it was just something "everyone knew".

In his book "N.S.D.A.P. Enamel", Mike Tucker has a number of "coffin-pin" variant pins identified as original (pages 5, 10, 15, 31, 44, 47, 49 and 51 etal). If Mike is wrong, the book should be corrected for the next edition. However, if it is wrong, proof needs to be presented.

Again, I appreciate your responding, and I very much appreciate the information about the Gautag in Berlin.

You're right. Your badge is original.
Congrats.

Matt

[David Fettes]

Hold your horses for a second, I was under the impression that ALL Parteiabzeichen marked M1/129 are fakes, coffin pin or not.

[munsongary]

Another "hmmmm" moment.

Mike Tucker is quoted "Listed below in ascending numerical order are the known manufacturers of N.S.D.A.P. membership badges and their RZM control numbers. ..... Original, period N.S.D.A.P. membership badges have been encountered and catalogued for each of these firms".

M1/129 Seiler & Co, Geldem

Again, if this is incorrect, I would like to get the info to Mike - as a correction for the next edition of his book. Thank you!

Hold your horses for a second, I was under the impression that ALL Parteiabzeichen marked M1/129 are fakes, coffin pin or not.

[David Fettes]

Will wait for Jo Rivett to see this thread, but I am sure all coffin pins and all M1/129 badges are now classed as reproductions.

[Wood]

You're right. Your badge is original.
Congrats.

Matt

Shame on you Matthew.

[Matthew]

Mi? Por que?

I thought I would cover both possibilities since the owner was unhappy with my first answer?
As a friend says: "You have two chances to learn. You either learn before you buy or before you sell".

cheers

Matt

[okkultist]

As a friend says: "You have two chances to learn. You either learn before you buy or before you sell".

Brilliant words Matt! I must only add that the second way of learning is always much more expensive.

And another advice to TS, please stop cite Mike Tucker as a Holy Bible here, it is just tiny picture book with little scientific value if at all. More of that; in many ways it is really misleading.