Originally posted by DAKcollector1
View Post
-
To me personally this makes a tunic more attractive. At least you know it was actually used etc. A lot of mint tropical items came out of a Italian warehouse and never saw Africa or wartime use etc. -
Thank you!Originally posted by Johnny R View Post
Last edited by MilitaryCollect; 07-05-2010, 06:01 PM.Comment
-
Chris,
Typical hard used POW items, altered for use either on farms or work gangs.
The tunic is a conundrum as to why/when the alteration occured, but still collectable in it's own right.
Unless dated 1941/42 I would not call it DAK at all, though.
Thanks for sharing
MarkLast edited by NZMark; 07-05-2010, 06:33 PM.Comment
-
Hello,
Very true Mark. Tunic is marked "F 42" and has a very low RbNr.
C.Last edited by MilitaryCollect; 07-05-2010, 09:45 PM.Comment
-
NICE!Originally posted by DAKcollector1 View Post
I'd like a '42 dated example - & I do know of a '41 dated 2nd pattern tunic which is superb....and historically important.
RB# - very late 1942 manufacture.
Love altered tunics.
Regards,
MarkComment
-
Hello,
Yes, I'd love for you to have this one as well.
Btw, the RbNr is: 0/0049/00?1
Best,
C.Comment
-
Tunic alterations are common to see with issue clothing for service wear. I think given the care that was taken the alteration was done directly after issue as is often seen with wool tunics. Most later alterations are functional and not done so carefully. This is consistant with a resizing probably for a shorter soldier with broader shoulders who a standard size tunic did not fit well.Comment
-
Possibly Johnny,
But I don't think so in this case. The hand stitching is too shoddy and I believe a modification on this level would be handed to the company tailor for alteration, so most likely we should see it done with a machine.
Interesting all the same.
MarkComment
-
-
If you mean logic, I'll say yes
MarkComment
-
Nice rig..thanks for showing... Billbert
Comment
-
With the situation in Africa towards the end (if this tunic was there) perhaps the company tailor didn't have a sewing machine and/or the soldier did it himself. Who knows....Comment
-
Hello,Originally posted by tropenmilitaria View Post
Agreed! The DAK was on the run in the 2nd half of 42'. I would think that field modifications on an oberschutze's tunic from this time & theatre would be "crude" but effective such as this.
The tunic came from a picker in Holland ~ and is reputed to have come from a 90th Le. Div. veteran. But more fundamentally, this one has the look & feel of an Afrikan piece.
Best,
C.Last edited by MilitaryCollect; 07-06-2010, 08:26 PM.Comment
-
I doff my hat in your direction, my meager assumptions have been outweighed with this new logic. Regardless of timing never to be determined, a nice set.Originally posted by DAKcollector1 View PostComment
-
RB# = Late 1942 manufacture so it would doubtless have seen issue in 1943 at the earliest after sitting in stores and then shipping to - Tunisia? (if it went there and not Sicily, Italy, The Balkans, France, or The Soviet Union...) so why even mention North Africa and the German forces 'on the run in the second half of 1942'? It was the last quarter after Alamein & this tunic was not there.
Whoever did the alterations did so by hand and had plenty of liesure time to do them - so certainly not 'on the run' as he would have been wearing the tunic and not at all worried about where the hem or pockets sat.
No harm in personally wishing some things are more than what they actually are - but when you are putting this accross as fact, then I see a problem.
Logic.
I'm out - I've told it like I see it, and as the tunic evidences.
Good Luck in the sale, Chris.
Mark.Comment
Comment