1923 enamel Gau Honor badge

[Gary Symonds]

Original 1925.

Looks like it is not in 800 silver.

[der-hase-fee]

Original 1925.

I agree with Gary.

[all1knew]

it is an example marked for "800" silver according to the seller though I have yet to see it in hand.

As far as the 1923 that started the thread, we are fairly confident it is a reproduction correct? The seller also had a 1925 at the show with some enamel damage but these are the only two photos I snapped.

William Kramer

[JoeW]

I agree with Andreas' assessment, sad to say. The General Gau Honor Badge is one of my favorite awards and this example does not have the beautiful detail in the silver wreath that genuine examples present.

In his initial comment, William presents a number of questions:

"what was the difference between the 1923 and 1925 award dates, what do they signify and why are there both enamel and painted version from the same maker, does anyone know?"

As I understand it, there is still no clear explanation of why two versions of this badge existed, bearing different years. Both versions appear to have the approbation of the NSDAP as they are both referred to in the Organisationsbuch, but without justification. And while it seems understandable that several Gaue decided to get together and utilize the same design for a commemorative badge, even that brings up other questions, such as why the Gaue that participated in this design changed over the years of the TR; why other Gaue that never created a commemorative badge decided not to participate in this "General Gau Honor Badge" design; whether the Gaue that did participate in this design utilized both the 1923 and the 1925 designs or did each Gau use only one of the two; what did the two different dates signify to each of the Gaue that presented this badge; and what did this badge signify in it's very presentation -- was it given to honor very early Alterkämpfers living in that Gau, as some other Gau Honor Badges did, or to commemorate the foundation of the Gau itself, or...??

I believe there are genuine examples of the General Gau Honor Badge bearing both 1923 and 1925 with the enamel swastika, and it appears likely that both versions existed from the time of institution in 1933. It seems that the painted version may have been a later effort to cut costs in manufacturing this badge, just as the simplification of the pin system seems to have evolved for the same reason.

Just some thoughts...without answers, I'm afraid!

Br. James

Br. James, I think the answers to many of the above questions can be answered in examples of the Besitzurkunde/Ausweis that accompanied these Gau Awards.

[Erich B.]

Eric I am holding in my hand my 1923 enamel, and I can say with full confidence that Kramer's wreath and swastika are identical.

If your computer skills are up to it, and mine are not, maybe you can mark the disputed areas in Kramer's 1923 so I can see where you are coming from.

Gary,
I marked a few areas that are always present. Yours has them distinctly visible, whereas on the first example some were faint and some were missing. Hopefully this will help.
Erich

[Gary Symonds]

Eric, thanks for the helpful post.

I cannot agree that these minor differences prove Kramer's 1923 Gau is a fake.

These differences could be attributed to a worn die or even a slight misplacement of the die.

The overall totality, the workmanship, the materials, are all consistent with an original 1923.

[Bob Hritz]

Could the reverse differences be the result of heavy abrasive cleaning? It sure looks like some strong abrasive was used that scratched the reverse.

Bob Hritz

[Erich B.]

I would be very surprised if the lack of the reverse features were due to die wear. 95% of these were made of 800 silver, and assumably it wouldn't have been a high production award. As Bob mentioned, someone could have done some heavy handed 'restoration' work to the reverse--and possibly soldered the swastika on if the rivet failed.
Erich

[der-hase-fee]

Maybe William Kramer can take measurements and test for silver content.