Warning: session_start(): open(/var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74/sess_e5a55967b93a00b3ac33d704131a9c9cbecd6af3eadaf658, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Strange heer dedication? - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
CollectorToCollector

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Strange heer dedication?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
    #1

    Strange heer dedication?

    The dedication is as follows (each forward slash is a new line): (name changed to protect the innocent)

    "Ihrem Oblt. de Zeng/ 1. Zug Res. Offz./ Okt. 1935" On an army officers dagger

    The phrase "Ihrem Oblt. de Zeng. 1. Zug..." is clear to me as a formula often seen in dedications of this nature: To their Oblt x. (from, signed..) the unit in question.

    What puzzles me is the next phrase in the order given and in the same line: 1. Zug. Res. Offz. It doesnt make any sense to me that Res. offz. is referring to 1. Zug.... a platoon made up of reserve officers??? On the other hand if the Res. offz. was this "our Oblt." then I would expect the proper abbreviation in the right order "Ihrem Oblt d. R."

    Any thoughts appreciated
    Tags: None
    #2
    Since the unit is not mentioned in the inscription, it is implied or it is a given. If that is the case, then "1. Zug Res. Offz." makes sense and was probably an accepted way of doing the inscription. All it says is that he was a reserve Oblt. assigned to the 1. Zug. While some units may have done it that way, others did it the way you suggested. There probably was no hard and set formula for the phrasing of the inscription in 1935, if ever.

    Oblt. de Zeng

    Comment

      #3
      If it is not a too common name did you look in the rangliste and check if he was an active duty officer? The training of a platoon of reserve officers did happen. With the expansion of the WH around 1935 they were bringing many people into the reserves and were conducting refresher training like OCS etc. That is a possibility in addition to Larry's theory.

      If you don't have the book Pm it to me and I can look,

      Comment

        #4
        Thanks JOhn, I do have the ranglisten and there is a possible, even likely match.

        Your explanation is interesting and something I didnt know. Of course with the Heer in full expansion mode in late 1935 it does make sense: An aktiv officer leading a platton of reserve officers, for training purposes.

        Thx also to Larry for his info.
        Last edited by tenoriodj; 06-17-2008, 09:28 AM. Reason: spelling

        Comment

        Previous template Next

        Users Viewing this Thread

        Collapse

        There is currently 1 user online. 0 members and 1 guests.

        Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.

        Working...
        X