Hamann part 2
-
-
Hamann part 3Last edited by Si1964; 03-07-2004, 08:53 AM.Regards
Si
SWS Collection 01-14 Images Copyright.Comment
-
Deleated itemLast edited by Si1964; 03-07-2004, 08:55 AM.Regards
Si
SWS Collection 01-14 Images Copyright.Comment
-
HamannRegards
Si
SWS Collection 01-14 Images Copyright.Comment
-
Signature Dietrich
Hello Simon,
I have a original document signed by Dietrich in oktober 1944. His autograph looks a lot different from the one you have made a photo of.
I'm adding it for you to compare.
Jerome
Originally posted by Simon 1964Comment
-
1) The "photo" on first document clearly shows newsprint type or something like that coming through the back of the image: COPIED from a newspaper or magazine and not an original photo.
2) Perhaps only "the rule" with exceptions, but it was always understood in my Third Reich collecting days that Heinrich Himmler had a mania for using GREEN pencil to scribble his initials. And whatever the red things are in 6 and 7 they aren't "HH."
3) As Jerome notes, in the scans, posts 10, 15, 18 and 19, there is an entire letter missing from the "signature"-- "Dietrih" not "Dietrich." NOT a skip of the pen, either, but an entire missing stroke started up without the letter.Comment
-
Very intersting.
I had three thoughts as I reviewed the photos.
First, the personnel page at the begining lists decorations right up through the Oak Leaves and Swords. Yet the photo is one that clearly dates from the 1930's based upon the cap insignia. I was trying to figure out how some clerk could have repeatedly rolled that sheet into a typewriter to update Dietrich's awards without ruining the photo. I didn't see the newsprint coming through on my screen, but that would sure explain its pliability!
Second, as to the "Himmler" signatures, or initials, or whatever they are supposed to be......
Third, the copis of letters from Dietrich look as though they are supposed to be file copies. Someone please correct me if I'm uninformed here about German practices, but I don't ever recall seeing "file copies" of letters that the sender actually signed in addition to the one that was mailed. What would be the point of that?Comment
-
Jerome - in Your document is a heavy mistake.
It reads Oberfehlshaber instead of Oberbefehlshaber.
Sorry, but I think no clerk at that time would have given Sepp Dietrich a document to sign it, with that mistake in his rank.
Just my opinion
RobertComment
Comment