UBB.threads Forums Uniform & Accessories Medals & Badges of the Third Reich Forum Gold Party Badge

I have a small gold party pin which I am fairly certain is original, but I have a friend who stated that it was a fake. Please visit my website and check it out, and please render your informed opinion. To me, it's 100%. The hyphen extends over the "L" in National. The "O" in socialist is oval, and not round, the red enamel is translucent, showing the beading underneath, and there are no tell-tale "lines" on the oakleaves above the Z in Socialist. Furthermore, the reverse numbers are stamped in such a way that conforms to other Fuess pins I have owned. Thoughts from the experts? I would certainly not want to offer a fake GPB, and I am certainly not up on every brand new fake out there. Thanks in advance.

Front of badge.

Reverse of badge (sorry for the slight angle).

I don't like that badge, there are few things wrong with it, the style of the letters on the front, the lettering in the maker mark close, but different and the pin on the fuess's badges goes in to the catch from top down,not like regular from down up.
Here is the picture of original to compare.

Reverse

i agree with the noted exceptions stated by Alikn....

I do see some differences now - especially on the shape of the "p" - I may have to send this one back!

Yes, it appears bad to me.
Ron Weinand
Weinand Militaria

AlikN,

Welcome back. I see you are one of the early members.

The rules have changed a bit since you first joined and members are required to post a real email address in their public profile. Please modify your profile as yours is not a real eamil address. If you would like, I can do it for you. Just send me an email at "dave@germandaggers.com"

Thanks
Dave

Got an email from John Peppera regarding the pin - he confirmed that it was indeed a bad one. We need to document this one - it's got SUPERB enameling.

Obverse of an older repro large GPB that I own. At an initial glance it looks convincing. That is until you examine the detail of the oakleaves.
I just re-examined my repro carefully and when you compare it to the real example AlikN posted above the difference in the red enameling is very apparent. Mine is like flat paint compared to the irridescent hue of the original:

However when you examine the back several problems become apparent:
It's RZM marked when was never done on real ones.
This pin arrangement is totally wrong for this type of badge.

In my opinion John Pepera is the last word on if this Badge is good or bad. This is one of the better fakes out there. Not a good thing!

Just back from a few days off - yes, the badge is bad. The letters are too uniform in width and the "C" on the reverse pin plate is too tall. They have learned now to grind down the "ties" over the laurel leaves on the Fuess badges.

Guess I am still at odds on this subject.
With the info presented here check the following thread and compare the 33333 marked badge.
http://daggers.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/800097...780047633#2780047633
Thoughts?
--dj--Joe

Pin hooks from underneath.
C's on the 33333's appear tall and not the out of shape round ones attributed to originals.
And the sloppy azzed enamel work on some examples excepted as original for such an esteemed badge mystifies me.
What is the time frame for the appearance of the railroad track fakes to the cleaned up version?

--dj--Joe

I notice the red flag here is definitely in the lettering. Craigs badge is not even close to P Von and my badge or Alikin's examples.

derjager, you're not the only one who is mystified. I've got a 30xxx Fuess GPB with the exact characteristics of John's #33333 which reflects honest wear and partial loss of the gilding. I picked this one up from Bill Shea in 1997 (#I-19 on 4/97 list). So have we had fake GPB's floating around for 8 years, or more, that are just now being identified as such, and with what are allegedly obvious defects?

Is it possible these are pieces produced by a Fuess subcontractor, hence some of the minor differences? After all, the enamel and glass work are rather exceptional. Just my two cents.

So, what's the conclusion? That the new "variation" (to include the badge I first pictured, and John's 33333 badge), is bad or good? This is beginning to sound more and more like the "stipled" date German Cross in Gold that, while 100% original in my opinion, are not sellable as such any longer.

Craig,

One interesting aspect of all of the GPB's in question, including mine, is the presence of a "drooping" third numeral in the party number. To my thinking, this points to a common manufacturer, and raises the issue of why a faker who invested so much effort in getting the enamel/glass work so perfect, would want to introduce such a flaw into the design of the badge. I briefly discussed this matter with Bill Shea in 1997, and he did not feel it was of any significance, being totally convinced the badge was a quality pre-1945 piece. After examining the badge, there was not one known fake of the Feuss GPB that came anywhere close to this badge in terms of quality and construction. Hence, I felt it was a righteous one.

What documentation exists that there were NO minor variations in the Feuss GPB? Further, it is my understanding that no faker has yet, much less eight years ago, mastered the enamel/glass construction issues.

Bill

Bill, although I have not purchased the badge I posted, I do tend to agree with you. There is a tendency in this hobby that, when presented with a variation, to cry "fake." This is an understandable tendency, as less-than-scrupulous dealers and collectors use the "variation" vernacular to justify obvious and known reproductions. And often times, this tendency ends up ruining the reputation of real items. Case in point: The "Stipled" date German Cross in Gold.

Someone aptly noticed that the 20 marked German cross in Gold was observed both with a clean, plain date, and with one that is stipled. The internet crowd determined the "stipled" date to be a fake, but there was no evidence to support this claim. There have been plenty of "stipled date" crosses obtained by reliable sources from veterans. Do a search on Wehrmacht-Awards and you will see many discussions on this. I believe in the stipled date German Crosses, and yet, they are currently unsellable. I believe the German Cross in Gold with the stipled date simply represents a different manufacturer or die for the gold wreath.

I want to make sure we don't make the same mistake with these Gold Party Badges. Could it be that the differences we observe on these "new" Gold Party Badges is merely the differences that are a result not of them being faked, but of them being constructed of parts provided to the Fuess company by different sub-contractors. In this case, where the quality is there, it seems a logical deduction. We also know that Fuess did two "runs" of the Blood Order, and that the 1st and 2nd pattern differ slightly. Maybe they did two runs of the small gold party badge?

One bit of evidence to support this theory is the fact that the "bump pattern" beneath the enamel of this questioned badge is identical to the "bump pattern" of the accepted original. On the high-quality reproductions, I believe, the "bump pattern" is composed of dots, rather than extended dots, or lines. I hope people will comment on this observation.

Craig,

You make some good points. Variation does not automatically equate with reproduction. For instance, on the Deschler small GPB, you see various combinations of maker marks and venting, and sometimes nothing at all. Which of those badges would qualify as being suspect?

As I have said before, I'm just rather surprised that these badges have not been focused upon previously, as they have been out there for several years, and, if fakes, were clearly the best ever produced.

Bill

To assist in keeping this discussion on going here is a thread showing and discussing some Fuess marked GPB's.
http://daggers.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/800097...383066117#5383066117
Note you may have to scroll up to the top as this link drops us near the middle of the first page.

--dj--Joe

AlikN,

Thanks for updating your profile !

Dave

Stephen, Just a thought,Could a reason being that original Badges were finished by hand and would be the reason that the lettering is not as uniform as on Craigs example and other possible reproductions?

I am also rather surprised that they have not been identified and discussed earlier - variant, or reproduction - whatever the case.

Erich, hand finished or not the lettering on the obverse of the accepted originals was sloppy to begin with or it would not look like that.
We could also ask if the repro. artists finish their wares by hand thus producing the different obverse and reverse lettering found on the more believable badges deemed repros. If they do how on earth did they miss the railroad tracks?
My thought, how do we explain the quality lettering and enamel work found on common party badges?

--dj--Joe

If you check the Fuess GPB on Jamie Cross's site, item #3 under Political Badges, you will note that the pin hooks from underneath, and the letters are quite uniform, not "sloppy" at all. The "c" in Munchen is the round type.

What is the opinion on this one?

Bill

For another comparison go to the last thread link I posted look at the 352 and the 3105 and compare the fonts obverse and reverse against Craig's 93300 and note the differences.

--dj--Joe

I don't think the pin is an issue. The Deschlers hook from the bottom and i have seen many original Fuess badges that do the same.

Also notice on Craigs example the the oak leaves don't come together in a straight line above the I in Sozialist.

Did you mean the O ?
I don't feel that is an issue either. Hold a straight edge against the image of AlikN's badge, you should find things don't intersect perfectly.

--dj--Joe

2 members in the 'know' on these particular pieces both condemn it, a few others also..Maybe someone could do a fancy side by side and document the differences in detail and what to look out for...

A quick comment on enameling,,,I don't think enameling should enter into the picture here when trying to determine if an item is 'period' or not. The days of crappy enamel work and 'quick enamels' are over...I've recently met some people who restore enamel on Imperial Russian and Soviet pieces. Their work is beautiful!. They've been doing this work in NY since immigrating here in the early 1990s. I'm sure there are many,many more that do this type of work..
It is not a lost art. The professional must be experienced, meticulous, and it is time consuming..Given the price of pieces like this it is no wonder that the counterfeiter would take the time and effort to at least start having the enameling done right...

I have one dog in the fight however due to the underwhelming amount of info. available on these I do not feel a firm factual consencus will be reached any time soon! My example is as the one Craig posted. As an enamel collector if I had the first two examples of badges posted side by side I would purchase the first every time!
These have been around for awhile.there appears to be an example of one on page 178 of For Fuhrer and Fatherland Political & Civil Awards Of The Third Reich by: LTC John R. Angolia 1978.
Yea yea, I have heard all books are full of fakes lets not bark up that tree just now!
I purchased my example in 1981 from a gent that claimed it was "good as gold" however conceptions change and he has now condemened it. Gee, should I ask him if his lifetime waranty is retroactive?
The numerals on the reverse of mine are impressed not stamped. Holding it in hand I feel it is good! It is not a money issue. I have no emotional attachment what so ever it is just a part of my collection. If indeed good, well and good, if it ever proves out false, oops fooled again. But, I require proof not opinions. Opinions is all we have at this point in time. I am not saying the well respected gentlemen have not put a lot of time and research into their analysis I am sure they have, however I have done my home work also thus my opinions.

One item I would like to see close up is an example of the 3rd. class pin back version of the German Order. Page 226 of the above cited volume.

Regards,--dj--(nobody )Joe

(BTW) I have no delusions of grandeur for my poor collection. I am not attempting to be cynical nor combative. I collect for fun, when it gets to a point it's no longer fun, adios! Right now it's at the point where I can not afford to add any items or go to the big shows! Boo hoo!

I have tried to have an open mind on this topic from the outset, HOWEVER, one thing keeps coming up in my mind and eye everytime I look at this thread. That is: these were all fire glit gold finished. All the originals that I have or have had, even those with much wear and damage, HAD REMAINS OF THE FIRE GLIT FINISH IN THE RESESSES AND AT SOME PLACE ON THE BADGE. This can be easily seen on the HJ Leader's Sport's Badge when they are worn.
I see NO fire glit finish on these small GPB pieces pictured here, even in the background of the rays.
This alone makes me wonder if they are not original????
JUST MY OPINION.
Ron Weinand
Weinand Militaria

Ron, mine came from you! I know after 23+ years it's just my word, however my word is my bond. I recieved it directly from your hand. One more reason I have faith in it!
You must have obtained it from a veteran source, right?

--dj--Joe

Sorry - Just got back from a few days in Las Vegas, so was out of touch for much of the thread.

I don't know of any published source that shows this type of Fuess badge with the thick, even letters. If you look under a magnifyer the Angolia badge on p. 178 shows the uneven, "spidery" letters we have come to know and love in orginals, although the photo's quality leaves a lot to be desired.

The known original Fuess front has letters of varying thickness as shown in AlikN's photos above. It especially shows up in the "S", "C" and "H". It also has a characteristic skinny "I" and a square "P" in "D.A.P."

A few things put me off the badges in question. First of course is the "regular" or uniform lettering. The irregular lettering would be much harder to copy, which is why I think fakers would opt for a more standard font.

On the back, the "C" in "Munchen" on the pin plate is taller and thinner than on known "spidery" originals. The "C" is also missing the slight cap or serif on known originals. Although the angle of the photo makes it difficult, Craig's badge also seems to have the maker's name and address centered, instead of its usual slightly up and to the left of originals. That same pin plate is common to the recent excellent quality Fuess fakes, which I feel puts the rest of the badge into question.

We had another discussion about one of these same badges marked "33333". Amazingly, two forum members had exactly the same 33333 Fuess badge. Possible? I suppose, but people who collect these things know how hard it is to reconnect pairs, let alone find two of the same size with the same number. Most full sets had one of each maker for the small badge - a Deschler and a Fuess. I don't like coincidences in this hobby, and the two identical 33333 Fuess badges to me was the smoking gun pointing to them being of recent and spurious manufacture.

I've only begun seeing them recently, but they may well have been hiding in collections longer. If it was a genuine variation (which I don't believe), I feel it would and should have shown up in the literature earlier, like Angolia or Huffman, or in more general circulation in greater numbers among collectors.

That's all I have by way of "proof" that these are fake. Now I'd like to see some actual proof they are real.

Like they say in Vegas, a tie goes to the dealer. In collecting, the benefit of the doubt goes to known originals and against "variations".

Obviously, this issue could be easily settled if a collector holding one of these "variant" badges would come forward with an impeccable provenance, ie. vet or original owner acquisition.

The evidence appears to be that these badges have been out there for quite sometime. As noted, I acquired mine from Bill Shea in 1997, and I now understand one went back to 1981. The conventional wisdom as late as this year was that no faker had yet to properly nail the enameling, especially the translucent red glass. Further, I don't know why any faker would want to devote that much energy to producing these 25-30 or more years ago. They were only of interest to a small minority of collectors back then.

It is also worth noting that not all of these badges bear a traceable party number. Mine does not, and it also shows evidence of having been worn, with gilt only remaining in the recesses of the tracks.

No doubt, with all of the bad press, these badges are now roadkill.....unless someone produces that provenance.

I concede on the point that under magnification the image on page 178 appears to have the malformed lettering, except it does not appear that the tail of the S on that image comes near the hyphen. Another "variant"?
I was also incorrect to refer to sloppy enameling when I should have infact stated that I can not fathom how a die for the planchet with malformed lettering could pass muster! Sorry, I knew what I meant I just did not do a good job getting that point across.
Proof, I can not prove it either way I do not have the resourses to do so. I was just taking part in a discussion and voicing an opinion. I guess we need period in wear photos.
As to fire gilt is it fire gilt or is it brenlac? I do wish to get to the bottom of this. If it is fire gilt mine is all present with a little bit of old protective varnish remaining in the recesses or else my badge has been cleaned to death and what remains in the recesses is the old finish. Does any one know what the base metal was for these awards. Brass, tombac?

Let's keep this discussion going what ever the outcome.

--dj--Joe

Base metal was brass for all makers and sizes.