This jacket was sold in the 80's out of War Relics Shop in Delaware and low and behold, found it's way back. Nice jacket.
-
-
Small world! Nice example too. But what exactly do you mean about it's path? Just curious about some of the details. I find these sorts of stories fascinating.
BTW, just saw a Size 58 2nd Model jacket (arm pocket) sell for EUR 221 today. I know it is an impossibly difficult item to find in any condition, not to mention near mint, but that's a lot of money!
Steve -
Nice example, somehow missed this earlier! Have become quite expensive, when they appear. Mine is very faded (but I like that look too).
If you want information, it is what I refer as 2nd Model smock, introduced after 1958 to replace the reversable splinter/white smocks ("1st model"). They are distinct garment from the jackets and not to confuse with various Sumpftarn jacket models! Appear to be mostly issued for patrols and training in winter mountainous areas and when on skis as a kind of windbreaker to wear over the wool uniforms. Photos show them up to at least late 60s, so there are a few production variants over time. There is unfortunately some disinformation spread about these being an early jacket model (possibly due to the Peterson book?)
Regards
KlausComment
-
Hi Steve. The shop owner sold it to someone in the early 80's and I guess it ended up changing hands and eventually ended up back for sale at War Relics Shop.Originally posted by Collectinsteve View PostComment
-
Too funny! I once had a guy contact me about some items I had on eBay. Seems he sold them to someone who sold them to someone else who sold them to me. This was over a period of 20 years. The really funny thing was I knew all three of these guys separately for different reasons.Originally posted by Ron P View Post
The world is a small place!
Klaus,
I think the confusion about the Sumpftarn smocks does come from Peterson's book. He treated them as a distinct lineage of the smocks predating the jackets. There was also some talk on this forum about trials in 1957 and there was speculation the smocks were part of the trials. Since then you've produced information about them being used in parallel for specific functions. Which, I think, makes sense.
As far as I know I have the only 2 pocket Sumpftarn smock. I wish I knew how that fit into the equation. Based on your information I assume it was simply a variation that was in parallel to both the 4 pocket Sumpftarn smock and the jackets, not something distinctly earlier or later. That's why I've stopped referring to it as "late" or trying to assign it a number.
From my camouflage collecting experience, I've found sequentially numbering items that are of different camouflage patterns to be confusing and possibly problematic (there's a couple of common reasons). For me, I refer to them as "Splitterarn Smock", "Splittertarn trousers", "Sumpftarn Smock", and "Sumpftarn trousers". Less chance of confusion in my view. But there is no one right way to refer to these items, therefore your way is just as valid as mine.
SteveComment
-
Steve,
thanks for confirmation. Not own the Peterson book, only looked at a copy a few years ago. Yes, an earlier poster here mentioned something about trials and unpopularity of the smock leading to abandon it early on, but this is disproven by photos of it in wear during 1960s (and he was wrong about some other things too).
I use terms Sumpftarn smock and Splittertarn smock normally too, but sometimes sequential numbering also to emphasise the lineage of the smocks as seperate from jackets. Is only reason really.
Regards
KlausComment
-
I wish we knew more about the smocks! I've seen 4 or 5 in person (I currently have two) and many on eBay over the years. They are not as rare as I once thought they were. I'd say a little more rare than 1st Model Sumpftarn jackets, but not by much. The rarest Sumpftarn item, by far, is the suspected S-H Polizei jacket.
The thing I find most interesting about the smocks is none of them have any BGS markings. Just the sizetag in the neck. I find it very strange that a relatively large number of these were made and none have markings.
As for the Petersen book, from what I remember he shows the smock, trousers, 2nd Model jacket, and parka. He refers to the smock as the first model, the jacket as second model. He also had a Splittertarn top and bottom (lucky bugger!). Given how little information there was at the time he made the book, I think he did a very good job overall. For the uniforms he documented he got far more right than wrong, plus he was one of the first to document some of the uniforms. Definitely some I'd never seen in color before. I've exchanged emails with him over the years and he's also a nice guy.
SteveComment
-
Yes, his setup of smock with full Sumpftarn uniform is wrong. Smocks were worn over the Dienstanzug. I have actually tried this out and it ok.
A little OT, but since you mentioned it
, I suspect the Splittertarn trousers must be prototype, that not mass produced. I have never seen a pair in many period photos of the smocks and only known example is in Peterson book. Would explain rarity.
Regards
KlausComment
-
Originally posted by Collectinsteve View Post
Hi Steve. Yes, I can attest that this particular smock/jacket has no markings other than the small size tag as can be seen in the picture. Ron.Comment
-
That makes some sense. A smock is meant to be worn over something else, a jacket is not. Generally speaking of courseOriginally posted by Klaus1989 View Post
IIRC he said someone found the uniform at the bottom of a bin that was slated for disposal. Or something like that.A little OT, but since you mentioned it, I suspect the Splittertarn trousers must be prototype, that not mass produced. I have never seen a pair in many period photos of the smocks and only known example is in Peterson book. Would explain rarity.
SteveComment
-
Sumpftarn smock
"...were found in a pile of disposed Sumpftarn Uniform pieces...", he wrote
Best regards
ReinerComment
Comment