Ahnenerbe Wolfram Siever's signature

[Michael Fay]

Thank you Derek for your posting of a example. Can't be positive one way or the other .The upward curve on the connection between the r an s is promising, If that sig. is in a book, could you tell me which one?
-Michael

[derek]

The other side of your signature, this one being from 1944. They signatures are not from a book but Sievers's BDC file.
Derek

[Michael Fay]

Thank you again Derek, for your answer and 2nd example. Nothing is for sure, but your second example looks like mine, to my ,admittedly, untrained eye.
I went for this grouping after a positive comment from someone who knows Ahnenerbe paper documents in Germany, and my own research as to what was actually being written about in the doc.s themselves. As it is a "non-sexy" topic and rather oblique as to just what they are talking about, I was heartened to figure out exactly what they are discussing and , in general, why somthing this seemingly banal would matter to Siever's and the others. To me, as it was so esoteric, and yet a confirmable area of Ahnenerbe/Siever's/ Dr.Fehlre interest it suggested a good deal of legitamacy to me at the time.
I am of course, very glad to hear Max History feels for the moment ,that the non -Siever's documents "appear genuine," for the moment.
--Michael F.

[max history]

Michael,
Thank you for posting clearer images. Although I repeat that the only true method of authentication is physical examination, having now seen your follow-up digital photos, I would say that your documents are genuine. In your closer images, it is now possible to gauge the flow of the pen better. A high quality scan would be even better, but, coupled with the almost certainty of the accompanying documents being authentic, the balance of probabilities lies heavily in your favour. A nice group.
Max.

[Michael Fay]

Max, as you may imagine, I am glad you think so,not withstanding the ultimate test:a final examination, of course. As my true area of interest is: the Ahnenerbe's study of ancient "aryan" history and the pagan side of the SS), these documents dovetail perfectly into this area. I could almost say my Heilige Gral in my collection.
As I am a bit technically challenged, what kind of Scanner /or settings would I need to achieve a high quality scan (-which I would then post for your-and others, perusal) ?
I currently have an HP Scanjet 4890.

Thank you, Michael F.

[max history]

Michael,
Your scanner would be OK. You just need to raise the pixel rate slightly (400 dpi is OK for here) and scan just the signature. Resize it to approx. 650 x 400 and then save it as a jpeg ( 7 medium). That should be sufficient to attach it to this forum in a reasonable size and quality.
Max.

[Michael Fay]

hopefully better scan

Thanks for the instructions. I could not find dpi, but did find and raise the ppi. I seem to only be alowed to raise these levels in higher levels than 400, so had to a lot higher. Anyway, I hope this is better quality.
--Michael F

[Michael Fay]

since I accidentally did one in 24 bit greyscale, at a pixel size of:609x395, I am putting it up as a comparison.
-Michael F.

[max history]

It was this area that gave me concern. It does not have an unhesitant flow which is normally present in all authentic signatures. There is a slight 'jerkiness' to the formation of the letters. This is nearly always present in forged examples as the writer subconsciously cannot control a nervous motion in the hand, producing a hesitant flow to the writing. In some examples the pen is even lifted away from the paper creating a break in the flow. Having said all that, your example bears remarkable similarities to a genuine Sievers signature which outweigh the reservations. Without the benefit of physical examination, I am 95% certain yours is genuine.
Max.