Tunic and Visor Cap of SS-Brigadefuhrer and Generalmajor der Polizei Willy Tensfeld

[der-hase-fee]

May I ask what the others think of the nametag in the tunic ??

Reads "Lensfeld" !

[wewelsburg]

Reads "Lensfeld" !

It could also be a cursive T.

[der-hase-fee]

It could also be a cursive T.

That's wishful thinking, clearly a cursive "L".

[DougO]

Well, it seems that this set has its doubters. With all due respect to the naysayers, let me address some of the comments, as I have the advantage of having the set in hand.
<O</O
First let’s review some of the concerns on the tunic…
<O</O
We have a comment about it having a fake cuff title, which is NOT fake, as confirmed by Dave Delich among others. It is a tight weave example, that is typically found on early titles. The numbers are a bit sloppy, but well within acceptable standards IMHO.<O</O
We have a comment about the shoulder board having a fake RZM tag, which is NOT fake, as confirmed by our very own Pete Manzie.<O</O
We appear to have a comment about the application of the RZM tag on the shoulder board. The comment is a bit vague, appearing to indicate that the RZM tag shouldn’t be under the board – which is a common placement, and/or shouldn’t be hand applied – I’ve seen RZM tags applied by hand, machine stitched, or simply glued down. So, I don’t think hand stitching, especially at this early date, is any problem. Or, perhaps he is indicating that RZM 61/35 didn’t make Allgemeine shoulderboards??? – but that would be difficult to prove.
As for the nametag, when my friend originally pulled this tunic out of an older collection where the collector had passed away, we both felt that the nametag read ‘Jenafeld’. Only after researching the name, the 19<SUP>th</SUP> Standarte, etc. did we discover ‘Tensfeld’. The 19<SUP>th</SUP> cuff title, Munster tailor label, date on the name tag, and rank then confirmed it IMHO. But, old German script is difficult to read. Anyone who thinks they can definitively read every letter is kidding themselves. It’s the nametags that are really clear and easy to read that worry me. Can I definitively say that it doesn’t read ‘Lensfeld’ instead of ‘Tensfeld’ or ‘Jenafeld’, no.
<O</O
Now let’s review the comments on the cap…
<O</O
The cap, in hand, does show significant wear on the interior and the exterior (as does the inside of the tunic). It looks as if this guy wore the outfit every day for a few years. I agree with the comments about the wear on the part of the tag that was protected by the sweatband being a bit more than one would expect. But, in hand, the tag does appear to have been there for a long time. It is molded to the side of the cap, the wear line on the part that sticks up above the sweatband lines up exactly with the top edge of the sweatband, and there is a stain/bug larve(?) that has embedded itself into the tag and shows a corresponding mark on the inside of the sweatband.<O</O
These early tags appear to be made from a loose weave cheese cloth that has had paint or some resin applied and then printed on. Could exposure to sweat, moisture, etc. and nearly 80 years of storage cause this cheese cloth tag to deteriorate a bit more than other materials used in the construction of the cap? Who knows? I have a fair amount of experience with visor caps, and the wear on different materials is often a bit different.<O</O
The stitches of the sweatband and the prongs from the side buttons also have left impressions on the inside of the sweatband. The lining shows a discoloration on the sections that sit above the sweatband as well. Most importantly, the materials used for the top, the velvet, etc. are all period, textbook materials. In hand, this cap is superb IMHO.
<O</O
But, I’m sure that none of this will convince those that have made up their minds on a few photos and comments by forum members – many of which have already been discredited in this thread even before my post.<O</O
I have no doubt about the set and am happy to have it in my collection. The set has already been vetted by experts who I trust and respect (no indifference meant to any of those who posted here – as they have their own expertise). At the end of the day, I guess sometimes we just have to agree to disagree.
<O</O
Doug<O</O

[PMan]

Group

Well, it seems that this set has its doubters. With all due respect to the naysayers, let me address some of the comments, as I have the advantage of having the set in hand.
<O</O
First let’s review some of the concerns on the tunic…
<O</O
We have a comment about it having a fake cuff title, which is NOT fake, as confirmed by Dave Delich among others. It is a tight weave example, that is typically found on early titles. The numbers are a bit sloppy, but well within acceptable standards IMHO.<O</O
We have a comment about the shoulder board having a fake RZM tag, which is NOT fake, as confirmed by our very own Pete Manzie.<O</O
We appear to have a comment about the application of the RZM tag on the shoulder board. The comment is a bit vague, appearing to indicate that the RZM tag shouldn’t be under the board – which is a common placement, and/or shouldn’t be hand applied – I’ve seen RZM tags applied by hand, machine stitched, or simply glued down. So, I don’t think hand stitching, especially at this early date, is any problem. Or, perhaps he is indicating that RZM 61/35 didn’t make Allgemeine shoulderboards??? – but that would be difficult to prove.
As for the nametag, when my friend originally pulled this tunic out of an older collection where the collector had passed away, we both felt that the nametag read ‘Jenafeld’. Only after researching the name, the 19<SUP>th</SUP> Standarte, etc. did we discover ‘Tensfeld’. The 19<SUP>th</SUP> cuff title, Munster tailor label, date on the name tag, and rank then confirmed it IMHO. But, old German script is difficult to read. Anyone who thinks they can definitively read every letter is kidding themselves. It’s the nametags that are really clear and easy to read that worry me. Can I definitively say that it doesn’t read ‘Lensfeld’ instead of ‘Tensfeld’ or ‘Jenafeld’, no.
<O</O
Now let’s review the comments on the cap…
<O</O
The cap, in hand, does show significant wear on the interior and the exterior (as does the inside of the tunic). It looks as if this guy wore the outfit every day for a few years. I agree with the comments about the wear on the part of the tag that was protected by the sweatband being a bit more than one would expect. But, in hand, the tag does appear to have been there for a long time. It is molded to the side of the cap, the wear line on the part that sticks up above the sweatband lines up exactly with the top edge of the sweatband, and there is a stain/bug larve(?) that has embedded itself into the tag and shows a corresponding mark on the inside of the sweatband.<O</O
These early tags appear to be made from a loose weave cheese cloth that has had paint or some resin applied and then printed on. Could exposure to sweat, moisture, etc. and nearly 80 years of storage cause this cheese cloth tag to deteriorate a bit more than other materials used in the construction of the cap? Who knows? I have a fair amount of experience with visor caps, and the wear on different materials is often a bit different.<O</O
The stitches of the sweatband and the prongs from the side buttons also have left impressions on the inside of the sweatband. The lining shows a discoloration on the sections that sit above the sweatband as well. Most importantly, the materials used for the top, the velvet, etc. are all period, textbook materials. In hand, this cap is superb IMHO.
<O</O
But, I’m sure that none of this will convince those that have made up their minds on a few photos and comments by forum members – many of which have already been discredited in this thread even before my post.<O</O
I have no doubt about the set and am happy to have it in my collection. The set has already been vetted by experts who I trust and respect (no indifference meant to any of those who posted here – as they have their own expertise). At the end of the day, I guess sometimes we just have to agree to disagree.
<O</O
Doug<O</O

Doug,
I agree with your accessment of the cuff title. No problems there to speak of, and as you said, you have the advantage of having it all in hand. In summary, if you or anyone else is happy with an item, that's all that matters.
We can talk about the RZM tag next time I see u live.

[DougO]

Thanks Pete. I'll try to bring it along to one of the upcoming Chicago shows so you can get a 'hands on' with it.
All the best, Doug

[John Pic]

Congrats Doug,nice score.

[Ian Hulley]

I'm pleased the cufftitle is acceptible ... obviously the very poor quality of the embroidery was my source of concern.

Ian

[revi]

It's a Sütterlin T, although somewhat unusal to the "original" Sütterlin T as one would expect this could be down to personal touch. Best, Seth.

[colt45s]

looks great

[judas]

This is what i call a classic . expert nay sayers now backpedaling i wonder how many tunics have been ruined here . by these experts with out hands on or like one or two posting on this topic even owning or have owend one

[PMan]

Backpedaling

This is what i call a classic . expert nay sayers now backpedaling i wonder how many tunics have been ruined here . by these experts with out hands on or like one or two posting on this topic even owning or have owend one

I for one am not back pedaling. My comments and observations stand.
Want to make that clear. Your other observations and comments are well noted however.

[judas]

I for one am not back pedaling. My comments and observations stand.
Want to make that clear. Your other observations and comments are well noted however.

peter your the Exception in this case and excluded

[markus]

This is what i call a classic . expert nay sayers now backpedaling i wonder how many tunics have been ruined here . by these experts with out hands on or like one or two posting on this topic even owning or have owend one

I think this is not about "ruining" tunics.

Personally I see posting a piece on then forum more like a chance to detect possible problems and increasing the chances of having a 100% original and historical piece in one's collection.

This is what every serious (!) collector should be striving for, right?

It's about an open mind and one can be glad that others take the time to comment and share their experiences.

If it's only about showing off a tunic and playing "internet hero", without being able to face potential doubts, then I see no real benefit for anyone posting on a forum in the first place.

The whole issue with uniform/cloth collecting is difficult, as we all know well. It is literally very tengible.

I personally think the vast majority of collectors have too low quality standards and they know it, but are in conformity with this. They prefer an item with the "benefit of the doubt", because it looks "cool", over it's historical correctness and originality.

As Peter Manzie correctly put it. In the end every collector takes his own decisions and must be happy with the piece - certainly not others.

Before this is misunderstood: The above is based on some general observations and not about Doug's tunic in particular. Only my personal 2 cents...

Cheers everyone and happy, enjoyable collecting!

Markus

[Ian Hulley]

This is what i call a classic . expert nay sayers now backpedaling

I am neither an expert NOR back-pedalling, I asked what others thought of the cufftitle. Personally I was concerned by the pretty poor embroidery of the numbers ... in my opinion an entirely legitimate question to ask, and it's certainly wiser to politely question than merely accept and follow like sheep.

Ian