I'm sorry voelender,,, I thought someone would come in and help.. For me this is a copy / fake.. The runes look wrong as well as the way its done etc.
- my comment was because no matter how bad one of these looks someone always comes in and says 'you don't know what your talking about', I just dug this up near the Halbe pocket last week'!...
Most of the original Dirlewanger ekm I have come across were in zinc, there isn't anything that immediately tells me that this one is a new strike on a wartime blank, but the runes don't look the same.
when these tags were first discovered they were zinc, and have only 2 break lines. This is a 3 digit tag. That should fit in with all the others, - but this one is AL, has 3 break lines and strange runes. None of the other 3 digit tags before or after this same roll number are like this.. And this is good.. It is why I wrote my first comment.
One thing that stands out that doesn't look right is the numbers, especially the "5". Totally different from the known original examples I've seen. Being made out aluminum and having three slots I believe is not a good sign. The original tags usually have two slots and are made of a lighter zinc, lighter than a normal soldier's dog tag. The way the numbers look alone would have me running...
Comment