Announcement

**Larry deZeng** · 01-14-2008, 01:04 PM

Flossenbürg had a very large Ukrainian guard contingent during the last year of the war. It was a bad place. There were a lot of sub-camps where the prisoners were worked to death in stone quarries. I see that Voigt's civilian occupation was stone worker. He must have felt right at home at Flossenbürg (and yes, the "u" in Flossenbürg ist mit Umlaut - one of the very rare cases where a word ending in "bürg" has one).

--Larry

**peter u** · 01-14-2008, 01:10 PM

Hallo David,

Imo this wp is an authentic example.

It was sold in the early 90's on the militaria fair in Antwerp, together with bunch of other KL related wp's.
In that bunch was the wp of the second in command of KL-Hertzogenbosch.
That officer had much more KL stamps in his wp and these KL-Hertzogenbosch stamps were in the middle, so that was good confirmation that this wp also is an authentic example.
The KL-Flossenburg stamp is the correct one also.
Until today I still regret not to have bought that KL officer wp!

Cheers,
Peter

**Eric JB** · 01-14-2008, 02:24 PM

Hi Peter,

I know about those WPs in Antwerp many years ago....as we were there together that day.

The first look at this WP shown here is that the document looks good.
Looking longer and seeing the rest of the pages !!! I can say that I don't like the WP any longer at all.
IMO a very well made fake.
The rest of the entries are done very simple, Führerschein stamp is wrong - and also not mentioned for type or what class.
Handwriting and promotion etc.

For me a WP of an older man, checked for wartime service in the late 30ties and sent home.....and never came back.

I know that officer's WP too.....as it was just sold before we were able to look at it/to buy it.
In my mind / rememberance....the officer was one of the camp kommanders in The Netherlands.
Didn't have the seller 3 or 4 WPs of this Dutch KZ.

yours

Eric-Jan

**peter u** · 01-14-2008, 02:38 PM

Hello Eric Jan,

I'am breaking my head on it since this thread started, trying to remember how the low rank example looked.
On that Sunday I actually had only intrest in the officer, but alas I had not the necessary cash on me that day.
This is the only item that I have regreted to buy in my collecting career.
That officer that was sold that day was absolutly OK.
The low rank that was sold with it had the same stamps.
I have only seen two examples of KL-Hertzogenbosch and that were those two examples on the fair in Antwerp.

If these are fakes then the faker sure has used those original once as an example to create this one.

Like I said in my first posting in this thread, the KL-Flossenburg stamp looks identical to the once I have seen in the past.
My KL-Auschwitz wp has the same stamp in it.
& all the other wp's with a KL-Auschwitz - KL-Flossenburg transfers of February 1945 I have seen, have the same stamp.

A large majority of KL wp's are very poorly filled in, this aren't combat soldiers.

With what I see now I think it is an original.
But this is ofcourse my opinion.
Perhaps David can show more pages, his promotions for example.

Cheers,
Peter

**peter u** · 01-14-2008, 02:41 PM

For comparison:

I must add that I have seen fake KL ID booklets were authentic - or very good copies of original stamps were used!!!

Cheers,
Peter

**Eric JB** · 01-14-2008, 02:57 PM

Peter,

I did have a look at the lower ranks too !
But didn't buy one of them......as feeling bad at that moment because I (you and me) missed the officer, as that one was the jack-pot and the lower ranks felt like a small replacement for the big one.
I remember the how the other WPs the dealer did have looked like, and I must say that even after all those years there was more and better entries/information in those booklets than this one shown here.

The entries shown here looks good, but not convincing me.
I hope that David show us here the rest of the pages, and one can see what I mean, the pages shown here are well done ! and the rest is done in a hurry or without any interest in how it should be done the right way.
The rest looks just as a "filler for the empty pages".

I think that the one who made this WP did use an original one to compare the entries

yours

Eric-Jan

**peter u** · 01-14-2008, 03:08 PM

Hi Eric-Jan,

I recently encounterd a KL-soldbuch that was upgraded from normal concentration camp guard service to service in an extermination facility & that upgrade was done with the help of very well made replica stamps or perhaps original once and sure with the help of looking at an original.
The only mistake the faker made was that the owner of the soldbuch died before he could make his extermination camp transfer!

Two know more then one and that fair where those two original examples were sold is many years ago.
And indeed this wp is filled in, in a slovenly way.
So you might be right.
But I still give it the benefit of the doubt.
Viewing more pages sure would help.

Cheers,
Peter

**polux** · 01-14-2008, 04:12 PM

WP Nordwest

Hello,

I think that it would be interesting to present other images of this document.

The presence of stamps of control would allow to direct our researches.

For the moment, but without power bring a answer for lack of more information, two things bother me in this document :

1. presence on the page 11 of the stamp with the date of 28.11.37 (Vereidigt).

2. the registration of two different spellings for the unit, is once Wachtbataillon (with one t among Wach and Battalion) and down Wachbataillon (without t). I have to admit that it is the first time that I see the mention Wachtbataillon with one t. Usually, it seems to me that these guard units are mentioned Wachbataillon. To verify.

Awaiting for more preciseness than will be able to bring David.

Cordial greetings.

Polux

**Eric JB** · 01-14-2008, 04:31 PM

Hi Polux,

I have seen the other pages too.

And in this Wehrpaß there are no control stamps for his "KZ" period, on none of the other pages there is such a stamp, neither for promotions or whatever.

There are only control stamps for his earlier period, the once on the Beurlaubtenstande : Anmeldungen/Abmeldungen page.

yours friendly

Eric-Jan

**peter u** · 01-14-2008, 10:44 PM

Hello,

The lowrank that I saw many years ago, sure had some promotions in it.
What is normal for 4 years service.

Cheers,
Peter

**Notebaert David** · 01-15-2008, 03:58 AM

Everyone thanks to express their opinion. I have added the requested additional photographs.
Hopefully can bring these an answer on the arisen controverse.
In my opinion this Wehrpass is original. I have bought this from a very reliable source, about seven years ago.
If these Wehrpasses should be falsified, then more of these would come on the collectors market. Untill now I have, in these seven years, never seen one for sale. Not such as the Sachsenhausen Werhpasses which emerge everywhere and keep poping up.

David

**polux** · 01-15-2008, 12:58 PM

Hello,

Reading the new images presented by David leaves me a little perplexed.

I understand now the presence of the date of 28.11.37 on the page 11. This problem is so resolved.

As indicated by Eric-Jan, the registration of the Führerschein on the page 21 does not like to me.

The registration of the page 26 seems to me interesting and important but I do not manage to decipher it completely. German member of this forum could be useful for us. Beforehand thank you.

I admit that I am disappointed to not find any stamp of control for the change of rank. The presence of a stamp would have been able to help us and confirm the annexation of this soldier in the date of February 1, 1944. Damage.

For lack of made matching, I think that it would be sensible that David takes contact with the WAST and the BDC to obtain information about the military career of this soldier.

Personally, I prefer that the registrations which are in German military documents as the Soldbuch and Wehrpass are confirmed in a direct way by a stamp or the presence of a FP nr or in an indirect way by a documents annex. In that case of figure, nothing. Where from the necessity to examine more pushed beside the German archives.

Is this document is authentic, it presents a little usual military caeer. If the registrations of the page 12 are completely false, why, as indicate it David, no other documents must be seen on the rather particular market of the German military document.

Considering that precedes, I want to think that this document is authentic in spite of big doubt. To David to make the steps necessary to dissipate them.

To end, here is one image of a Soldbuch of my collection (with numerous stamps

).

Cordial greetings.

Polux

Attached Files

SB Wach Btl NW.jpg (42.4 KB, 290 views)

**Eric JB** · 01-15-2008, 03:17 PM

Hi Polux,

The stamps we see on the extra scans are all pre-KZ-period, so nothing there for us with those stamps.
For the KZ- period nothing is confirmed with stamps, only a simple writing and a very strange - IMO - fake Führerschein stamp !!!

Thanks for showing the part of page 2 of the Soldbuch you have Polux.

Do you have a reason why they changed "Wacht" to "Wach" ????, as I don't know why that changed a couple of months later.
I go with you Polux that "Wach" should be the right spelling.

And for the Sachsenhausen WPs.......I have no problem with most of them.
Years ago I visited a dealer who bought most of them after they were found !!!, from very bad condition due to water and damp ...... to the once in perfect condition - being in the middle of the box.

Although I have seen faked Sachsenhausen KZ WPs too, using the original ones as an example.

But to speak here over the Sachsenhausen WPs, while we are discussing this one David is showing here.............

I know that the WASt can give the final answer if this WP is good or bad, but I doubt they will give that information......as they are not that happy to share KZ information at all.

Sorry to say it but for me, the WP that is shown here is IMO a bad one.
Even when it is bought from a very reliable source seven years ago.

yours friendly

Eric-Jan

**Eric JB** · 01-15-2008, 05:19 PM

Gentlemen,

Wachtbataillon is not the right German name, as it should be written as Wachbataillon !

We see two different versions on page 11, with and without the T.
With a T on page 12, from 20.1.1942 t0 15.5.1943.
But we know for sure that they used the version without the T in Febr.1945.

On January 1st. 1942 by decree of Reichsführer SS Heinrich Himmler the unit received the name "Wachbataillon Nordwest".

http://www.germaniainternational.com/waffenss3.html
This information is taken from a dealer's site:
Look at album number 4.

Waffen-SS Hauptsturmführer Ludwig Henrich of SS-Wachbataillon Nordwest, album number 4 shows his official funeral directive ABT.II.A2., in the Bataillon Sonderbefehl.
Top left: SS-Wachbataillon-Nordwest.
Top right: Amersfoort, den 14.Februar 1943.

I have really no idea why the Germans would use two differents stamps with the T mistake in it !!!

Is it possible that the stampmaker made a mistake, but even then - would the Germans except such a stamp and use it, or would they order that a new stamp without such a mistake would be made.

The longer I look at that Wehrpaß and the longer I check the available sources the worse this Wehrpaß looks.

Maybe I am wrong here, and I really hope so, as 1000 Euro for an old man who wasn't a KZ guard is a lot of money.

yours friendly

Eric-Jan

Announcement

Wehrpass SS-Wachtbatailillon "Nordwest"

Wehrpass SS-Wachtbatailillon "Nordwest"

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread