Dogtag.

[Jos L C]

Interesting or not ???

Jos.

[Jos L C]

I thought this unit ever fought aside Meindl ??

Jos.

[bhholst]

Hello:
per Tessin Feldregiment der Luftwaffe 3 was formed in the winter 1941/42 on the eastern front. It was subordinated to Luftwaffen Div. Meindl and deployed 1942/43 in northern Russia (Lake Ilmen). and had four battalions. Dissolved in 1943 and used in the formation of the Lw.Feld-Divivisionen 21 and 22.
Bernhard H. Holst

[Willi Z.]

In my opinion the tag gets the "thumbs down". Without even discussing the tag overall, the printing is incorrect, from a German WWII point of view. The third battlion is never stamped or printed (in either tags, documents or Soldbucher) as "III.". The Germans only wrote the company designation in this manner...with a period. Both the company and battalion designation would be followed by a "/" before the Regiment is discussed.......as in 3./FJR.......or III/FJR. The period after the "III" and the lack of the "/" is a very bad sign. Not sure it was correct to use "Regt" as the proper German military abreviation for Regiment. Usually encountered as "Rgt". These mistakes should not be seen on original stamped Erkennungsmarken...these things were done by the proper unit level administrative types..not subject to too many variations from the norm.

Willi

[Jos L C]

Hello Willi,
I don't know much about this dogtag,but I know it is ground-dug.
I have another one that has traces of being in the ground for a long time.
The zink coin I found in my backyard while digging,it has the same pitting with white tallow like stuff in it.
Strange thing is that the III. first was 3 on that tag.
Take a good look.

Jos.

[Jos L C]

another view.

[Willi Z.]

Hi Jos,

Yes, your closeup clearly shows a German "3" is under the "III". This is very strange. 1rd Kompanie would be part of the 1st Bataillon. This "3" is very lightly stamped, unlike the rest of the tag. Seems very unusual. Still have a problem with the spelling of "Regt" and the absence of the "/". Clearly displays signs of being ground dug.......

Eric, any opinions on this one??

Willi

[Eric Queen]

I agree with Willi 100% on this one. Having a fair understanding of how the Germans used unit nomenclature has proven to be somewhat usefull.

A few years back I was asked to look at an army para badge which was being considered for inclusion in a major reference work. Beyond the direct problems of the badge itself, it had II/FIB scratched onto the reverse. This nomenclature would not have been possible ( the 2nd Batl of the Fallschirm Infanterie Bataillon did not exist ) of course 2./FIB ( Olt. Huebners 2nd company ) would have been possible. Needless to say, the badge was rejected for inclusion in the book. I can post a pic later if anyone is interested.

Eric

[Jos L C]

OK,the theory is clear,but what about these tags?
They've been in the ground for a long time,see the zink coin and compare with the tag.
I had to wash off the dirt myself and I've bought these for $ 10.- each a couple of years ago,so I can hardly believe they're faked.

Jos.

[Eric Queen]

I wanted to make a clarification as to what exactly it was I am agreeing to here. Its the absence of the backslash ( / ) that I find a bit strange, not the presence of the period after the roman numeral which is absolutely correct. The period should be present after both the company ( 3./ ) and balt. ( III./ ) designations. This is clear on all documents and reference materials I have seen.

Willi is correct that it is a bit odd that 3./ and III./ would be on the same tag. 3./ ( 3rd company) should be 1st Batl. ( I./ ) and III./
( 3rd Batl. ) should be 9. 10. 11. 12 companies. A bit of contradiction here.

EQ