here is the answer PETER got from JEFF HAMMOND
Hi Paul
Here's Jeffs answer to my e-mail yesterday. Will e-mail you more info as I get it.
Peter
.................................................................................................................................
Hi Peter:
I will check with two other knowledgeable people and get their opinions. I will get back to you soon (but it will probably be next week). At the same time, to me that badge still looks right. I know that people do question multiple strikes of markings, and perhaps they are right.
In the mean time, there is so much that is right about that badge. There were two manufacturers of these badges, Wittmann and Hoffstätler. Both badges are quite similar, but there are a number of differences. The Wittmann badge is, in my experience, by far the more common of the two.
The differences (although quite minor) are distinct between the two badges. (1) On the Wittmann badges the upper tips of the skis come to a sharper point. On the Hoffstätler badges the skis have almost a tiny raindrop type look at the end of the skis. (2) On the Wittmann badges the umlaut over the U is distinctly separate and neither dot touches the U. On the Hoffstätler badges the left dot of the umlaut touches the top of the U.
There are a good number of other differences between the two badges, but they are even more minor and obscure than these two. The badge you have is marked Wittmann and is correct for Wittmann on all of the Wittmann- Hoffstätler minor variations.
Also on the front, the wear exposing the copper underneath the skis and edelweiss is, in my opinion, correct. To get this type of wear to look correct on a reproduction badge would be a challenge, although of course a dedicated individual might take the time to do it.
The close up image of the markings also shows the bottom of the skis as well. To me the back of those skis have a distinctly cast look to them. But at the same time, the skis are quite heavy and might well have been cast.
The multiple strikes of the GES-GESCH is interesting and I agree that this is rarely found on an original badge. Still there is something quite interesting about that marking. The smaller square between the GES and the GESCH and the larger trapezoid after the GESCH are both consistent with the markings found on the Wittmann badges. The GES-GESCH marking on the Hoffstätler badges is quite different and on two lines rather than one and with a square period and a rectangular period in place of the small square and the trapezoid.
In addition the needles, the hinges and the hooks are all correct for the Wittmann badges and different from the ones on the Hoffstätler badges.
The badge you have does have some aberration on back on the circular piece at the center of the top of the badge. I can't quite tell what that means from the photograph.
As for reproductions, I believe that this badge has not been widely reproduced. I have never seen any reproductions except one or two quite poorly made examples that were obvious reproductions. The badge you have certainly does not fall into that category. It would be sort of surprising for the first serious reproduction of this badge that I have come across to be such a stunningly well made and aged and worn example that could only be produced by meticulous effort by hand. Even getting the needles, hinges and hooks right is an effort that many who reproduce badges don't bother doing.
Jeff
Hi Paul
Here's Jeffs answer to my e-mail yesterday. Will e-mail you more info as I get it.
Peter
.................................................................................................................................
Hi Peter:
I will check with two other knowledgeable people and get their opinions. I will get back to you soon (but it will probably be next week). At the same time, to me that badge still looks right. I know that people do question multiple strikes of markings, and perhaps they are right.
In the mean time, there is so much that is right about that badge. There were two manufacturers of these badges, Wittmann and Hoffstätler. Both badges are quite similar, but there are a number of differences. The Wittmann badge is, in my experience, by far the more common of the two.
The differences (although quite minor) are distinct between the two badges. (1) On the Wittmann badges the upper tips of the skis come to a sharper point. On the Hoffstätler badges the skis have almost a tiny raindrop type look at the end of the skis. (2) On the Wittmann badges the umlaut over the U is distinctly separate and neither dot touches the U. On the Hoffstätler badges the left dot of the umlaut touches the top of the U.
There are a good number of other differences between the two badges, but they are even more minor and obscure than these two. The badge you have is marked Wittmann and is correct for Wittmann on all of the Wittmann- Hoffstätler minor variations.
Also on the front, the wear exposing the copper underneath the skis and edelweiss is, in my opinion, correct. To get this type of wear to look correct on a reproduction badge would be a challenge, although of course a dedicated individual might take the time to do it.
The close up image of the markings also shows the bottom of the skis as well. To me the back of those skis have a distinctly cast look to them. But at the same time, the skis are quite heavy and might well have been cast.
The multiple strikes of the GES-GESCH is interesting and I agree that this is rarely found on an original badge. Still there is something quite interesting about that marking. The smaller square between the GES and the GESCH and the larger trapezoid after the GESCH are both consistent with the markings found on the Wittmann badges. The GES-GESCH marking on the Hoffstätler badges is quite different and on two lines rather than one and with a square period and a rectangular period in place of the small square and the trapezoid.
In addition the needles, the hinges and the hooks are all correct for the Wittmann badges and different from the ones on the Hoffstätler badges.
The badge you have does have some aberration on back on the circular piece at the center of the top of the badge. I can't quite tell what that means from the photograph.
As for reproductions, I believe that this badge has not been widely reproduced. I have never seen any reproductions except one or two quite poorly made examples that were obvious reproductions. The badge you have certainly does not fall into that category. It would be sort of surprising for the first serious reproduction of this badge that I have come across to be such a stunningly well made and aged and worn example that could only be produced by meticulous effort by hand. Even getting the needles, hinges and hooks right is an effort that many who reproduce badges don't bother doing.
Jeff