Warning: session_start(): open(/var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74/sess_e4da104ac611947a112baa48345567a65e47c4369f41213f, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 possible FAKE SS-Ausweis - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
Emedals - Medalbook

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

possible FAKE SS-Ausweis

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
    #1

    possible FAKE SS-Ausweis

    What are your thoughts on this SS-Ausweis?

    http://www.oakleafmilitaria.com/images/0812p1-1.jpg

    http://www.oakleafmilitaria.com/0812p1.html


    Here's what I see. For starters the SS number ends with a letter at the end (?) The z.v.B. HA "Gestapa" - gestap"A" ? That should send up a red flag immediately. The round "SD" ink stamp is extremely questionable and resembles other fake stamps I have seen used on bogus SD IDs.

    The abbreviation for Unterführer is incorrect. I do not like the type and style of the typewriter characters - the strike is very thin and crisp, and the ink looks too fresh - not aged as you would expect to see on a 70+/- year old SS-Ausweis.

    The way the dates are written on the back, lack of a authorization stamp, the strange writing where the stamp should be, what is left of the signature on the photo does not look like it matches the one on the card, and all of the blue ink entries done in hand appear to have been done by the same person with a conscious effort to attempt to make them different.

    Also, the aging looks very artificial to me.

    Granted, there are always exceptions to every rule, and any one - or 'maybe' two - of the above 'could' be considered an exception, but ALL of these present on the same SS-Ausweis lead me to believe that it is a post-war fabrication.

    There are at least three other issues I have, but I'd like to hear what others think.

    Rob
    Last edited by Rob Johnson; 02-03-2009, 10:19 AM.
    Tags: None
    #2
    Quote:

    Granted, there are always exceptions to every rule

    ...but this is not one of them.

    You called it "right on the money".

    "Hundestaffel"

    Comment

      #3
      Bad.Bad.Bad
      Jeff

      Comment

        #4
        Oh...SS Dienstausweis with original Signature of Heinrich Himmler....
        Signing every SS Unterführers Dienstausweis might have taken the Reichshühnerzüchter until 1975- with no sleep and no meals in between.

        Nice photo, though.....

        Comment

          #5
          "Gestapa"

          Originally posted by Rob Johnson View Post
          What are your thoughts on this SS-Ausweis?

          http://www.oakleafmilitaria.com/images/0812p1-1.jpg

          http://www.oakleafmilitaria.com/0812p1.html


          Here's what I see. For starters the SS number ends with a letter at the end (?) The z.v.B. HA "Gestapa" - gestap"A" ? That should send up a red flag immediately. The round "SD" ink stamp is extremely questionable and resembles other fake stamps I have seen used on bogus SD IDs.

          The abbreviation for Unterführer is incorrect. I do not like the type and style of the typewriter characters - the strike is very thin and crisp, and the ink looks too fresh - not aged as you would expect to see on a 70+/- year old SS-Ausweis.

          The way the dates are written on the back, lack of a authorization stamp, the strange writing where the stamp should be, what is left of the signature on the photo does not look like it matches the one on the card, and all of the blue ink entries done in hand appear to have been done by the same person with a conscious effort to attempt to make them different.

          Also, the aging looks very artificial to me.

          Granted, there are always exceptions to every rule, and any one - or 'maybe' two - of the above 'could' be considered an exception, but ALL of these present on the same SS-Ausweis lead me to believe that it is a post-war fabrication.

          There are at least three other issues I have, but I'd like to hear what others think.

          Rob
          "Gestapa" with an "A" stands for Geheime Staatspolizeiamt. Amt is the German word for office. Gestapa is the abbreviated way of saying, gestapo main office or headquarters building.

          Comment

            #6
            Originally posted by Peter Manzie View Post
            "Gestapa" with an "A" stands for Geheime Staatspolizeiamt. Amt is the German word for office. Gestapa is the abbreviated way of saying, gestapo main office or headquarters building.
            Peter - I am well aware of what the English translation of "amt" is What I was pointing out was "GESTAPA" (Geheime Staatspolizei Amt), which - to my understanding - was formed by Hermann Göring in Prussia, run by Rudolf Diels, and reorganized and renamed GESTAPO when Himmler (and subsequently Heydrich) took over control in 1934.

            Look at the issue date on the Ausweis - 1936.

            Was there continued use of "GESTAPA" after 1934? If it was continued to be used, say to refer to the central office of the GESTAPO (GESTAPO Headquarters in Berlin) then I was unaware of that.

            My concern with GESTAPA is that it appears on a SS-Ausweis dated 1936 when I was under the impression that the title had been changed to GESTAPO in 1934.


            Rob
            Last edited by Rob Johnson; 02-04-2009, 09:14 PM.

            Comment

              #7
              Originally posted by Rob Johnson View Post
              Peter - I am well aware of what the English translation of "amt" is What I was pointing out was that "GESTAPA" (Geheime Staatspolizei Amt), which - to my understanding - was formed by Hermann Göring in Prussia, run by Rudolf Diels, and reorganized and renamed GESTAPO when Himmler (and subsequently Heydrich) took over control in 1934.

              Look at the issue date on the Ausweis - 1936.

              Was there continued use of "GESTAPA" after 1934? If it was continued to be used, say to refer to the central office of the GESTAPO (GESTAPO Headquarters in Berlin) then I was unaware of that.

              My concern with GESTAPA is that it appears on a SS-Ausweis dated 1936 when I was under the impression that the title had been changed to GESTAPO in 1934.


              Rob
              GESTAPA ;Secret State Police Office; predecessor of Gestapo, yes this is true. As to if the acronym was used after 1934, I can find no proof either way. I do however agree with your opinion of the Ausweis.
              Peter

              Comment

                #8
                I agree with Rob Johnson's comments concerning the unit designation, incongruity in the use of an SIPO stamp on an Allegemeine SS Ausweis and other tell-tale exceptions to this piece. Moreover, I would question the remnants of what I believe might be the original NSDAP stamp
                visible in outline only. I have not examined many SS Ausweis in hand and am relying on photos from some older publications (Pia's Nazi Regalia and Stewart's Militiary Identity Documents). These show a different configuration of the photo of the Ausweis holder. Did both Unterfuhrer and Fuhrer identity documents feature the placement of owner pictures only in portrait position or were they also placed in landscape position like the Ausweis under discussion? Was Unterfuhrer a generic term for all ranks below Fuhrer (officer) or was there actually an Unterfuhrer rank. I didn't think so, but I may be having a memory freeze here.

                I don't know if the Himmler signature was supposed to be original or a facsimile, but all the Ausweis had it. Finally, I notice the watermark pattern of the Ausweis. Does anyone believe this was a damaged Ausweis that was reborn if a more attractive Sicherheitspolizei mode, or is the entire piece fabricated from scrap?

                Comment

                  #9
                  Joe-

                  I am about to head into meetings for the good part of the day so I will have to make this quick.

                  You make some very good observations. Yes, based on studying surviving examples, it would appear that there was a very strict guideline for applying portrait photos to SS-Ausweis (although I do not have any evidence of an official order). Photos 'should' be cropped/trimmed to fit within the confines of the portrait area dictated by a outline. Out of all the Ausweis I own, those I have handled and others I have studied (well over 200) I have yet to see one with a photo attached other than inside the portrait area.

                  The Himmler signature on this pattern Ausweis should be facsimile. The only original Himmler signature I have seen on a SS-Ausweis is a very early, first pattern example with a SS membership number in the 3,000 range, issued in 1930.

                  Regarding the card - I believe that this piece was created using an original, unissued SS-Ausweis. These surface on various dealer and online auction sites from time to time and I cringe every time I see one, knowing that there is a very good chance that it will eventually resurface filled out and with a photo.

                  Rob



                  Originally posted by JoeW View Post
                  I agree with Rob Johnson's comments concerning the unit designation, incongruity in the use of an SIPO stamp on an Allegemeine SS Ausweis and other tell-tale exceptions to this piece. Moreover, I would question the remnants of what I believe might be the original NSDAP stamp
                  visible in outline only. I have not examined many SS Ausweis in hand and am relying on photos from some older publications (Pia's Nazi Regalia and Stewart's Militiary Identity Documents). These show a different configuration of the photo of the Ausweis holder. Did both Unterfuhrer and Fuhrer identity documents feature the placement of owner pictures only in portrait position or were they also placed in landscape position like the Ausweis under discussion? Was Unterfuhrer a generic term for all ranks below Fuhrer (officer) or was there actually an Unterfuhrer rank. I didn't think so, but I may be having a memory freeze here.

                  I don't know if the Himmler signature was supposed to be original or a facsimile, but all the Ausweis had it. Finally, I notice the watermark pattern of the Ausweis. Does anyone believe this was a damaged Ausweis that was reborn if a more attractive Sicherheitspolizei mode, or is the entire piece fabricated from scrap?

                  Comment

                    #10
                    Whether the card was unissued or reused I cannot determine from the photo. I am puzzled by the "shadow" of the two standard NSDAP authentication stamps usually seen on authentic examples. If this was an unissued card, then the stamps were applied in production? Or was this an attempted photoshop creation created on a heavy stock using an edited original as a pattern and printed as a photo?

                    Comment

                      #11
                      Originally posted by JoeW View Post
                      Whether the card was unissued or reused I cannot determine from the photo. I am puzzled by the "shadow" of the two standard NSDAP authentication stamps usually seen on authentic examples. If this was an unissued card, then the stamps were applied in production? Or was this an attempted photoshop creation created on a heavy stock using an edited original as a pattern and printed as a photo?
                      The shadow you are seeing is from the embossed seal on the card. This seal was originally done by hand on the earlier issue Ausweis, but over time became part of the production process. It appears on unissued cards of this type.

                      It's hard to be absolutely certain, but I believe that the card itself (the card stock Ausweis) is original. I don't think it's a complete fabrication...

                      Rob

                      Comment

                        #12
                        Fascinating. Thanks for the info Rob.

                        Comment

                          #13
                          Another "dodgy" one!
                          Attached Files

                          Comment

                            #14
                            Reverse.
                            Attached Files

                            Comment

                              #15
                              Grahm-

                              Yes, that one is beyond any doubt 100% fake. Peter Whamond (The Collector's Guild) had this on his site for a while. He promptly removed it upon being informed it was bad.


                              Rob

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next

                              Users Viewing this Thread

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 4 users online. 0 members and 4 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.

                              Working...
                              X