HJ honour badge M1/120 - problems

[Garry]

Spotted this on Weitze's site earlier. This is ostensibly an original issue M1/120 Deumer honour badge with award serial number but....

1. Award number 72295 falls within the range covered by M1/78 - Paulmann und Crone. Deumer original issue honour badges are from the later period where the award serial number was six digits. See this thread.
2. The safety lock on this M1/120 was not introduced until late-1939 but badge number 72295 would have been awarded two or three years previously. For example, badge number 71794 was reported lost in 1937.
3. The M1/120 badges had stamped award serial numbers but the ones on this badge look completely different in style to those on genuine Deumer badges.

In my opinion this is an original Deumer badge that had this number added at a later point (not by the manufacturer). That's a worry of course because it could have happened post-war. Also, the numbers look to have been cut with a rotary engraver...?

What do you guys think?

You don't have permission to view attachments.

 

[bertl59]

Nice research work GARRY, in fact the number is not well aligned and this is the first time I have seen this.

 

[Garry]

...this is the first time I have seen this.

Yes, same here B. Without an award serial number these badges are worth less anyway as you know but this particular badge is a battered, ordinary example. Adding a serial number and then getting 60% more than it is actually worth would make sense to the unscrupulous. I don't for a second think that Weitze's people did it but I very strongly suspect that someone somewhere did.

 

[Jack]

It does look strange. What actually happened to the outer dots on the front? Weird.
And the number type is definitely not standard, you're both absolutely right about that.

Note the typical second, "fallen" digit, and compare the 2, 5 and 7.

You don't have permission to view attachments.

You don't have permission to view attachments.

You don't have permission to view attachments.

 

[Jack]

I spotted another one, which also raises questions. Same strange numerals that deviate from standard, strangely dark in the numerals and lacking the typical luminous gilding. All numerals neatly in a row, the rotating lock silver, and all this in contrast to 127,xxx and also to 131,xxx (at Wim V.'s essay). Monday piece? I wouldn't want it, but someone else did.

You don't have permission to view attachments.