Narvik Docs

[pantherv]

Just picked up these two Narvik docs...any opinions appreciated.

Thanks in advance...........Peter

[pantherv]

Narvik docs

And the LW

[Robin Lumsden]

The Dietl signature on the second document looks awfully 'laboured' when compared to the one below.

Looks like a forgery to me.

Max History can best advise.

[pantherv]

........

I see what you mean about the signature Robin. I've compared it to other docs and it does look a bit shaky.

Any other opinions.....Peter

[Brian R]

I definitely like the first doc, but I see Robin's point about the second and its signature. I'm not really familiar with later luftwaffe docs such as the one shown. Hopefully someone else can post an example.

[Simon O.]

Well spotted guys, yes the KM doc is good and the LW bad. Other than the shaky signature the colour on the stamp should not be blue.

Compare to these
http://www.germancombatawards.com/th...?threadid=7811


By the way, the reason that LW docs are dated later than KM and Heer docs is because the LW was slower in giving Gebirgskorps Norwegen it's lists of those that qualified for the award.

[pantherv]

.....

Well spotted guys, yes the KM doc is good and the LW bad. Other than the shaky signature the colour on the stamp should not be blue.

Compare to these
http://www.germancombatawards.com/th...?threadid=7811


By the way, the reason that LW docs are dated later than KM and Heer docs is because the LW was slower in giving Gebirgskorps Norwegen it's lists of those that qualified for the award.

Thanks for the comments guys. I went back and had a look at the LW Doc. The signature actually isn't disjointed at all.For some reason when the scan is re-sized it comes out like this (odd). But if the ink stamp is wrong, it's going back anyway.

Thanks ......Peter

[Simon O.]

Peter, also look at the differences in the mark 125-n in the bottom lefthand corner between this one and the LW examples in the link provided.

[ChrisA]

Hello

In the second doc there is also the gramatical mistake "IN" NAMEN DES FÜHRERS which should be a "IM"

/Christoph

[Simon O.]

Hello

In the second doc there is also the gramatical mistake "IN" NAMEN DES FÜHRERS which should be a "IM"

/Christoph

This style of doc (luftwaffe) uses IN rather than IM as seen on the KM\Heer style, so that part at least is correct.

[ChrisA]

Hello Simon

"IN" is totally incorrect! It is not german. It has to be "IM" no matter what type of doc. Like it is in english - "in the name of love" no matter if it is written on a NAvy or Army document. :-)
If it is really written on (a) original document it would be a major gramatical mistake. Don´t kown if they would print such mistakes on blank documents.

/Christoph

[Simon O.]

Christoph

I wouldn't dream of disagreeing with you about German grammar but on this Luftwaffe style of Narvikschild document the word IN is used, i don't know why or if it's right or wrong but that is what was used on this particular style. If you believe 'Im' was used then please show us some examples, just one even.

Or, if you would prefer i'll put up examples, like those published in 'Die ritterkreuzträger der Deutschen Wehrmacht, teil II: Fallschirmjäger' that include those of Uhlig and Görtz. Or the example in Niemann's price guide, page 576, the two that appear in Forman's guide to award documents, the example from Hartung's guide or the half dozen or so other examples that i've seen come up for sale the last few years.

[ChrisA]

Hello Simon

Of course I believe you and documents are not my topic. But it is funny that they use a incorrect gramar in such a official document. Every german speaker with a basic school education will see that it is wrong. Maybe it was printed that way and they didn´t bother to correct it. So it is just on this particular type of document or on several docs from the Lw?

\Christoph

[Simon O.]

This is the only one i know of Christoph. I can only speculate but it could be that the LW placed their order with a Norwegian printers (which is why we see two main styles even though Gebirgskorps Norwegen was responsible for issuing them all) and that the mistake was discovered too late.

The only that i can think of that would come close to this mistake as far as Norway goes is on the beautiful Ehrenurkunde. The mistake, if that's what it is, lies in the placenames on the map in the background. The Germans called the Norwegian port and city of Trondheim, Drontheim yet on this document it's spelled in Norwegian. Could it be a tiny sign of defiance from a Norwegian printers or is it simply innocent?

[pantherv]

.........

Found this LW Narvik doc in 'German Military Award Documents 1939-1945 ' by Emilie Caldwell Stewart.

Every other Narvik doc to the LW I've looked at seems to be this way.

Incidentally Simon, what colour Ink should the stamp be.

Peter