1923 Gau Badge

[JoeW]

I own an enamel 1923, a paint 1923, and an enamel 1925, which is illustrated in Gottlieb's Gau badge book.

This is a well worn paint original 1925 Common Gau Badge.

I see no red flags.

Gary, I don't have Craig's book handy. Are the pins of all three of your Gau badges made of identically formed stock? All of round or flattened wire or whatever you call it? Do any of the three have different coloration between the verso of the wreath and swaz?

[Gary Symonds]

Gary, I don't have Craig's book handy. Are the pins of all three of your Gau badges made of identically formed stock? All of round or flattened wire or whatever you call it? Do any of the three have different coloration between the verso of the wreath and swaz?

Joe, all three use flat wire stock, with both needles tight against each other.

As to the "coloration between the verso of the wreath and swaz." I'm not sure what you mean.

All three wreaths are in a matt silver, but the swaz is black. How could there be a a color relationship there, unless you are referring to the date.

A bit confused!

[Military]

Craig's book shows a clear 1925 variant on page 222. But it shows it with the pin closed. Patrick, it might be better to take photos in natural light. It could be a very worn badge as you say. Some of the markings that I've been noticing across this variant do seem to show but very faintly. Better lit photos are a must.

Mil

[der-hase-fee]

The one thing I am missing are the typical flaws at the reverse of the wreath.

[Bob Hritz]

The one thing I am missing are the typical flaws at the reverse of the wreath.

I completely agree. Also, the shape of the wire forming the pin seems incorrect.

Bob Hritz

[Gary Symonds]

The one thing I am missing are the typical flaws at the reverse of the wreath.

What are the typical flaws?

[JoeW]

Joe, all three use flat wire stock, with both needles tight against each other.

As to the "coloration between the verso of the wreath and swaz." I'm not sure what you mean.

All three wreaths are in a matt silver, but the swaz is black. How could there be a a color relationship there, unless you are referring to the date.

A bit confused!

Gary, all three of yours have flat wire stock and the ones in question have round wire stock. Those illustrated in Craig's book also appear to have flat wire stock pins, except the Type II straight pin example. These are red flags or are you accepting the different pin wire as a variation?

The coloration I was referring to was on the reverse of the wreath and swastika. The reverse wreaths on mine and those in Craig's book have a smooth artificial dark finish that contrasts nicely with the lighter finish of the 800 silver swaz. The one in this thread and on Matt's forum thread feature identical finishes on the reverse for both wreath and swaz that is a dark finish that I can only describe as non-smooth.

Any explanation of wear as the cause of a lack of a distinct maker mark on the back of the swaz begs the question of how you can have wear to a MM in a protected place.

I have attached three micro photos of areas on the reverse and front of my badge: the rivet which looks to be copper surrounded by a close view of what to the naked eye is the smooth dark reverse of the wreath and a portion of the wreath revealing what I take to be casting marks?

[Stan]

Here is one I used to own which shows the two parts of the pin tightly placed together, although not soldered.

You can also just about see the flat profile of the pin which becomes round where it enters the hinge.

What I do like about Patrick's example is that it has a beveled leading edge to the catch.

Stan

[Br. James]

Joe -- I'm afraid I don't understand what you are identifying as "flat wire stock" and "round wire stock." All of the examples of the Combined/Traditions Ehrenzeichen shown on this thread appear to me to include a pin made of round wire, doubled for more secure mounting. The example of this "1923" badge in my collection also includes a pin fashioned of round wire. And checking the appropriate section of Craig Gottlieb's "Gau Decorations of Hitler's Germany," I can find no direct reference to the pin -- whether it was made of "round" or "flat" wire -- though all of the variations of this award shown in his book appear to include a pin made of round wire, either in one length or doubled.

Gottlieb recognizes four different "Types" of this badge:
Type I features an enameled swastika for both the 1923 and 1925 issues, a wreath made of .800 silver, and both issues of this Type include a pin formed of round wire, doubled. This Type features the Wachtler & Lange maker's mark.
Type II features a painted swastika for both the 1923 and 1925 issues, a wreath made of .800 silver, and both issues of this Type include a pin formed of round wire, doubled. This Type features the Wachtler & Lange maker's mark.
Type III -- Gottlieb does not mention whether the swastika on this Type is enameled or painted, though he does state that both the 1923 and 1925-dated examples do exist. He does differentiate this Type from the I and II Types in that the wreath is stamped "ALPACCA" on the reverse -- indicating silver plate instead of .800 solid silver -- and the Wachtler & Lange maker's mark is omitted. Another difference is that the Type III badge presents a pin made of a single length of round wire.
Lastly, Gottlieb states that a Special Presentation Grade in gold of this award is also known and he shows an example. This gold grade has no date on the swastika, but it bears the full Wachtler & Lange maker's mark, including the .800 silver content. The photos appear to show a badge with a gold wreath, and the pin is identical to the Type I and II versions: a round wire, doubled.

I hope this is helpful information in a most interesting subject! Cheers,

Br. James

[Gary Symonds]

Gary, all three of yours have flat wire stock and the ones in question have round wire stock. Those illustrated in Craig's book also appear to have flat wire stock pins, except the Type II straight pin example. These are red flags or are you accepting the different pin wire as a variation?

The coloration I was referring to was on the reverse of the wreath and swastika. The reverse wreaths on mine and those in Craig's book have a smooth artificial dark finish that contrasts nicely with the lighter finish of the 800 silver swaz. The one in this thread and on Matt's forum thread feature identical finishes on the reverse for both wreath and swaz that is a dark finish that I can only describe as non-smooth.

Any explanation of wear as the cause of a lack of a distinct maker mark on the back of the swaz begs the question of how you can have wear to a MM in a protected place.

I have attached three micro photos of areas on the reverse and front of my badge: the rivet which looks to be copper surrounded by a close view of what to the naked eye is the smooth dark reverse of the wreath and a portion of the wreath revealing what I take to be casting marks?

Joe, the pin in Patrick's example being rounded on the top and bottom could I suppose be considered a "variation," though such a minor change hardly qualifies for such a title. It could be on the day it was assembled, there was no flat stock wire, and nothing more.

As usual in this hobby we are looking with 21st century eyes upon these artifacts from the early 20th century, magnifying observations, making the slightest difference from the text book "norm" as the basis to reject upon the grounds of reproduction. The Party member who received Patrick's Gau badge in 1933, almost certainly gave no more than two glances at the reverse, let alone the design of the needles.

As to the coloration on the reverse of the wreath, which is artificially patinated in all original Gau badges, matching the color of the reverse of the swaz, a red flag in your book, I direct your attention to Stan's example where the reverse of the swaz is also darkened, this time my plain old tarnish on a 800 silver swaz, not too surprising. That could very well explain the color of Patrick's wreath, plain old tarnish, and nothing more.

The example in question has the proper hollow rivets, the proper hinge, and the proper maker mark. The "R" is always slightly higher than the word "Wachtler," in the maker mark. I see no evidence of any wear in this protected area.

Finally, I have to revise my opinion that Patrick's 1925 example is "well worn," it is not. Comparing my painted 1923, that has paint in mint condition, I realize that Patrick's is not the same paint. My 1923 like most have a shiney black surface, sometimes referrred to as "Japaning," which is very fragile and I have seen many pictures of painted badges with loss of the paint.

The example before us is not the same paint. It is of a rougher texture, without any damage that I can see, which as far as I am concerned is not the same fragile high gloss finish that we are used to.

So if Patrick's example can be considered a variation, it would not be based on the round needles, but on the paint used that is far more durable than the high gloss paint.

My opinion is still the same, Patrick's 1925 is an original Common Gau Badge.

[JoeW]

Br. James, I apologize for the poor choice of words for my description of the wire stock of the pin. I should have written "flattened" rather than flat. My pin and others as described by other contributors is made of round wire stock doubled in width and joined together in some manner. It has been described as soldered. But the round wire on my 1923 (painted) and others viewed here and described was flattened by press or hammer. Stan describes it above, "You can also just about see the flat profile of the pin which becomes round where it enters the hinge."

The back of the wreath on mine seems artificially finished so as to seem blued. I think the swastika is cast too. Do other members believe this to be the case. And the rivets that are used to attach the wreath must either be cast in the swaz or silver soldered on.

[Br. James]

Many thanks for the clarification, Joe...and certainly no "apology" necessary, my friend!

Br. James

[der-hase-fee]

You can also just about see the flat profile of the pin which becomes round where it enters the hinge.

Maybe to assist Br. James: The flattened area is where the doubled pin is touching/joined. But I would not consider this detail to be enough to determine whether a badge is genuine or not.

Stan's example exhibits the typical die flaws on the reverse of the wreath.

[Br. James]

Thanks for your comment, Andreas, though to my eye, I can't see any "flattening" of the double-length of wire comprising the pin structure on any of the badges shown on this thread, in Craig Gottlieb's book on the subject, or on the badge in my collection. But perhaps this "flattening" is more noticeable on some examples than on others? Just thinking out loud!

Happy Holiday to all here, friends,

Br. James

[JoeW]

Thanks for your comment, Andreas, though to my eye, I can't see any "flattening" of the double-length of wire comprising the pin structure on any of the badges shown on this thread, in Craig Gottlieb's book on the subject, or on the badge in my collection. But perhaps this "flattening" is more noticeable on some examples than on others? Just thinking out loud!

Happy Holiday to all here, friends,

Br. James

Br. James, as Andreas points out, the flattening is evident on Stan's and those in Craig's examples at the point where the round pin stock turns at the bottom of the pin and at the top where the two ends are turned to enter the hinge. Looking at the pin of yours, is it not flattened a bit and more evident at the top and bottom?

Joe, the pin in Patrick's example being rounded on the top and bottom could I suppose be considered a "variation," though such a minor change hardly qualifies for such a title. It could be on the day it was assembled, there was no flat stock wire, and nothing more.

As usual in this hobby we are looking with 21st century eyes upon these artifacts from the early 20th century, magnifying observations, making the slightest difference from the text book "norm" as the basis to reject upon the grounds of reproduction. The Party member who received Patrick's Gau badge in 1933, almost certainly gave no more than two glances at the reverse, let alone the design of the needles.

As to the coloration on the reverse of the wreath, which is artificially patinated in all original Gau badges, matching the color of the reverse of the swaz, a red flag in your book, I direct your attention to Stan's example where the reverse of the swaz is also darkened, this time my plain old tarnish on a 800 silver swaz, not too surprising. That could very well explain the color of Patrick's wreath, plain old tarnish, and nothing more.

The example in question has the proper hollow rivets, the proper hinge, and the proper maker mark. The "R" is always slightly higher than the word "Wachtler," in the maker mark. I see no evidence of any wear in this protected area.

Finally, I have to revise my opinion that Patrick's 1925 example is "well worn," it is not. Comparing my painted 1923, that has paint in mint condition, I realize that Patrick's is not the same paint. My 1923 like most have a shiney black surface, sometimes referrred to as "Japaning," which is very fragile and I have seen many pictures of painted badges with loss of the paint.

The example before us is not the same paint. It is of a rougher texture, without any damage that I can see, which as far as I am concerned is not the same fragile high gloss finish that we are used to.

So if Patrick's example can be considered a variation, it would not be based on the round needles, but on the paint used that is far more durable than the high gloss paint.

My opinion is still the same, Patrick's 1925 is an original Common Gau Badge.

Stan, thank you for your detailed answer and explanation. I think Patrick's example uses rounded wire stock as is proper, but the reproduction failed to flatten the length of the pin as in others. At least in my view of the poor image.

The reverse of the wreath does not appear to have an articifical patination. It has the same dull finish as does the back of the swaz. Of course the buyers back then never looked at the back of their badges. But this is 21st century and the skill and tools available to modern fabricators requires our observation of the methods and results of manufacturing. I don't ascribe to your apparent view that production was so loose that there were constant variations in the results. But that is what makes collecting and discussing things interesting.

Perhaps these three images can illustrate Andreas' comment about flaws.
The first is the reverse of my 1923 that has the Japaning finish as you pointed out. Thank you for that explanation, as my glossy paint is very well worn. The second example is Stan's 1925. Now I see comparable flaws around the lower rim of the wreath from rivet to rivet and at 10 o'clock. Also notice the similarity of the rivets of these two as they display a concave strike. The third example if the subject of the beginning of this thread. I see no flaws. And the rivet strike is different as I see no concave strike. No perhaps I am seeing things, which wouldn't be unusual, but do these flaws appear on any other examples?