Wolff signature: what's your opinion?

[Erich B.]

I agree--if you look at the formation of the letters, the pressure on the pen strokes, the bleeding of the ink into the paper, and the actual execution of the letters, the example does not look as though it came from the same hand.
Erich

[max history]

Jim's example is genuine. The first one posted is not, in my opinion. Erich has correctly identified some of the faults with the first. It has all the hallmarks of a well-copied signature, but the most obvious is the lack of "flow" and the different character formation of some letters. These are things which cannot be copied. Look at the flow of the double "ff"...it does not exist. In authentic signatures, the writer strokes the pen without thinking and without hesitation. A forger subconsciously has a vibration and hesitant flow which is evident in the first example posted by Drapeau noir. Now compare the capital "W" and the way the "o" is formed. Copied, but not well enough.
Max.

[max history]

I have indicated below the more obvious faults I find with this signature. They are basic points, but there are more technical faults which can be ascertained and confirmed by greater magnification. Physical examination remains the only true method of authentication.
Max.

[jimt]

wolff signature

Max and Eric,
thank you for pointing these errors out to me , I completely agree with you and stand corrected, I was to hasty in my opinion.
jim

[Tommaso]

Since I would like to send back the item to the Seller I would like to have further comments about the last hours "news" from the SS Guys of this forum as Mr. Lumsden and all the others.

I would really appreciate it.
Thanks
Tom

[Robert H]

This doc, is not original. When you see only the sign. then you might think it is original but the whole thing is then different. Cautiousness about paper these days, and soon top class copys that will fool mostly everyone will flush overseas and mostly nobody will see it.

[Tommaso]

Really appreciated it Robert.

Thanks a lot for your comment.
Tom

[Tommaso]

Any other comment out there?
I did contact the seller to send back the document and I sent him the thread link to have the chance to have a check and maybe have a word.

Thanks all guys.
Tommaso

[Simon O.]

I have no opinion on the signature, it's not my field but i can make general comment on the document itself. To me something as pristine as this yet so late in the war raises suscpision. A good knowledge of the unit, where it was operating and the situation at the time helps a lot. With the price level a document such as this would command i'd like to have seen a good few other documents. Both to the unit in question and of stuff coming from Wolff's headquarters around this time in order to get a good feel for the paperwork being produced. Things like styles of doc being used, who was signing what and what with (ie. pencil or pen, what colour of ink etc.), stamps in use and that sort of thing.

[Tommaso]

Hi Simon,

the SS-Pol.Rgt.15 was on duty in north italy in antipartisan operation under Wolff control in 1945.
The paper itself is very close to an original.
Also the signature is very well faked since some of our senior members have been stroken by it.
Infact Max History and others Wolff's items collectors have written on this thread the same exact thing: a pretty good fake.

Thanks
T

[Tommaso]

Guys,
I really need help on this one, I paid quite a ear and I asked the full refund.
Thanks in advance.

Cheers
Tom

[Simon O.]

Hi Simon,

the SS-Pol.Rgt.15 was on duty in north italy in antipartisan operation under Wolff control in 1945.
The paper itself is very close to an original.
Also the signature is very well faked since some of our senior members have been stroken by it.
Infact Max History and others Wolff's items collectors have written on this thread the same exact thing: a pretty good fake.

Thanks
T

According to Munoz in 'Hitler's Green army' a company from I./Pol.Rgt.15 was actually guarding Wolff's headquarters around the time of this award. So the unit was in the right place at the right time at least.

You say the paper is very close to an original, do you mean a known original awarded to the unit about this time or a known original coming from Wolff's headquarters?

[Tommaso]

Simon,

Im talking about Bandenkampfabzeichen certificates.
There is just few printed original type known and this one is pretty close as far as I can see.

Cheers

[Tommaso]

The Dealer, a very big militaria "head", refuse to give me back the money.
There's someone out there who would help me somehow, maybe advising what to do?
I'm not happy with the document then I would say that even the 14 days inspection are expired I must have the right to give the item back, even since the Dealer still says the document is 100% original but refuse to have a look at this thread.

I will really appreciate any help since I've paid 1750 euros for that very good fake..
Cheers
T

[Robin Lumsden]

Tom.

I'm sorry you've had a raw deal with this one.

If you look at page 364 of Vol 1. of Charles Hamilton's Third Reich autographs book, there are 2 x Wolff signatures (one from 1945) that are almost identical to the version on your document.

However, Max is better qualified than me to comment on autographs, and I defer to his expertise.