Theodore Eicke signature and who else?

[Doug Kenwright]

2

[Doug Kenwright]

4

[max history]

I'll now wait to be shot down in flames.

Get the fire extinguisher out Robin.
I am not happy with the Eicke signature or the one below it on the "driver" document. Admittedly, I have not had an opportunity to physically examine the document and therefore would not go as far as to say that it is fake, regardless of what kurskss says about its authenticity. Documents can have entries added subsequently. I had some documents relating to the driver of Oswald Pohl and some bright spark had added a forged Pohl signature to one of them in order to increase the value. The group was of interest to me anyway, so I still bought them (at a reduced price).
However, your postcard signature you post as comparison rings alarm bells immediately. These sketch portrait postcards of Eicke are well known in the autograph world for providing numerous fake and stamped signatures. Yours not only looks "not quite right", but also looks to be dated 20th April 1942. This is the date that Eicke was awarded the Oakleaves to the Knights Cross. He was not physically presented with the award by Hitler in person at Rastenburg until 26th June 1942. Now, apart from the fact that Eicke appears to have found time during the battle to sign a postcard, how can you explain that the image shows him wearing the award he was granted that same day?
Max.

[Doug Kenwright]

Max,no offence..but what exactly more do you need?

He was his personal driver,i have 19 documents signed by just about everyone that you have ever read about as far as "names" go... they came direct from the family in Canada along with pics etc..Korners brother is still alive and served in Das reich..

I understand the "wish" concept in that is either w"is"h or you wish it to be.I believe these documents stand on their own and i would not have presented them here unless i believed it so.There was no money involved in this transaction,all items were given directly to me gratis, so there is no thought of enhancement.

Just a note of interest...Do you see the light areas where the paper was folded over on the signature page? That is a waterstamp mark with the divisional commanders seal..

[max history]

I am still not comfortable with the Eicke signature or the one below it on the same document. As I said before, I haven't physically examined the piece and I would therefore not go as far as saying it is fake, but having just seen it on a computer screen, I would not be a buyer. I am more confident in my assessment of Robin's example.
Out of interest, can I also ask why, if you have a whole group of documents from this man's family, are you breaking it up and selling just this single piece?
Max.

[Panzer Rob]

Is it the same Eicke? I find it hard to beleive a Divisional commander would sign an extract counting for combat days.......as can be seen it should be signed by the Company commander which is normal in this case!?!?!?

I am not particularly comfortable with it......any other thoughts?


/Ian

Ian,

I’m never one to disagree with you, but the fact that Körner was Eicke's driver, and that from what I understand the two had a rather informal relationship with one another (for all his belligerence and evil doings Eicke was a pretty laid back guy when he was with his troops) I don't find it hard to believe that Eicke would have signed this document. I can't for the life of me make out the other two signatures, and it would be nice to know who the are- their rank and file. There is only one stamp, and given that there were several months in between each entry I would expect to see three. EDIT - just realized that there are three, the other two at the bottom of the doc! EDIT

I personally like the documents themselves. I am not an expert on signatures - never mind Eicke - but the two sig’s shown here do not (to ME anyway) match up like I would expect them to, considering that they were written 10 days within one another.

That's not to say that either are bad! I know my signature changes day to day depending on my mood, etc. But just judging the documents themselves, I like what I see. I'd still want to see them in person before making a final decision. Regarding the sig, well.. I'll leave that one for the experts


There is one more question I would like to ask... Why would you sell this one document when it - for all intents and purposes - belongs with the rest of the group? The fact that you got them for free yet you decide to sell one off puzzles me. They're your documents and you have every right to do with them what you please, but I don't understand why you would split this group.

Just my .02 American cents (which, in today's economy, doesn’t account for much!)

Rob

[Doug Kenwright]

Guys,just to clarify...the paper item with Eickes signature is but one of 6 with the same theme.Eickes name appears 3 times,two on one piece of paper. I am selling one that in no way breaks the cohesion of all the other documents..it just allows me to fund some more projects,and is redundant

[Hank C.]

Guys,just to clarify...the paper item with Eickes signature is but one of 6 with the same theme.Eickes name appears 3 times,two on one piece of paper. I am selling one that in no way breaks the cohesion of all the other documents..it just allows me to fund some more projects,and is redundant

So the paper doesn't belong to Korner? Because if it does/did, I would think it would break the "cohesion" of the others...

Hank

[Doug Kenwright]

Hank..it does indeed belong to Korner...you can see that at the top of the paper..it is redundant because the others are all the same , and Eickes signature appears twice more, in the same fashion

Freeing up this one will not dimminish the cohesion of this group,or degrade it any further as there are some 12 other documents missing to time.

Due to others who have begged me not to split the group..i will acede to their wishes and keep this in the fold.

[max history]

I also forgot to mention that in Robin's postcard image, Eicke wears the rank insignia of SS-Obergruppenf******252;hrer, a rank to which he was promoted on 20th April 1942!
Max.

[Robin Lumsden]

Get the fire extinguisher out Robin.
I am not happy with the Eicke signature or the one below it on the "driver" document. Admittedly, I have not had an opportunity to physically examine the document and therefore would not go as far as to say that it is fake, regardless of what kurskss says about its authenticity. Documents can have entries added subsequently. I had some documents relating to the driver of Oswald Pohl and some bright spark had added a forged Pohl signature to one of them in order to increase the value. The group was of interest to me anyway, so I still bought them (at a reduced price).
However, your postcard signature you post as comparison rings alarm bells immediately. These sketch portrait postcards of Eicke are well known in the autograph world for providing numerous fake and stamped signatures. Yours not only looks "not quite right", but also looks to be dated 20th April 1942. This is the date that Eicke was awarded the Oakleaves to the Knights Cross. He was not physically presented with the award by Hitler in person at Rastenburg until 26th June 1942. Now, apart from the fact that Eicke appears to have found time during the battle to sign a postcard, how can you explain that the image shows him wearing the award he was granted that same day?
Max.

The postcard isn't mine, Max. I lifted the photo from the net for comparison purposes as some members may not know what Eicke's signature looked like.

[Ian Jewison]

It's amazing how different something looks when you get the full story!!!

On it's own without who what where when it doesn't ring true!!!! Anway I still don't like the look of it...that's not to say it is right or wrong!

Now to split things up in my opinion is just as bad as faking an item.......

I have nothing further to say on this matter.

[max history]

The postcard isn't mine, Max. I lifted the photo from the net for comparison purposes as some members may not know what Eicke's signature looked like.

Then you are illustrating a forgery as a comparison again, Robin.
Max.

[max history]

Here are two examples of authentic Eicke signatures.
Max.

[Robin Lumsden]

Then you are illustrating a forgery as a comparison again, Robin.
Max.

I bow to your expertise in signatures, Max. I know this is your area of speciality.

Personally, though, I still like the item that started this thread.