Hitler Youth HJ knife diamond size variations.

Forums New posts
WernerBamberg

WernerBamberg

Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
447
Thanks Received
202
Thanks Given
94
Location
Europe
Hello guys,

I like to share some information I learned from an authority on HJ and other daggers.
The guy is writing a reference book on heer daggers right now and soon that will be available.

He buys daggers to make pictures of them and than he sells them.
I bought some knives of him and they are all discussed at the warrelics.eu forum.

Below some pics of the 3 different sizes of hj diamonds.

1st Early Period Smallest Daimond From 1933-1936: 20mm x 13mm

2nd Transitional Period Daimond From 1936-1938: 23mm x 13mm

3rd Late Period Daimond From 1938-1942: 25mm x 14mm

The picture I made is unfortunally not very good for comparing, so I posted the thread.
I hope it is allowed...
I tried to measure it, but the differences were to small of the 2nd and 3rd variant.

Hitler Youth Knife Diamond Variations From 1933-1942

You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.






 

Attachments

    You don't have permission to view attachments.
Its an interesting post for sure with nice pics but I think this is just him observing something about the diamonds. I don't see any evidence in his post that makers definitely all used different size diamonds in certain periods. Maybe I missed it? I don't see evidence for what he is saying.It's just observation.
 
Well.. I think you have to believe it on his word.
Just ''whatsapped'' him.
He said he had a lot of daggers. He used a caliper to measure some diamonds.
He has no actual photos with the caliper near the diamond.
But I know the guy. He is NOT the type of guy that is telling bullshit. Those guys don't write good reference books.
 
It is impossible to deduce anything at all from looking at the HJ membership badges that are inlaid into HJ knives.
They could be fake, they could be replaced, (period or modern) you cannot see the reverse and have no idea of the time period.

The sizes of the various HJ badges will vary from 1933 to the last day they were made.

At best you can "Observe" and note the observations for your personal research/library. But you can not deduce, assume, claim or anything else from the simple "viewing" of the obverse of badges laid into grips.

What will you do if i lay a 1940 RZM-era produced HJ badge into an early knife? See, that's going to throw any "Variations" theories out of the window :lol: And it surely was done on many knives. (pre and post war)

The only way you could study the variations and possible time periods of their production, would be to examine the actual badges, both obverse and reverse, as the HJ knife badge IS the HJ membership badge, there is no different badge for the knife, the only difference is the attachment.
 
Jo Rivett said:
What will you do if i lay a 1940 RZM-era produced HJ badge into an early knife? See, that's going to throw any "Variations" theories out of the window :lol: And it surely was done on many knives. (pre and post war)
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more Jo. I've seen many examples of later knives with early diamonds, there are no hard and fast rules as such with any of this stuff.

Regards

Russ
 
smolders said:
He said he had a lot of daggers. He used a caliper to measure some diamonds.
Click to expand...

Yes, as Jo said, this is pure observation and is open to failure because all you would need is one knife with a fake diamond or a knife that had its diamond replaced during the period for the overall result to be invalidated.
 
I do not have much knowledge about daggers, but know something about regulations.
Here is a part of text about the HJ-badge with the actual drawing with sizes, as shown
in "Bekleidung und Ausrüstung der HJ, Amtliche Bekleidungsvorschrift der Reichsjugend
der NSDAP" from January 15, 1934. The book so was prepaired in 1933:

You don't have permission to view attachments.


It was allowed sizes varied slightly and so the official pattern from 1933 had the size
13 x 23,5 mm.

In the booklet "Die Uniformen der HJ" from 1933 the size was noted as 1.3 x 2.4 cm.
In the F.W.Assmann cataloque the badge is 1.3 x 2.3 cm.

The size from the drawing largely remained the size for the diamond, so I wonder
where those guys get their information about early, transitional and late period.
The difference in size is just the manufacturer and the "allowance" to vary slightly.
But this is just 1.0 mm or so.

In the same book from January 15, 1934 the dagger was described in detail
and according to specifications. The size for the badge is mentioned as 1.3 x 2.3 cm.
The same size for the diamond is being described in "Herstellungsvorschriften der
Reichszeugmeisterei" from 1936, page 110.
So tell me please where the saying "early period smallest diamond" comes from.
This surely is an "invention" from one or the other author!


Further in the RZM manufacturing regulations from 1937 the size for the diamond
is noted to be 1.4 x 2.5 cm.

By the way: some indeed write books, but occasionally they have hardly ever seen
regulations. And often the one and/or the other is "parotting" from what he has heard.
 

Attachments

    You don't have permission to view attachments.
Last edited:
Well, looks like my gut feeling was right then. The period sources say one thing and the guy with the calipers says another. I'm most definitely going with the period sources. How can you write a BOOK to tell collectors the "truth" about HJ knife diamonds whilst simultaneously ignoring the sizes given for them in the regulations?? Bizarre so I'm not going to do this in this author's case:


smolders said:
Well.. I think you have to believe it on his word.
Click to expand...
 
Hello crack,

read my last line. I often find out about this when getting a new released book.
The author(s) have not or hardly seen any regulation otherwise they would have
mentioned what was said in such regulation and especially a manufacturing
regulation. Or they do include a facsimile from a regulation, but do not read the text.
 
Thanks Wilhelm. It was a rhetorical question but yes, you are exactly right. I have your excellent HJ book by the way.
 
Well regarding the size and overall look of the early badges, if we are talking about a badge like the Parteiabz. that was made for over a decade before the RZM March-1935 standardization, you indeed will find many more variations before the RZM took full control, and can watch them "evolve" into the standard size/shape/look. With the HJ membership badges, it is easy to see that indeed before the RZM took full control, there is a period between mid-1933 and mid-1935 where we do find slightly "different" designs.

I have seen a fat and skew swastika (example) or a very thin swastika (example) and the more you look at these "transitional" badges in detail, the more differences you will find.
The period 1933-1935 was a period when vast amounts of these badges were needed, and "controls" were not as tight as they would be later. (I think in the PB book i gave the period of grace for standardization 2 years or so, for all makers to be getting correctly made standard dies. 2 years post March 1935!!)

It is normal really when you will have many makers with little control, and no standard Master Dies.

So i would agree to a point that during the first 2 years of the HJ diamonds existence, there are in fact badges that do look different, with slight differences.

The actual size, will depend on so many things.
Thickness of the sheeting being used (maybe it was 0,5 mm thinner/thicker)
The die set-up, how much pressure they were stamped with
The shearing dies, whether they were standard or not..

These all will contribute to a few 0,-mms or even as much as 1mm.

But, "early period smallest diamond" is indeed rubbish.

I would change that to mid-1933 to mid-135 = indeed slight differences in size and design.
Post RZM M1/ period = mostly all the same size/design, but still with slight differences depending if the badge was made by the maker or a sub-subcontractor.
 
wilhelm saris said:
Nowhere a HJ diamond was mentioned being 2.0 cm.
Show me an original document where this size for the diamond in the grip was
mentioned?
Click to expand...
No, i already said that this "theory" is rubbish.↓↓↓
Yes i know you know, my post was for the benefit of the original poster.
It is hard sometimes when a new forum member joins, or old member expresses a new "theory" that is absolute rubbish. Hard in so far as to try and explain that his "theories" (or in this case an Author/Friend he knows ) are silly and grabbed from thin air, - without scaring him away or looking too much like a "Professor"
So it`s no more than a post saying that INDEED there are found, variations, and during the first few years MANY of them, regardless of what the rules say.
This is, after all, the main reason for the RZM standardization. Same with the LDO, for the simple reason that even by 1940 many awards were not standard from all makers.
:swiss
↓↓↓↓↓
1st Early Period Smallest Daimond From 1933-1936: 20mm x 13mm
Click to expand...

I try and think outside of the small "regulation" box, otherwise we have collectors using these rules as means of authentication. "Oh the rules say ××, and you badge does not match the rules, therefore your badge is fake, or wrong, or or or.."
Many collectors do think and act this way, which is wrong.

As far as the HJ knife badges, they are the membership badge, so a person would need to study the actual badges and not just badges in grips.. If they did this, they would quickly see that during the first years, many size variations are known. Smaller than the regulations, as well as larger.
 
Thanks Jo. Sometimes things are difficult to explain especially when
manufacturers made things not as according to orders.
The orders from 1933 are specific. The size mentioned is obvious!

Of course badges not strict having this size do not mean they are fake,
just not according to whatever!
As I said before, I quote from official material and would like to see a
document where 2.0 cm is being mentioned.

To much one reads a regulation (about uniforms) and see the contrary.
That's the fun of studying TR material.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top