H.G. Panzer Beret

[Richard P]

6. Easy to see zig-zag.

[Richard P]

7. Fairly uniform, slightly heavy zig-zag.

[Richard P]

8. One of Glenn's examples...rather wide or long for zig-zag, but very nice.

[Richard P]

9. One more of Glenn's, rather heavy stitch similar to the beret ( I think) and over extends in one spot on the wing. Perfectly legit for production sewing. Same one as the close-up above.

[Chris]

The thing that every single one of those eagles has in common is that every one of them IS ON A UNIFORM and not a single one IS ON A HAT.

If you have been paying attention, the point that has been made REPEATEDLY is that at this stage of the war, and for at least THREE YEARS AFTER the date on which this eagle would have been sewn to this beret, NO LUFTWAFFE HEADGEAR EVER HAD ZIG-ZAG STITCHING. So we have to believe that the little tailor shop on the corner was three years ahead of the industry standard and actually introduced this style of stitching to the entire German Air Force. What an incredible freak of chance!

I am always amazed that there is a steady one percent of collectors over the years whose approach to collecting artifacts is to find some complex, convoluted, extraordinary explanation, often involving time machines, of how something strange might possibly, maybe, conceivably, somehow be explained by a freakish, bizarre, explanation and could therefore, just maybe be original and so it can be in their collections.

My advice to collectors is to use the exact opposite approach. Apply the scientific principle of Occam's Razor: Given two explanations for any phenomenon, the simpler one is likely to be true. In this case, the simpler explanation for this 3-years-too-early-on-a-Luftwaffe-hat stitching is that it was put on a stripped Heer panzer beret to sell it to a collector of headgear with more money than intensive, in-depth, forensic knowledge.

[Glenn McInnes]

The thing that every single one of those eagles has in common is that every one of them IS ON A UNIFORM and not a single one IS ON A HAT.

If you have been paying attention, the point that has been made REPEATEDLY is that at this stage of the war, and for at least THREE YEARS AFTER the date on which this eagle would have been sewn to this beret, NO LUFTWAFFE HEADGEAR EVER HAD ZIG-ZAG STITCHING. So we have to believe that the little tailor shop on the corner was three years ahead of the industry standard and actually introduced this style of stitching to the entire German Air Force. What an incredible freak of chance!

I am always amazed that there is a steady one percent of collectors over the years whose approach to collecting artifacts is to find some complex, convoluted, extraordinary explanation, often involving time machines, of how something strange might possibly, maybe, conceivably, somehow be explained by a freakish, bizarre, explanation and could therefore, just maybe be original and so it can be in their collections.

My advice to collectors is to use the exact opposite approach. Apply the scientific principle of Occam's Razor: Given two explanations for any phenomenon, the simpler one is likely to be true. In this case, the simpler explanation for this 3-years-too-early-on-a-Luftwaffe-hat stitching is that it was put on a stripped Heer panzer beret to sell it to a collector of headgear with more money than intensive, in-depth, forensic knowledge.

Amen! I guess we will have to keep repeating this every 5 pages or so.



Best,
Glenn

[B. N. Singer]

...If you have been paying attention... NO LUFTWAFFE HEADGEAR EVER HAD ZIG-ZAG STITCHING...So we have to believe that the little tailor shop on the corner was three years ahead of the industry standard and actually introduced this style of stitching to the entire German Air Force. What an incredible freak of chance!

I am always amazed that there is a steady one percent of collectors over the years whose approach to collecting artifacts is to find some complex, convoluted, extraordinary explanation...My advice to collectors is to use the exact opposite approach. Apply the scientific principle of Occam's Razor:...

I can't see anything convoluted or fanciful in keeping an open mind to the possibility that such a piece of head gear could have had machine sewn insignia (again, not necessarily the manner exhibited here).

And why the continued reference to "the little tailor shop on the corner "? Is it so "complex, convoluted, extraordinary" that this item's insignia was not "modified" as some SS berets were obviously done, with a machine by a unit tailor? Oh I see, the SS had the good fortune to be clairvoyant of thought as to be so much ahead of the times in sewing technique!!

In my opinionm it is within reason that "Occam's Razor" could cut either way (machine vs hand) in a case like this.

Now just for those who might tend to get somewhat "rattled" about this, my stand (publicly at least) is not nay or yay for the item. It is simply that to point to the method of sewing (machine vs hand) and to use that as significant criteria for dismissal is erroneous.

B. N. Singer

[Chris]

And my stand is, "never buy a piece which requires 1/100th of this much explanation." Ever.

[tgn]

If you have been paying attention, the point that has been made REPEATEDLY is that at this stage of the war, and for at least THREE YEARS AFTER the date on which this eagle would have been sewn to this beret, NO LUFTWAFFE HEADGEAR EVER HAD ZIG-ZAG STITCHING. So we have to believe that the little tailor shop on the corner was three years ahead of the industry standard and actually introduced this style of stitching to the entire German Air Force. What an incredible freak of chance!

Chris, your logic fails me. You keep refering to the zig-zag stitch like it was a wonder stitch developed by the Germans later in the war. In fact the zig zag stitch was around for a very long time before that and commonly used in the garmet industry:

Zig-zag Stitch Machine
Helen Augusta Blanchard of Portland, Maine (1840-1922) patented the first zig-zag stitch machine in 1873. The zig-zag stitch better seals the edges of a seam, making a garment sturdier. Helen Blanchard also patented 28 other inventions including a hat-sewing machine, surgical needles, and other improvements to sewing machines.

Again, the standards you base your arguments on refer to factory applied insignia. The method of sewing insignia my company tailors, little corner tailor shops, wives, sisters, girl friends, etc. would have been whatever they thought appropriate or what was most expedient to them. I hardly think when the fellows came out on parade wearing their newly modified berets that they would have been reprimanded for having the insignia sewn with a ZIG-ZAG STITCH!

One thing about an Army's uniform is that it never ends up being uniform...

Tom

[B. N. Singer]

And my stand is, "never buy a piece which requires 1/100th of this much explanation." Ever.

Yes, of course, and as an experienced collector you are wise to do so; and not wanting to run the risk of "putting words in ones mouth" I would wager that the criteria used to base that judgment would be quite sound.

It is my contention that machine vs hand alone should not be placed in the "sound category" at least with this item.

B. N. Singer

[Chris]

So it's just a remarkable coincidence that of all the possible ways of stitching insignia to a cap at this early date, by all those wives and girlfriends, the way this particular, almost unique piece of headgear turns up just happens by chance to be the one type of stitching which all but the most-advanced collectors gravitate to as authentic? What an extraordinary stroke of fate, that the girlfriend of the working-class German trooper just happened to own a sewing machine with this option, and chose to use that stitch setting for her boyfriend's beret! No ordinary old baseline German machine for this depression-era gal or company tailor! She/he had one with the zig-zag stitch option and chose to use it that day, even though no one else in the Luftwaffe had seen such a stitch on a hat before. Wow, what good luck for us as collectors! Like drawing an inside straight in poker! Of all the ways in which it might have been done, it just happens to be the one that average collectors like most! What are the odds? At least as good as winning the lottery, I would say.

For the last time: Anything which requires 1/100th this much explanation is not coming within a mile of my collection. You go ahead and collect whatever you want.

[Glenn McInnes]

It is my contention that machine vs hand alone should not be placed in the "sound category" at least with this item.

B. N. Singer

My contention was never the fact that is was machine sewn (as you do see on SS Berets) but rather the heavy,over done, almost embroidered type of zig zag used.It is not a sewing technique from the period that I am used to seeing,especially on hats.

Do you know of any SS Pz berets showing this type of heavy sewing?You mentioned a Heer beret with a more conventional type of zig zag but that it was factory.

Even if the insignia was sewn in a more conventional way on this Luft beret,whether by hand or machine I still would be skeptical as so few were produced and without rock solid providence from the Veteran who brought it home (and I still might be skeptical) I would not touch it.

In my opinion this piece should not be in the $20K category but rather in the category of a stripped original Heer beret with unconventional Luftwaffe insignia sewn in a very unconventional way.

This has been a great thread....But I think it is up to any potential buyer of this item to make up their own mind as to when the insignia was applied.


Glenn

[B. N. Singer]

My contention was never the fact that is was machine sewn (as you do see on SS Berets) but rather the heavy,over done, almost embroidered type of zig zag used.It is not a sewing technique from the period that I am used to seeing,especially on hats.

Glenn

Two totally separate issues Glenn, which should NOT be weighted equally IMO.

B. N. Singer

[Glenn McInnes]

Two totally separate issues Glenn, which should NOT be weighted equally IMO.

B. N. Singer

Perhaps Bryon...But it is "food for thought".


Best regards,
Glenn

[Chris]

For the next year, whenever you guys are in an antique shop prowling around, look at the antique 1920's and 1930's era sewing machines, particularly the German Singers, and tell me how many have a zig-zag stitch setting. If it's one-in-ten, I'll buy you both a beer at the next show. It was not a common feature on ordinary baseline machines for the domestic market, then or now. Unit tailors may have been more likely to have more expensive, industrial strength machines, but still not what you would find in factories. It's just way too much of a coincidence to me. Far from being a "one-looker," it doesn't talk to me at all. It looks hopped-up, and the explanation required for it to be not hopped-up is like betting $20,000 on a horse to win at 200-to-1.