Possible postwar entries in Wehrpass

[kale010]

Hi Guys,

Been a while since my last visit. I was discussing a wehrpass of mine with a collector friend and while scanning the document we had a discussion about the entries regarding the awards mentioned in the wehrpass. Maybe we are wrong but we are having doubts on the EKII and the IAB.

Also there is no stamp on the page.. something I see in all my other wehrpasses..

Comments would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance

Bob

[peterm]

Hi Bob!

I can't tell for sure, but from Your pics the entries don't really look bad. Hard to say... With the absence of the stamp I don't have a problem, this sometimes happend.

I would wait for Ian Jewisons opinion on these entries.

Kind regards, Peter

[Ian Jewison]

I would wait for Ian Jewisons opinion on these entries.

Thanks

I would like a larger scan of the entries if possible? Difficult to say, of course with it being a Wehrpass you would not necessarily expect a signature and authorising stamp!

Not too sure about the bottom two laut Besizturkunde though from that scan! But the writing looks good enough...........

/Ian

[kale010]

I'll bring in a larger scan tomorrow guys. I'm just about to go out.

Thanks so far.

Bob

[peterm]

Thanks

I hope that was no problem, Ian! In my opinion You do a really good job on this forum.

Kind regards, Peter

[kale010]

Ok, here it is

Bob

[Gary T]

The entries look okay at first glance to me - is this a second or third issue wehrpass? And can you post some more scans - units etc?

[pauke]

entries

Just a personal observation, but the bottom two lt. Besitzurkunde entries by the same hand in different color ink look very childish or amateur to me as I read and write the script.

[Hank C.]

Just a personal observation, but the bottom two lt. Besitzurkunde entries by the same hand in different color ink look very childish or amateur to me as I read and write the script.

They look "forced" to me. Another question would be - is the same writing anywhere else in the book? On/about the same dates?

best
Hank

[Gerdan]

The writing of the last two entries seems to me like a calligraphy handwriting exercise done by a young student at school - not a military clerc making hundreds of entries.

Gerdan

[Ian Jewison]

I'm not comfortable with those entries at present. We could do with seeing further entries as mentioned.

/Ian

[CWP]

I think the handwriting is not totally impossible but I would feel better about these if they were made in the same ink at the same time, and I agree they are suspicious.

[kale010]

I must admit that my friend mentioned me on the entries and I never looked and studied the wehrpass because the lack of time lately.

I am seeing a few mix-ups now in the wehrpass. What triggered me is the picture below mentioning him being selected to spy in prisoncamp..

[kale010]

Further the wehrpass says he was still active for his regiment during that time....

And regarding the notation of him being selected by the abwehr... why is it not mentioned on the picture below...

[CWP]

That entry on page 26 certainly appears to me to be an original example of an entry found in a great many books. The meaning of this entry is that the soldier was given standard instruction in keeping quiet, observation and conduct if taken prisoner. It does not mean that he was selected by the Abwehr for anything, it does not mean he was trained as a spy or did any spying. I believe this standard training was compulsory for all Wehrmacht troops after a certain date.