Preliminary Document for the NARVIKSCHILD / opinions please

[Chris Boonzaier]

Hi Eric,
Here is another earlier one.
Your pics of the original doc are gone, but I would like to take another look if possible, as I said the wording sounded good for a period prelim/ausweis. It could very well be that it was worded more in the way of a notorised copy or bestaetigung. I have an honor certificate from the Luftwaffe high command, also in the notorised copy form, signed by a high ranking Reichsbahn man !!

[Eric Queen]

Chris,

Here is the image again. Your theory that this could be a notorised piece is interesting, but wouldn't that be indicated somewhere on the document? Also, it says clearly under the signature ( which is not Walthers ) "Major u. Fhr. I./ FJR 1" which would tend to suggest that this should be Major Erich Walther signiing.

Also, is "Fhr" the correct abbreviation for Fuehrer?

Thanks,

EQ

[Chris Boonzaier]

Basically, although my Germna is not perfect, I read it to say, "it is here confirmed that XXX is entitled to wear the Narvik shield" ergo, not awarded by the Maj, only confiormed that he has met the requirements to qualify.
The forms of German shortening are all over the board and iwould not rule Fhr out. That the docs were signedat regt HQ. is maybe only unusual to us because we dont know how these docs came to be issued.
I would also prefer to have it from the guy himself, and may balk at buying it at a show, but a few of the arguments against it fall away in my mind.

[Eric Queen]

In hopes of getting another opinion from another paratrooper collector, I sent a scan of this document to my friend and fellow paratrooper document collector Chris Mason.

His thoughts tended to confirm mine. He said
" you and I ( and most guys ) would take one look at this document and run away screaming
( or laughing )"

For what its worth.

EQ

[Chris Boonzaier]

Agreed, it is a long way from getting me to lay out any money for it, but I would not write it off 100%.
I have had vet acquired docs that wouldhave collectors running faster and laughing harder, but have been good.
As with all field made docs, its a grey area.

[CSP]

Eric, Chris, etc:
A very well studied friend of mine who collects documents exclusively - and is heavy in to the Luftwaffe- has always stated to me that when one sees "Fuhrer" in the signature block (eg, Kompanie Fuhrer, Battaillons Fuhrer, etc) that this indicated a period of temporary command (such as when the principle was on furlough or in hospital) - otherwise it would read "Kommandeur". Which adds yet another twist to things.
Scott

[Chris Boonzaier]

Which could explaim why it is not Walthers signature.
I would not put my hand in the fire for this doc... but I would not put the doc in the fire either....

[Gary T]

Hi Chris,
But surely the FP Nr is the crowing turd in the u-bend? I thought all Luftwaffe FP Nr's began with an L - that would give it away even if you did not have a FP reference book at hand to check with.

Cheers,
Gary.

BTW Fhr. is a correction abbreviation for Fuhrer.

[Chris Boonzaier]

A good question indeed, however, I dont know enough about how the Paratroopper units were used. Were they mixed in with Mountain units... was the 1st Btln detached to a Gebirgsjaeger regt ?
Notice the shield sees for Heereangehoerige, not Luftwaffenangehoerige..

Once again, I would maybe not buy this, but dont feel it has been proved guilty yet.

[Akira Takiguchi]

Hello,

I think it is signed by Walther, at least from my understanding of Suetterin. I hope somebody can come up with a scan of known genuine signature of Walther, if he insists otherwise.

Still... I know, from Mehner/Teuber, that Major Walther was a temporary commander (Fuehrer) of the Regiment in 1940. If he signed Major u. Fhr. FJR 1 it would go nice with this reference...

One more thing: the typist uses uppercase I for number 1 consistently throughout the document. This is not usual --- normally they use lowercase L, because you can't distinguish 1./Rgt. and I./Rgt this way...

[Chris Boonzaier]

Good point about Walter and good one on the I and l, the plot thickens :-)

[Gary T]

Although the FJ were attached tactically to the GJ their administration would still be done by their own unit and would therefore have a LW FP Nr. anyhow the FP Nr isn't a GJ units but as Eric said an army transport unit.
You're right about the army version being awarded - it should of course be the Luftwaffe issue.
All in all this document gives massive signals as regards its authenticity. At first sight whats looks acceptable is on closer inspection wrong is quite a number of respects - Army issue instead of LW, wrong FP Nr, wrong unit designation (I instead of 1), wrong signature (possibly), wrong date (again possibly), the incorrect use of Gefreite instead of Gefreiten. In fact there is almost nothing correct about the document. Short of having fake stamped on it in big red letters I can't see what further evidence anyone would need. Any one error could be explained as an admin error but not all of them.

[Akira Takiguchi]

Well, I should have done more homework.

Thomas/Wegmann says that Hauptmann Erich Walther was appointed to m.d.W.d.G(mit der Wahrnehmung der Geschäfte = acknowledged for the position) Kommandeur of I./F.J.R.1 on December 14, 1939, effective as of November 10, 1939. He was promoted to Major on June 19, 1940 (effective immediately) but no mention of change regarding his. He occupied the commander position until March 31, 1942.
Thus I now believe that it is not strange to see Maj. u. Fhr. I./FJR 1.

... but I do not mean it's right, just wanted to correct my mistake :o

[Chris Boonzaier]

I would like to add more salt to the soup, the "n" at the end of Gefreiten, I would say could be a very simple typo, based on the fact that the text is not copied from a formal award doc, and there are much more complicated things that are right, I cant believe that the person who had written this would make sucha grammatical error.

As for the mixing of the 1 anfd the I, I could understand if he had used the I as is usual for the Btln and the 1 for the regt, but he has used the I for the dates as well... that cannot be by error.

As I have said 3 times on the thread, I would not buy this, but all the holes we are picking in it could have very possible explanations... maybe not probable, but Possible.

[Akira Takiguchi]

>but he has used the I for the dates as well... that cannot be by error.

That's what I meant by consistently throughout. I understand that most german typewriter had 1(one) key, because they appear differently from lowercase L in most documents. Use of lowercase L for number one is something like Columbus's egg. So here's a story:

Major: OK, let's start typing Vorläufiges Besitzzeugnis...
Typist: Herr Major! My typewriter has been kaputt, sir!
Major: Then get one from the neighborhood!
Typist: Jawohl, Herr Major!
(after a while)
Typist: Herr Major, I've got one, but it does not have 1 key, sir!
Major: Verdammt! Do they count from 2 here? [ insert your favorite swearwords ]
Typist: Herr Major, I will use I for 1, is it okay, sir?
Major: OK, let's go ahead with that.

Sorry for a made-up story, which is abhored here

... as this has been fun, it's not too bad to pay $10 for that maybe