Jungsturm Hitler 1921-1923 Badge

[Gary B]

This would be far from the truth, and is only my starting point, just to get viewers accustomed to detail. Struck traits, die sheared traits etc.... because our hobby is full of cast nonsense, so we need to start with the obvious. But, you may or may not know, i have worked in a few Medal factories, doing every job needed to go from metal roll strip to boxed award. So i have the background knowledge to accompany the surface research. Or did you think i was just a simple party pin collector who bought a cheap microscope and now thinks he has hit paydirt? I hope not, but i can see where that comes from if you did.

First, I agree with you that pins/catches etc were bought from other suppliers for medal/badge manufacturers - that has not been debated. As to a medal/badge company sending to a subcontractor to attach the pins etc, I would have my doubts, that was most probably done in house. We also know that boxes and cases were subcontracted out to various suppliers and certain boxes/cases are associated with certain badge companies. Secondly, there is no debate that medal companies changed suppliers from time to time so we do see changes in pin/catches/hinges over time. I am not a pin collector but I would imagine due to the sheer number produced we see a lot of varieties in the pin set up, not so for badges. Typically a company had the same pin arrangement over many years and left the same "tool" marks on the badges when attaching the pins.

I was not aware of your work background but I am aware you are a coin collector, as am I. I do know that microscopes are being/have been used to verify US coins for authenticity, to examine and determine die variations, to see if an original coin has been altered to make it more valuable etc.

And finally I agree that a microscope can verify metal flow, micro flaws, flaw progression (if compared with others), edge cuts etc but we will have to agree to disagree that it can be used in and of itself to determine originality. I and many others will agree with me that there has to be a basis of comparison. Otherwise what are you looking at...with your method you can verify that a badge was nicely die struck, you can examine the micro flaws and wear, the metal flow, the flaws but then what do you have...a lot of facts but you can't draw a conclusion from that alone.

P.S. Have you ever thought of posting your theory about pins/hinges in any of the badge sections?

Gary B

[Gary Symonds]

Guys, based on the mighty Jo's claim of being all knowing about German badges, I predict that he will tell you that one by one, over the next years, all of the badges in your collections, no matter how original they may seem, being consistent with period materials, and period workmanship, and matching known originals, will eventually be said by Author Jo, to be reproductions.

Just you wait.

And if you should have the balls to disagree, all of his yes men and toadies will join in and tell you and the membership what a fool and idiot you are to disagree with god's gift to the German badge collecting community.

Just you wait.

Death, taxes, and Jo Rivett's edicts.

Just you wait.

[Jo Rivett]

Congratulations, Jo, upon becomming the final arbiter of what is authentic in German medals and badges.

Bob Hritz

That, is the sound of the backdoor opening, for you to slip once more out of the ownace to further participate in a discussion about an item you own, that you want to be real, regardless of what anyone says. No images need be shown, no evidence, just your same-old same-old VET, Adios!

"Final Arbeiter"? I am the "final worker"? What are you on about? Do you mean the "last word" or "authority on"? On what? Because i am showing collectors how to expose fakes under magnification? And showing them how to recognize genuine items? Giving away my secret tool - the microscope - at the start?

Blinding... absolutely blinding.
You dissapoint yet again Bob. Not me, i know how you operate and have told many collectors over many years how you and yours operate. So you prove me correct each time you carry on this way. But those who become interested and would like to see a thread evolve.

Take your Blutorden thread, look at the time and work that Frenchcollector-Vince- has put into his posts, gathering images from all over, photo shoping them, evidence, discussion, theories, debating, and what are you doing - on your very own thread - to further the discussion? to support your prototype, your very expenisve item? Same as here... nothing at all except a few jab posts, a bit of arrogance sprikled on top and then you`ll be off for good.

You dissapoint Bob.

[Gary B]

"Final Arbeiter"? I am the "final worker"? What are you on about? Do you mean the "last word" or "authority on"? On what? Because i am showing collectors how to expose fakes under magnification? And showing them how to recognize genuine items? Giving away my secret tool - the microscope - at the start?

English "Arbiter" not German "ArbEIter" Lost in translation....

Arbiter - a person who settles a dispute or has ultimate authority in a matter.

Gary B

[GiuseppeC]

Jo,

I understand manufacturing, from when I was younger and did cost accounting for large manufacturing firms. It was not uncommon for dies to be created for large production runs, but not economical for small runs. This is where casting was done. The size of the item was inconsequential. One firm made oil pipelines. A seamless elbow may have been 8 feet in diameter and a casting was made because it was a small run. If many were needed, die casting would be cost effective. When I worked for a firm that made parts for the space program, they did the same; small runs were cast and large runs used in house created dies. Many times, a small run of cast items became reordered, on a larger scale, and dies were made to offset production and finishing costs.

I certainly cannot speak for the German medals and badges manufacturers, but I would think that cost accounting would dictate how items were to be made at the lowest cost.

Bob Hritz

Bob:

At the time (in Germany), there were numerous manufacturers in competition with each other, over a very small pie...

The Versailles Treaty limited the German military's size, which is what almost forced the Solingen blademakers out of business. It also limited demand for awards...

Point being, German manufacturing wasn't viewed through the lens of "Profits Uber Alles", the way business is done now.

That said, whether large order, or small, awards manufacturing was done the same way. As proof, I submit tinnies...die-struck, even from little "nothing" hamlets of 50 people...

It kept skilled-labor employed...

[Jo Rivett]

English "Arbiter" not German "ArbEIter"

Arbiter - a person who settles a dispute or has ultimate authority in a matter.

Gary B

And who said you can`t teach a cripple dog new tricks?
But i like! Jo the arbiter.

Of course it could also be Monty McCullan the arbiter, or Doug Dozy the arbiter..if they had a scope that was, and took a deeper interest.

[Jo Rivett]

Guys, based on the mighty Jo's claim of being all knowing about German badges

LOL, so you do watch the videos then Goodun.

My claims are and have always been transparent. Not me dear Gary, but rather the microscopes i have, along with the knowledge i gained from making the items i decided to write about and later inspect in detail.

Besides, i am not right about everything, as a recent video shows, where i examine an unknown badge that i have always said was fantasy/crap/poorly made - in detail, actually having it and putting it through a micro test and not just blabbering an opinion about it on a forum as i did. And then hosting the video of that badge onto the forum that i claimed 4 years previous it was a fantasy, to show collectors that i was wrong, and that the microscope has proven that it is a not as i claimed, a "fake".

So i guess, the "all knowing" must, and fairly be awared to the microscope, and not to any one person.

[Jo Rivett]

Factual evidence is not a theory

but we will have to agree to disagree that it can be used in and of itself to determine originality.
I and many others will agree with me that there has to be a basis of comparison. Otherwise what are you looking at...with your method you can verify that a badge was nicely die struck, you can examine the micro flaws and wear, the metal flow, the flaws but then what do you have...a lot of facts but you can't draw a conclusion from that alone.

The yellow:
Until you challenge me, yes, you can disagree.
The sickly green:
The last part i understand, and i understand why you and many others would think this. It does not stop at cast items, or modern cut dies that are easily exposed on "struck and sheared fakes", though. The market however, is flooded with exactly these fakes, (1970-1990) hence me starting with the basics.

The rest of the green is a topic that i will be getting my teeth into soon. Not that i already havn`t, i have, the TeNo Ehrenzeichen book - although the fake in that book is cast, and not a correctly made award - explains and shows you what the "next steps are" that lead you to draw your conclusions. There is a lot more to it as well, so it`s a topic that is on the priority list. Not easy to find though, well made fakes, very hard in fact.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Jo,

I know your work and I appreciate it, you know that! Maybe you have brought it to a new and maybe even higher level.
But in my experience the topic is not quite as easy (or better uncomplicated) as you lay it out. I subscribe to the notion that time leaves traces and "time" is the factor we are looking at. But there are some areas which are more complicated:

- faking started on 9. May 1945 by definition and it must be clear to everybody that not even microscopy can make a difference in time of one day. But can it detect a diffence of one year? That is what we face with some badges (well, maybe four-five years).

- also, we have badges that are, to use the description of a famous dealer, "epic stone mint"! Taken from Klessheim, stored away for 70 years, never touched, still in cellophane! How about those? If you see them, you swear thet were made yesterday, literally yesterday!

- how about badges that use parts that are made during the war and also some that are made after the war? You have old (=original) and new (meaning maybe 1949!) parts combined, a time mix, so to say. How to separate and how to determine?

As much as I like these discussions because they stimulate thoughts and show new avenues of approach, my age also tells me that there are no absolutes in life. I have had so far great experiences with a holistic approach, taking into account veterans, sources, original documents, materials, microscopy, common sense, understanding of the time then, in the 70s, 80, 90, ... and now.

What do you say?

[Jo Rivett]

- also, we have badges that are, to use the description of a famous dealer, "epic stone mint"! Taken from Klessheim, stored away for 70 years, never touched, still in cellophane! How about those? If you see them, you swear thet were made yesterday, literally yesterday!
What do you say?

Or ↑ an "epic stone mint" Golden Party Badge, that could also have been in a box, in plastic for 70 years. Or anything else, parts of the recent Deschler hoard even.

Saying won`t be enough, so i will show you how it is done. Can we agree that the recent Deschler hoard will be a good place to start? If in the near future i get a couple of mint (naturally?) Deschler attic hoard items, from the main source say, Weitze, would you accept those as a good equal to Klessheim stone cold mint, and if so then i could possibly take it from there, and do a few step by step "why it is possible" videos, with bagged and tagged mint items.
I don`t think any of those attic finds have been touched, and many are still boxed, nevermind just wrapped in plastic, so they should be a good equivalent.

It is not only "when" the item was produced, but also why that is a very real and important part of how the items "come to be, from idea to end product". The purpose behind fake production is to fool a collector, regardless of period, and regardless of items, it is not to supply a paying and possibly returning customer with a durable hand-made item created by peoples who took pride in their jobs and wares, much unlike the generations that followed on.

The explaning part is long, and the subject possibly too complex for the average weekend collector, but it`s really not a problem to take any item you wish, and to go through it under the scope, bang off the problems, 1,2,3..or rack up the normalities, whether it is gilded or not, bashed or mint, if it is an honest citizen of the TR period, it will tell you.

[Dietrich Maerz]

OK, lets see. I hope you get a stone cold mint Deschler KVK 1. Class. We can only discuss if we know what to discuss. The downside of such a test is, of course, you know already that it is good!

A good test - from my perspective - would be to to show the difference between a late war 935-4 and an early post-war 935. Same parts, same finish, same paint, same company, same workers, same solder, ... maybe 3-4 years apart. Just like the 3-4 years between the Juncker 800 and the Lazy 2 ......

The downside is, of course, that if you don't find a difference the 935 would now be considered a real Knights Cross to the absolute happiness of all the owners of such a post-war fake.

[Jo Rivett]

A good test - from my perspective - would be to to show the difference between a late war 935-4 and an early post-war 935.

I have absolutely no idea at all what that is, but it sounds good
And i see no reason why not. It is easier in some respects for me to inspect items i have never had or been interested in too, that way the only things i have are what the item is telling me, and don`t know anything else about it, what it is "claimed to be" or not, or any of the folklore, facts, discussions etc.. that have taken place.

I find that it makes me focus more, and not approach the analysis in a more casual "oh one of these again" manner. That way you don`t have any expectations, and can just sit back and let the item talk.

[Gary Symonds]

I have absolutely no idea at all what that is, but it sounds good
And i see no reason why not. It is easier in some respects for me to inspect items i have never had or been interested in too, that way the only things i have are what the item is telling me, and don`t know anything else about it, what it is "claimed to be" or not, or any of the folklore, facts, discussions etc.. that have taken place.

I find that it makes me focus more, and not approach the analysis in a more casual "oh one of these again" manner. That way you don`t have any expectations, and can just sit back and let the item talk.

More mumbo jumbo, and "prancing around the fire," Jo?

Have not a clue about what you are talking about.

How about plain Swiss, English.

[Jo Rivett]

Gary, i can do German and English, and if needed i could brush the cobwebs off my Afrikaans or even fire the Xhosa up again, but Neandertal i can`t do, sorry. We all have our limits.

[Jo Rivett]

Let`s get back to the subject at hand now.

And as we see, no less than three"Authorities" have written CoAs and/or claim the following three examples to be period - genuine.

André Hüsken
Lothar Hartung
Helmut Weitze

The problem now, is that Bob (and others) finds it perfectly OK to assert that only his is original, and these three experts are wrong, and have been wrong since 1991 when the first CoA was written! Fair and well, but i find it very unprofessional to point fingers at dealers items with nothing more that a vet fable to support your assertion, and then nothing more that follows on from that as well.. nothing, just a bit of humour and a few arrogant posts.

Very unprofesional, especially seeing as these people will be the first to use the same dealers and the items they list as ultimate proof that something else is genuine, simply because they have the same for sale.

Do not forget we are talking about items worth over €3000.- now, and two of them, that Bob and others are calling fake, are up for sale right now on Weitze`s website, for €3200.- and €3500.- Together that makes €6700.-! a hefty sum, and apparantly a sum that Weitze has now lost because only Bob`s is original and not the two Weitze has - or any others for that matter.

I think that Weitze needs to be informed about this thread, and hopefully one of their employees can post a few words here and get Bob to shift into second gear and start coming up with something more than the word VET, to defend his assertions that both of Weitze`s badges are fake. After all, their items are now tarnished, and i am sure they will want to know exactly why their badges are fake.