Early HJ Members badge.

[derjager]

I know these are early pieces. Are they still considered as type 1 membership badges?

--dj--Joe

[Wim Vangossum]

As far as I know they are.

Regards, Wim :)

[derjager]

:) Any other examples of this badge out there?

--dj--Joe

[RLB]

Joe Here is the small version of the Type I HJ Nice Weekend. Robert:)

[RLB]

I'll post Type II also. What was the date of transition from I to II? Is it known?

[derjager]

Robert, what is the size of the small version? My version measures a smidge over 22mm.

--dj--Joe

[RLB]

Sorry about the late reply Joe. For the life of me I can't find my metric measure so a measurement will have to wait for now. I scanned them side by side to see the diference in size. Robert:001_rolleyes:

[derjager]

Robert, thanks for posting the comparison images. :)

Regards,--dj--Joe

[stuart]

i believe they swapped from the v1 to v2 in 1933 when the youth uniform became standardised
heres a few of mine have not been able to find the small version though anyone now for one:001_rolleyes:
stu

[RaymondG]

The small version is new to me and so thanks for posting it up.

Here is one I used to have in my collection.

Raymond

[stuart]

To be honest the small size was new to me up until about 6 months ago :blushing:.

as a side note i found one of the standard size badges on a highly respected site today with the rzm mark on the back,now if these badges where swapped when the standard came in surely there should not be any with rzm marks
thoughts :confused:
stu

[StephenL]

To be honest the small size was new to me up until about 6 months ago :blushing:.

as a side note i found one of the standard size badges on a highly respected site today with the rzm mark on the back,now if these badges where swapped when the standard came in surely there should not be any with rzm marks
thoughts :confused:
stu

My own thought is that these should not be RZM marked because of the timing. The RZM mark was introduced by law in December, 1934, effective January, 1935. The HJ diamond was introduced to replace the round badge before this, so logically, the older "Arbeiter-Jugend" badge shouldn't have an RZM mark, and for a brief period, the HJ diamond didn't have one either. After 1935, all HJ insignia should have an RZM mark.

Some have argued that the round badge continued as a "traditions badge" of the HJ, and it does appear in the Organisationsbuch, and so later manufacture of it had an RZM mark. I don't believe it myself - I think there would likely be enough old stock without making more, because the demand as "traditions badge" would have been negligible. I don't recall seeing it worn much past the introduction of the diamond.

[wilhelm saris]

For your interest:

This one, the official introduced HJ-symbol - the membership pin, was in fact the first official insignia to be worn with the HJ-headgear. In late 1931 the only official manufacturer was the concern of Otto Baudermann from Erlbach. His design was a ges.gesch product. Wearing an unmarked version was officially forbidden. All this was noted in the Verordnungsblatt der Reichsleitung der NSDAP from December 31, 1931.
Since 1932 also the Assmann concern was authorized its manufacturing.
Early types never may have RZM markings. Actually Assmann started making it in 1930, but at that moment they weren't allowed at all! They even were repremanded.
Since September 8, 1933 the diamond type was officially to be worn and the first type became the Traditionsabzeichen (in 1934). Then it should have an RZM code.
The wearing of the first type with sun symbol with the headdress was strictly forbidden since then.

The diamond was in first instance not allowed to be worn by males, but meant exclusively for females from the BDM and JM since 1931. It was not allowed to be worn with the beret. In the same year it became the official symbol for the Deutsches Jungvolk. The official version only was allowed to be manufacturer by the ferdinand Hofstätter concern from Bonn. When larger amounts were needed Assmann helped to reach the goal.
It is known it was conived to be worn by HY members since the summer of 1932 with the headgear, but officially the round one should be used. As mentioned it was the neues HJ-Abzeichen since September 1933

Wilhelm Saris

[Wim Vangossum]

Wow, Now I know why you're have that world wide reputation as a TR- reseacher, Wilhelm :ohmy:

Regards, Wim :)

[RaymondG]

A wonderful piece of additional information, Wilhelm.

Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. It is much appreciated

Raymond

[wilhelm saris]

Here some additional information about if it actually and officially was named Traditionsabzeichen?
There is some confusion in booklets about this badge:
at the moment of the new HY-insignia (the diamond, neues Abzeichen), the round was named as Altes Abzeichen (RZM, 1934).
With an order from about April 1933 it was said literally: all HY units have to wear the diamond symbol, which only was allowed to be delivered through Hofstätter (Verordnungsblatt der Obersten SA-Führung Nr.12 from April 1,1933 or Verordnungsblatt der RJF Nr 5 from April 13, 1933). It was asked by the RJF to snitch when another concern offered or produced this badge.
Since summer 1933 the diamond form had to be worn as: beneath the leather button for the left breastpocket. So, it then was not a cap badge yet officially (note from August 10, 1933). One month later it was annnounced to be worn also with the visored cap (note from September 8, 1933 when this cap in the new form was introduced). With the entry of April 1, 1934 the diamond had to be worn by all boys from the HY (note May 1934).

With some plates the round badge was in about 1933/34 indeed named Traditionsabzeichen:
NSDAP, Aufbau und Abzeichen from 1933, here it was additionally noted that the badge only was allowed to be worn after one year of HY membership;
in Abzeichen und Dienstgrade der NSDAP from 1934 the insignia was described as Ehrenzeichen (altes HJ-Abzeichen). Additionally it was mentioned that membership for HY had to be a joining before June 30, 1932;
with a plate with all important and official NSDAP badges (amtliche Abzeichen, only to be obtained with a membership-permit) it was noted as das Traditionsabzeichen for the elder HY and BDM members, which joined before June 1, 1932.

As worn with headgear (known then and offered as Mützenabzeichen) or traditions-badge it practically always had the safety-pin, as in the earliest stage for the diamond this had prongs. Later it was common when the diamond was used with safety-pin also.
For a short while (a year or so) the round badge indeed may have intended to be the Traditionsabzeichen, but since June 28, 1934 the braid for the triangle became the official traditions insignia. The round one no longer may have been that, but was still allowed to be worn by those that were authorized for it.
June 30, 1934 (note from Lauterbachter, the staff-leader, in the Verordnungbslatt) it was announced that a special insignia would be introduced for the Old Guard (Alte Garde der HJ), known as Ehrenzeichen. It was possible to request for this special insignia (the diamond in gold). Since mid August 1934 this could be done.

[StephenL]

Just by way of clarification, when you say:

For a short while (a year or so) the round badge indeed may have intended to be the Traditionsabzeichen, but since June 28, 1934 the braid for the triangle became the official traditions insignia. The round one no longer may have been that, but was still allowed to be worn by those that were authorized for it.

the braid on the triangle indicated the unit was a "traditions gebeit", meaning it had been founded early. It wasn't personal to the wearer, so it didn't take the place of an individual's "traditions badge".

Great HJ information.

[wilhelm saris]

a traditions triangle was a special, individually granted distinction, introduced on orders of von Schirach July 28, 1934. It is totally incorrect to identify the Traditionsarmabzeichen as a distinction for particulat units or even a Gebiet. This assertion is made by others, due to less knowledge or not understanding the German language.
The information about how and what is to be found in the Verordnungbslatt der RJF from Julky 28, 1935 page 5 mentions the introduction and gives specifis, also August 11, 1934, page 4; also November 24, 1934. page 1.

So, a Traditionslitze was not for a Gebiet, as a Gebiet was not Tradition; it was specifically for the wearer, whi joined the organization before a specific date.
There exists a specific formular (Antrag) to get the allowance to wear the Litze at the lower edge; this was later -when granted- authorized when the wearer had a document (Bescheinigung) that stated the granting and the date the boy entered the HJ-organization.

You have to wait about a year or less and then you can read all about it in my newest coming up book for Bender Publishing, over 800 pages and especially dedicated to triangles and Bann-numbers

[StephenL]

Thanks for the correction - two secondary sources specifically mention (Angolia & Brian Davis) the stripe as for "Traditionsgiebeten" - ie: established prior to Seizure of Power on Jan 30, 1933. I look forward to your book.

Have you found an RZM Blatt for the earlier HJ "Traditionsabzeichen"? It should appear with design specifications in their regulations if it ever was an RZM marked item.

[wilhelm saris]

Hello Stephen,

Just a quick return to the triangle: if the Gebiet would have been the Tradition then all triangles should have had the Litze, but look at original triangles in wear with photographs. If you would know how many mistakes are made by Angolia (and others) in his book(s)? That's who others can research and write about the subject. This does not mean I do know all, but I do actually research and from that you learn.

About RZM, I can give a simple answer. Many people think this is the holy bible, but it isn't! Many things are NEVER explained in that and from 95% of the items never a specification is published.
I do own the Mitteilungsblatt der RZM lets say complete from the first issue, to the last. Ánd often I wonder that a specific thing is not mentioned at all, nothing to say about a drawing or so. Bad luck then and you have then to find you another source!

[StephenL]

Believe me, I don't trust secondary sources, and know all about the errors in Angolia (among others), but until your book comes out, it's all many of us have :wink: I use primary sources whenever available.

I have been trying to get my hands on a RZM Handbuch und Mitteilungsblatt for years. I've been able to look through one, but would love my own copy to roll around in. Like everything, it is not the be all and end all, but it is another valuable tool and resource. I think it would be an incredible project to produce a facsimile edition. Any interest?

Stephen


Hello Stephen,

Just a quick return to the triangle: if the Gebiet would have been the Tradition then all triangles should have had the Litze, but look at original triangles in wear with photographs. If you would know how many mistakes are made by Angolia (and others) in his book(s)? That's who others can research and write about the subject. This does not mean I do know all, but I do actually research and from that you learn.

About RZM, I can give a simple answer. Many people think this is the holy bible, but it isn't! Many things are NEVER explained in that and from 95% of the items never a specification is published.
I do own the Mitteilungsblatt der RZM lets say complete from the first issue, to the last. Ánd often I wonder that a specific thing is not mentioned at all, nothing to say about a drawing or so. Bad luck then and you have then to find you another source!

[wilhelm saris]

A friend of mine is having one RZM Handbuch. I think he still may own it, but do not know if he is willing to copy it totally. I haven't seen him for a long time (at least one year), as he often is out of the country. When I speak to him I will ask him, but don't quote me on when this will be!

I do not want to critize books from others, as also in my books and my articles I do have mistakes, errors and gaps (as not always the material at hand is complete and also old sources do have mistakes: especially historical fraud), but I often have at least two old sources at hand and hardly (or hardly ever) I do rely on material or quotes from others in their books, as I know how wrong they often have translated the German language. Or it should be one of the persons I often call my mentors. On their quotes and material I can rely, when needed.

I started gathering uniform-regulations in about 1973 or so, when you had to write down by hand the regulations you wanted, as copying occasionally was not possible at all. I started to gather them for the fact I intended to write a "real" buckle-book, as this was in those days my knowledge (somebody snooped my ideas) and I lost interest and sold all of my buckles in 1983/1984. And so the bunch of copies grew, also after that. I even do not know how much pages I have copied, but in total I do have over 300 files. It might be 80,000, 100,000 or more.
This might be only 5% of all what I ever would like to buy me.
These days I don't buy as I know where to find material when I need it, but it is so much. In many occasions I cannot afford it to buy. I am planning for years to buy me foe example all Reichsbefehle from the HY that I can find, but this goes as high as 8,000 or more pages, as far as I am informed.

About this I could write even a book and what to think of the photo-prices these days. When you write a good book you at least have to show a 1,000 of them, many should be the actual use of the item the subject is dedicated to. But look on shows and eBay what is paid for a photograph. Even one not having any interesting thing to look at sells, as it is III.Reich and when it is really something
what is then one hundred bucks!

[StephenL]

Love to know if your friend can locate the RZM Handbuch - I think it would be a great resource for the collecting community to have access to.

Regarding the (in)famous badges with just the RZM logo (Schutzzeichen) and "GES. GESCH.", if it doesn't appear in the RZM publications, I don't know why a manufacturer would add the RZM logo, since the RZM logo signifies approval by the RZM and a manufacturer's license to produce RZM-approved items.

If it is RZM approved (or even just slapped on it by an RZM-licensed manufacturer), the question is why it doesn't also have the manufacturer's RZM license number (M1/XX or the earlier "MA"), as required. Put another way - if a maker had an RZM license to make these badges, they would add their license number; if they didn't, they wouldn't add the RZM logo at all.

Whether or not this is an RZM-controlled piece, an RZM logo alone doesn't make any sense. I've never been satisfied with the explanation that - as our American friends say - "sh*t happens", even in the RZM system. That just opens the door to any bad badge and makes nonsense out of all primary research.

[wilhelm saris]

I do not know how strict the controlling by the RZM was. The Handbuch is from about 1935. Later no new edition was published, other then the additional lists that appeared in 1938 with the Herstellunsvorschriften (rules to manufacturer) and one must rely on what is mentioned in the RZM Mitteilungsblatt.

New permissions and withdrawals are mentioned in their issues with regularity. But I know that they were not consequent, as not all new permissions and withdrawals were noted, as this I have found out during my various researches.
In some ways of course they were strict and the controllers from the Ueberwachungsstelle may have done a lot of work, otherwise there would not have been so many withdrawals for all kinds of permissions for manufacturers (Hersteller) and sellers( Trade and wholetrade etc): unvalid permissions (ungueltig erklearte Berechtigungsnachweise bzw. Erlaubnisscheine.

I have no idea how it was with the group M1 (Metallabzeichen-Hersteller) and M5 (Uniformeffekten-Hersteller). I have no time to make a list and for M1 I never was that interested in badges of any kind. But from some I have quite a good view what happened and I can tell you many, many concerns did loose their permission. With the M4-group (Koppelschloss-Hersteller): from the about 120 concerns to make them, at least 40 lost their permission before and during the war. This is also what I have found out with A1 and A2, concerns that manufactured headgear of any kind for political organizations.
When the headgear-series from Bender Publishing ever will be finished, in the last
volume a list of all manufacturers will be included with all found dates of granting a permission and when eventually a permission was withdrawn. And believe me many lost their permission for all kinds of reasons. these however were hardly ever mentioned in the RZM Mitteilungsblatt.
A list as for headgear will also be published in my newest book for Bender, which will be released possibly summer or fall 2009 and deals about HY triangles, shoulder-straps and all known Bann-numbers. At the end of the book a list with all manufacturers from A4 (Textilabzeichen) so cloth-insignia will be included. Also the withdrawal of their permissions will be mentioned and also here believe me a lot of them were not officially allowed to manufacturer anymore for party-organizations.

[Weibliche]

Hi Guys~

It looks like I am a little late in this thread here but I wanted to post a post card that I have. The BDM girl here is wearing the 'type 1' HJ membership pin that you all have shown and discussed throughout this thread. I am looking for a badge to display with the pic but it is so hard to find one with all the silver left on the obverse.

[Wim Vangossum]

That's a nice picture. Thanks for showing.

Regards, Wim :)

[Gew44]

Hi,
very interesting discussion.

If is of your interest I have this copy, (all the 800 pages) printed on 1935 format PDF.

[Gew44]

Another few images.
I would like to print a book, nobody help me and is a good idea?

[dragnet]

ges.gesch.............

[scowen]

For your interest:

In late 1931 the only official manufacturer was the concern of Otto Baudermann from Erlbach. His design was a ges.gesch product. Wearing an unmarked version was officially forbidden.
Wilhelm Saris

Here's a Baudermann marked piece with prong fixing......

Cheers
Don

[Garry M.]

Just going back quickly to Wim's information on the Traditionsarmabzeichen here is an example of the Gebiet 8 Niedersachsen application form I have. It states, as Wim has said, that the award is for individuals and not for units:

[wilhelm saris]

Suchlike Antrag will also be shown in my fall-coming HJ book. It is from Niedersachsen and has the original triangle also shown. Further I have a document in there for Alte Kampfer der Hitler-Jugend for Nordmark; a Bescheinigung for the wearing of the Traditions-triangle for Westmark; and one document for a female for the traitions-triangle from Hamburg. I had much more, but had to limit the material, otherwise the book would have grown into over 1,000 pages, and a two-volume work was not the plan!

The chapter about regular triangles, the traditions-triangle, as well as the cuffbands for females is covered with about 160 pages;
the chapter about shoulder-straps ranks and development and shoulder-strap buttons is about 170 pages and the chapter about special forces and formations is about 250 pages. The rest is in-depth explanation about how a Bann was constructed and further all known Bann-numbers, immediately to check with the specific triangle(s) and all A4 RZM manufacturers of cloth insignia, including dates of when a permission was revoked. This is about
200 or more pages.

[Frank Booth]

Wilhelm, when your book is released where will it be availible for purchase? I am eagerly awaiting the release.

[wilhelm saris]

Bender Publishing....

[Jo_Rivett]

On This thread, (http://worldwarmilitaria.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4445) it`s been said that the "usual" amount of sun rays is 19? Although that thread was started off showing a badge with 15 Rays, that IMO is 100% genuine. At the end of that thread i showed one with 23 rays, and here now, another with 23 Rays.
Has there been any Comparison checks done concerning the amount of rays? and if so, what is acceptable, 15, 19 and 23 ? or are there even more examples?

[stuart]

i just checked the 4 i have and they all have 19 maybe there are diff amounts by diff makers????

[wilhelm saris]

The official Baudermann with prongs has 19, as has also Assmann and the official drawing does have that many.
But, in some periodicals the drawings of the badge is shown with 15 and 17 and so they surely will have been made by the one or the other manufacturer. All of these will have the safety-pin, to be worn as the traditions-badge for shortly, replaced by the traditions triangle!
Observing available photographs it is only the larger version (2,2-2,3 cm in diameter), which is worn with the headgear, until replaced for good by the diamond.

[Weibliche]

Wim,

I posted this photograph a little over a year ago. My question is why is she wearing the pin on her kerchief? Was this normal for females?

Chrys

[wilhelm saris]

According to: Bekleidung und Ausrüstung der HJ, the official uniform-regulation ordered by the Reichsjugendführung der NSDAP from January 15, 1934, page 38:
HJ-Abzeichen ( to be worn by all units) at the box pleat (Quetschfalte) of the left breast-pocket 1.0 cm beneath the flap;
Traditionsabzeichen (the badge with sunrays) was only allowed to be worn by those HJ-members and BDM, which were a member of the organization since June 1, 1932. Also to be worn upon the left breast-pocket (2.0 cm at right from the Postdam-badge). When such a kid was a member from the NSDAP this badge also had to be worn upon left.

So, according the regulations this young females does not wear the insignia properly. She may have thought I am political and so I do wear it at my scarf.

For example political leaders and SA were allowed to wear the NSDAP party-badge upon the tie: for example Anzugsordnung für die SA from March 1,
1934, pp. 17-18. The party-badge had to be worn upon the tie in the height of the buttons from the breast-pocket. The pin had to be pushed through the tie and to be attached at the brownshirt where the buttons were position. This needed to be done as the tie was not allowed to hang loose when one bended forward. And so were orders for others as NSKK and
SS.