This is a very nice and complete grouping. Wehrpass, Dogtag, 4 photo albums with over 800 photos!
Awards:
1) Sudeten Anschluss
2) EK2
3) EK1
4) War Merit Cross 2nd Class with Swords
5) Flak Badge
6) Winterschlacht im Osten
7) Luftwaffe Ground Combat Badge (Norway)
8) Wound Badge Black
Great photos starting in the Jungvolk - very sad album with the death notices for all the boys he was with. One album has a visit from Hitler! MANY 88 pics in action. Just a great grouping!
Interesting and very well filled out. I note that the EKII and EKI were entered on the same line, dated months apart - and this is not a Zweitschrift. Perhaps others would care to consider that when calling an earlier example an automatic fake.
Interesting and very well filled out. I note that the EKII and EKI were entered on the same line, dated months apart - and this is not a Zweitschrift. Perhaps others would care to consider that when calling an earlier example an automatic fake.
Er, who called it an automatic fake? No-one. Please stop putting words in people's mouths.
Er, it wasn't a quote, however this is (with my bolding):
"...as mentioned before the only time I have seen them entered this way is when they have been awarded together. Which these weren't."
Now you have seen a second example. Care to reassess the first one? Or would you like to cast doubt on this one as well?
My point is not that one should never be skeptical, my point is that this example should lay to rest your (and others) belief that the EKII and EKI entries were never doubled up.
Er, it wasn't a quote, however this is (with my bolding):
"...as mentioned before the only time I have seen them entered this way is when they have been awarded together. Which these weren't."
Now you have seen a second example. Care to reassess the first one? Or would you like to cast doubt on this one as well?
My point is not that one should never be skeptical, my point is that this example should lay to rest your (and others) belief that the EKII and EKI entries were never doubled up.
Hello F L Clemens,
With regards to award entries could you please say what particular past examples we should be refering to? This would help. IMHO, from Marcs scan both the EKII and EKI shown are dated and okay. I see no problems with them. I may be wrong, but from what Gary is trying to impart is that there are a growing number of fake EKI entries being added into Wp's over the past few years. With some of the examples shown on the forum I would agree. Is there room for doubt with two sides to the issue? Certainly.
My contention is that others were too hasty in casting doubt on the retrofit of the EKI in the same line with the EKII because they had not seen it done before despite one person who claimed that he is my grandmother. (Not sure I believe him about that and she didn't collect WPs anyway! )
I think the example in this thread bolsters my position on the other case, that's all.
PS Apologies to anyone offended by my devil-may-care use of the word "automatic". "Ipso facto" might have been better.
Er, it wasn't a quote, however this is (with my bolding):
Quote:
Originally Posted by F L Clemens
"...as mentioned before the only time I have seen them entered this way is when they have been awarded together. Which these weren't."
Now you have seen a second example. Care to reassess the first one? Or would you like to cast doubt on this one as well?
My point is not that one should never be skeptical, my point is that this example should lay to rest your (and others) belief that the EKII and EKI entries were never doubled up.
Reassess? I wouldn't have thought an historian would have quoted so selectively.
This is the original paragraph:
Quote:
I have some WPs where the EK entries have been entered as above. However these are all for instances where both levels of the award have been awarded on the same day. Although the ink\writing is passable the I Klasse notation clearly hasn't been written at the same time as the II Klasse. That doesn't mean it's fake of course - only Ian can decide if he's happy with it.
In the original thread it's quite clear I was referring to the way the entry had been made i.e. EK 2 Kl. + 1. Kl. I never said anything about them being on the same line. There's nothing wrong with the entries in the WP on this thread - they don't even bear comparison with the other one.
No-one here, including me, believes entries on the same line are automatic fakes, so I'm afraid you've laid nothing to rest. Sorry for that blow to your ego. You incorrectly appear to think we judge things by a stringent set of rules.
What do you collect exactly? And for how many years? Maybe you could post some examples of your doubled up EK entries and see what collectors with years of experience think of them.
My contention is that others were too hasty in casting doubt on the retrofit of the EKI in the same line with the EKII because they had not seen it done before despite one person who claimed that he is my grandmother. (Not sure I believe him about that and she didn't collect WPs anyway! )
I think the example in this thread bolsters my position on the other case, that's all.
PS Apologies to anyone offended by my devil-may-care use of the word "automatic". "Ipso facto" might have been better.
If you read the thread it wasn't just the EK1 and EK2 on the same line. No-one said that at all. It was the way they were entered together with the handwriting.
If anything it this WP undermines your case...here the EK's, even though they were entered at the same time, have seperate entries...even if they are on the same line.
...despite one person who claimed that he is my grandmother. (Not sure I believe him about that and she didn't collect WPs anyway! )
___________________________
Hello F L Clemens,
Really? That is most odd. Must have missed that one. Not sure I understand how they came to that conclusion as it has to be one of the weirdest comments I have read on the WAF. Too bad, mine didn't either.
If you read the thread it wasn't just the EK1 and EK2 on the same line. No-one said that at all. It was the way they were entered together with the handwriting.
If anything it this WP undermines your case...here the EK's, even though they were entered at the same time, have seperate entries...even if they are on the same line.
Hey Gary, your reading of that thread is quite different from mine and your response here isn't really clear enough to me to answer. "Seperate (sic) entries"? Do you mean separate dates or separate handwriting? How do you know they were entered at the same time - the hand is the same but they didn't change clerks every week at a flak unit, so same guy could have done it 3 months apart.
I also don't understand how you matched my quote from you with the wrong paragraph of yours.
In any case, there's no use in debating what the meaning of "is" is. The important thing is does anyone think the entries are bad and, if so, why. I think both cases are good.
Regarding your question of collecting - I have collected German paper since around 1980 when I was stationed in Berlin as a German linguist in the Army. The first award documents I ever bought were at a flea market in Frankfurt but I was already on a train an hour later before I realized they were fakes.
My collection was never bigger than a few hundred IDs, I am sure I would be envious of yours. I don't actively collect now, mostly doing research in German records and interviewing vets for book projects.
...despite one person who claimed that he is my grandmother. (Not sure I believe him about that and she didn't collect WPs anyway! )
___________________________
Hello F L Clemens,
Really? That is most odd. Must have missed that one. Not sure I understand how they came to that conclusion as it has to be one of the weirdest comments I have read on the WAF. Too bad, mine didn't either.
Regards
Teaching your grandmother to suck eggs - an English colloquialism. Means telling someone something they already know.
Super Luft Flak Wehrpass
)
Linear Mode
