Thanks Thanks:  0
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    guys it was a fake with the first pics and nothing has changed made in POLAND probably early last month and the pooor enamel not withstanding those pins never existed in the TR period sorry but it is what it is in this case


  2. #12
    ONE other thing to note is that the diamond was adopted in 1933 and would have been available in quantity probably in 1934. The RZM system kicked in 1933 so there may not be any interm badges as the round version would be worn until the diamond was available . Most early pre RZM badges normally where stamped with maker on the pin bases and where round .


  3. #13

    Please login to view user info
    Yep i fully agree with Paul on bad that you payed any money for it as that originals are cheap and easy to come by

  4. #14
    I would disagree on that data Paul. Wilhelm Saris has many early orders which show that the diamond was in use as early as 1931/2 and that it was officially introduced for all HJ in September 1933. Even if the RZM gained control of these badges in 1933 (which I doubt but can't prove) it still means that there were pre-RZM diamond badges around.

    I take your point on the pin catch and another worry would be the total lack of a manufacturer's name or a GES GESCH. I'm not saying that the badge is a good one - I'm just not ready to say fake without seeing more because that type of red enamel can also be observed on the early DJV (first pattern DJ membership badge) and is atypical for the fakes which seem universally to go for the normal dot pattern under the red enamel as opposed to what we can see here. It's also the first badge like this that I've seen so my interest was sparked by that alone :)

    I personally would need to see a few pre-RZM badges before I could close Richard's badge out completely but we're all entitled to our opinions of course. That's what makes research interesting :)

  5. #15

    Please login to view user info
    heres a pic of a pre-rzm basdge that toby is selling note that despite being an early badge the finish is very diff to the badge shown

  6. #16
    Hey presto. Here's another. Found it on mil321. Now that I've seen this and Toby's I'm happier about saying that Richard's isn't looking promising. As Paul said though, the catch was always a problem. It was just that red enamel finish that was keeping my mind open a little. Having said that though, the finish on Toby's is somewhere in between.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    • File Type: jpg 1.jpg (38.4 KB, 22 views)
    • File Type: jpg 2.jpg (50.3 KB, 19 views)
    • File Type: jpg 3.jpg (59.3 KB, 16 views)

  7. #17
    The sunken black enamel on the swastika is not a good sign - usually indicates a modern fill technique rather than a period "overfill and polish down to the metal" method.

    There was a gap between the HJ diamond's introduction and RZM marking. RZM marking of party items (including the HJ) became mandatory in a law of December 20, 1934, effective January 16, 1935. The RZM was around before that, but the marking system - including the logo - didn't start until later.
    Last edited by RZM; 3rd August 2009 at 01:52 PM.

  8. #18
    Thanks for the info Stephen. Welcome to the forum.

  9. #19

    Please login to view user info
    ive posted a members badge without any marking a few posts down from this one, pre rzm? any opinions? Pete.

  10. #20

    Please login to view user info
    I once had a pre-RZM, 2nd pattern badge, fully marked for Deschler.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

HJ-Research, the Hitler Youth Militaria Collector Forum
Copyright © 2009 -
Web Hosting by Vidahost "Hosting for Life"