Totenkopf, Tiger Wehrpass

[keifer kahn]

I disagree that the use of "0" preceeding the days on date format stamps is a computer age characteristic.

Certainly it doesent seem to occur in period Wehrpass or Soldbuch but it was used on period Feldpost date formats.

Below is a good example ,(example is from Rene Chavez)

Thread starter Bill Grist,

Look at Entry 14

Date is -06.8.43.

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ad.php?t=80337

This just one of many i can use as examples.
I also have a family members feldpost dated -02.5.44.

regards KK

[Panzer Rob]

I disagree that the use of "0" preceeding the days on date format stamps is a computer age characteristic.

Certainly it doesent seem to occur in period Wehrpass or Soldbuch but it was used on period Feldpost date formats.

Below is a good example ,(example is from Rene Chavez)

Thread starter Bill Grist,

Look at Entry 14

Date is -06.8.43.

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ad.php?t=80337

This just one of many i can use as examples.
I also have a family members feldpost dated -02.5.44.

regards KK

KK-

I believe the issue is with the 0 preceding the month, not the day.

Rob

[keifer kahn]

Hi Rob,

Thanks for the reply.

Referring to entry 25 of this thread,

Kuratorium said "Has anyone of you seen a 100% wartime german date stamp where the days or months were in 01,02,03......form shown?.

regards KK

[Panzer Rob]

Hi Rob,

Thanks for the reply.

Referring to entry 25 of this thread,

Kuratorium said "Has anyone of you seen a 100% wartime german date stamp where the days or months were in 01,02,03......form shown?.

regards KK

I've seen the day with a number preceded by a zero but never the month... Not that I can recall, anyway. I quickly checked through images of the IDs in my collection which I have scanned in so far, and out of 90 or so SBs and WPs, while there were a few days with the number preceded by a zero, not a single date entry used a zero before the month; they are all either single digits, abbreviated, spelled out completely or entered in Roman numerals.

Rob

[Hundestaffel]

As Rob mentioned, this piece really must be taken "in hand". The date format / style issue is certainly that - an issue- but IMO is not the "end all" in determining the authenticity of this pass.

No big revelation here, but the true focus of this Wehrpass must be centered not only on the overall "flow" of the entries themselves but dates, signatures, stamps, etc (although with quality refence books - and a decent lazer stamp maker - it's easy enough to piece all those elements together).

At any rate, if further research does unquestionably prove this Wehrpass bad, then it is definitely one of the more well researched, "thought out", made and marked fakes to have hit the market.


"Hundestaffel"

[kuratorium]

Hi Rob,

Thanks for the reply.

Referring to entry 25 of this thread,

Kuratorium said "Has anyone of you seen a 100% wartime german date stamp where the days or months were in 01,02,03......form shown?.

regards KK

Interesting information that the Feldpost use this "0" format in round stamps.
But I mean the typical German date stamp , used in German wartime documents.
(see picture)
So I ask again:
Has anyone of you seen a 100% wartime german date stamp where the days or months were in 01,02,03......form shown?
Look in your Soldbuch or Wehrpass !

Another question -
does anyone of you in your documents identical "SS-Lazarett Berlin" stamps as on page 25?
I have examined many various documents, but all "SS-Lazarett Berlin" stamps looked differently.
SS-Lazarett Berlin had a large capacity, so we can found these stamps quite often.

[PzV]

I will also look at the printed characters with a magnifying glass to see if printed or on a modern printer (dots)- this has certainly been a learning experience.

[Marcel Banziger]

This thread has been a learning process for all I guess. Myself I learned A LOT by reading here

[PzV]

the printed sheet does not glow like modern paper under a black light and I raised the back in the event the paper was coated but it appears to be old paper without optical brightener. The charachters appear to be offset print (this blown up to 4800 dpi).

There are two Feldpost numbers clearly legible : 48544 and 48785, can anyone make anything of these (I do not have the Feldpost number listings)?

I am in the process of going through some of my Wehrpäße and have found none with the modern stamp style as on page 1.

This Wehrpass is noted as being printed on the back as "Neudruck 1942"

[Stormfighter]

Jim,

Is the photo glued and stapled or just stapled? I might have a few comments to make later. I am going to the National Archives next Thursday, so I'll see if there is a file for Oskar Meier. If there's a file, we'll find out if this Wehrpass is indeed an Armour hot dog

Barry

[Panzer Rob]

Jim-

I had a look earlier this morning and both numbers do check out OK.... however I think the second one is 48786, not 48785:

48544
(2.1.1940-11.3.1943) 5. Kompanie Panzer-Regiment 3 SS-TK-Division, dann 5. Kompanie Panzer-Regiment 3 SS-Panzergrenadier-Division TK,

(12.3.1943-7.9.1943) 5. Kompanie SS-Panzer-Regiment 3 (Totenkopf),

(8.9.1943-22.4.1944) 7.2.1944 6. Kompanie Panzer-Regiment 3 (3.SS-Division).


48786
(2.1.1940-11.3.1943) schwere Kompanie Panzer-Regiment 3 SS-TK-Division, dann schwere Kompanie Panzer-Regiment 3 SS-Panzergrenadier-Division TK.,

(12.3.1943-7.9.1943) 3. Kompanie u. Werkstatt-Zug (= A) schwere SS-Panzer-Abteilung, dann schwere Kompanie SS-Panzer-Regiment 3 (Totenkopf),

(8.9.1943-22.4.1944) 7.2.1944 schwere Kompanie Panzer-Regiment 3 (3. SS-Division).


Remember, the FPN database is relatively easy to obtain and with modern technology it is very easy to have circular unit stamps made with any unit/feldpost combination one wishes. I can't say for certain if these are forgeries, but I wouldn't base a decision one way or another on these stamps alone.

Rob

[Hundestaffel]

I'm really looking foward to viewing any / all information that Barry may be able to get from the National Archives....

Onkel HanSS, I love ya' to death, but feel that too much importance / emphases has been put on the date entry format(s) in this Wehrpass and in this thread as a whole....I fully agree that the extra "0" style date format is not a European standard (then or now), but considering the tens of millions of Wehrpasses issued during 1939 - 1945 alone, irregularities / inconsistencies in date format would have, for whatever reason(s), been inevitable.

I may (eventually) have to swallow down my pride together with my Dog Food over this issue (the chance one takes when making a decision on a visual alone without having the piece "in hand" or doing any qualitative research), but there's something in the back of my head that says this Wehrpass is a SSloppy, SS**tty looking original.


"Hundestaffel"

[Panzer Rob]

As Rob mentioned, this piece really must be taken "in hand". The date format / style issue is certainly that - an issue- but IMO is not the "end all" in determining the authenticity of this pass.

No big revelation here, but the true focus of this Wehrpass must be centered not only on the overall "flow" of the entries themselves but dates, signatures, stamps, etc (although with quality refence books - and a decent lazer stamp maker - it's easy enough to piece all those elements together).


"Hundestaffel"

Agree 100%. There are things I like, and then there are details that I have my doubts about. There's no question that the Wehrpass itself is original but when it was filled out and issued is too difficult for me to say based on scans alone. IMHO It's a very difficult call and I would really like to have this one in hand to study the signatures, stamps and handwriting. I've seen entries in high-res scans that looked questionable at best turn out to be 100% original upon a hands-on inspection, and visa-versa. The fakers are getting better and -- IMHO -- correct dates, units and corresponding feldpost numbers aren't always enough to make a solid call anymore.

It's possible that this is an authentic WP with some really sloppy entries, sketchy signatures and stamps and a few anomalies, and for Jim's sake I hope it turns out to be original. Still, my gut reaction on this one was confirmed by Hans' post and there are a lot of things working against it that just aren't sitting so well.

Great discussion though! This is what I love about ID collecting It's a constant learning experience and the knowledge gained from these types of threads is invaluable.

Rob

At any rate, if further research does unquestionably prove this Wehrpass bad, then it is definitely one of the more well researched, "thought out", made and marked fakes to have hit the market.
"Hundestaffel"

Yup, and we have nobody but ourselves to blame for that. These forums -- this very discussion -- while as positive, constructive and fun as it may be for us will without a doubt only help the fakers in increasing the quality of their works.

It's a double edged sword...

Rob

[christof]

I'm a beat desaponted about no member make any observation about the tag number... For me this number is realy to low !

[PzV]

Barry, the photo is glued and stapled, Rob, thanks for the Feldpost research! I will be very interested in what Barry finds out on this also! Christof, that is a good point about the Erkennungsmarke number also, thanks, Barry, when you are there maybe this will help also.

thanks for your help!

Jim