Hello friends,
I think we have reached the point where we need to (re)evaluate the document:
Almost 900 “hits” on the forum suggest a keen interst.
Facts:
- The seller sent it from his hometown
Berlin.
- The paper is
UV-neg.
- The paper feels and smells like the other period pieces in my collection.
- The text is written by a period typewriter that held the key “
SS”.
- The heading is “Adjutantur des Führers” and “Berlin, W8 date 24.4.1945”.
- Nowhere on the document (front) is the name of
RATTENHUBER or HÖGL mentioned.
- The addressee’s are RSD (Dienststelle 1. And 15.) SS-Begleitkommando, Kraftwagenparks and Polizeirevier 8, Berlin W 9.
- The addressee “RSD, Dienststelle 1.” Is underlined.
- The signature on the front looks very well like the one by
Oberführer des NSKK ALBRECHT Alwin-Broder
Comments on the forum:
... I disagree that the emphasis of the content of this document is about paperwork (ie. Ausweis). It is clearly about security surrounding the bunker area and the possible use of a stolen Ausweis to gain entry. Therefore, it should emanate from the RSD, not an adjutant. Especially not from a naval and NSKK officer ....
... I doubt that very much. Who signs their name with the surname followed by the initial?...
Proof: an other example
- Signature Albrecht with AB.jpg (23.48 KiB) Viewed 2721 times
...If genuine, you are quite right that this particular copy was that of the Leader of RSD Dienstelle 1, as indicated by the blue pencil underlining ...
- On the back is a list with 19 signatures
... If that is the case, the signatures on the reverse (which we didn't have the benefit of knowing about when first assessing the piece) would be those of that unit. They each sign to acknowledge they have seen it...
- There exists a list of members who were still present at the Reichskanzlei april 30th 1945. These list was provided by
Dienststelle 1. members HOFBECK, MAN(N)SFELD and BERGMÜLLER.
- Personel Dienststelle 1.jpg (198.78 KiB) Viewed 2721 times
- There are obvious small variations in the writing of the names (MANNSFELD with single “N”, RUPPENSTROTH / RUPPENSCHROTH)
- Out of these 19 signatures, 7 (perhaps 8) have been
identified as signed by men, known to be members of RSD Dienststelle 1.
... What I find very suspicious, is that the signature of the leader himself (Högl) does not appear anywhere...
-
MAN(N)SFELD recalls for april 30th: “present were Kriminalrat
HÖGL and his
deputy Bergmüller”
- The first signature on the back is that of
BERGMÜLLER, who for reasons now unknown apparently replaced HÖGL that day (24.4.). The title “
Kenntnis genommen 24.4” (read and understood) is written as it seems (
same handwriting as the first signature) by
BERGMÜLLER.
Now we’re leaving the “facts” and move to a more mix of facts and “suppositions”
This document was for the use of those security services that had entrance at the Reichskanzlei. (RSD, Begleitkommando, Members Kraftwagenparks and even the police).
This is not a document that was sent to authority’s (Civil or military), if that was the case, this document without doubt should have had “Führerhauptkwartier” in its heading.
You can imagine it was dispersed via the postbox every (security)service should have in the Reichskanzlei. I’m in the military: every document that leaves the barracks is “the full monty” (heading with unit, full grade, name and signature ...); paperwork or correspondence for the “ in house” use is “light” without the unit designation etc ...
... Outside the bunker, nobody would know who Albrecht was, if they could even read his signature! He was not a high profile figure...
Not 100% correct, ALBRECHT was an equivalent of
a full colonel and “
persönlicher Adjutant of the Führer”, he was in this function
since 1939 ! People who should know him did! All security-services with entrance at the Reichskanzlei
should known ALBRECHT, even by his signature, without name or rank added on documents.
The fact that the deputy of Högl (
Bergmüller) handled this document and prepared it for the “briefing of the men of Dienststelle 1. by writing “Kenntnis genommen 24.4.” indicates that he had no problem with receiving orders/information through a document signed by
an Adjutant even if he was a naval and NSKK officer.
The names of the members of Dienstelle 1. are not common knowledge. Still not 1 or 2 but
at least 7 appear on the back of this document. Even the
name sequence is logic (Bergmüller as HÖGL’s deputy first).
This is by no means an “important document”, it bears no important names, signatures or even content. Still, interesting remain place (Reichskanzlei / bunker) and timeframe (april 1945).
the quote:
... the implied suggestion that forgers do not go to extraordinary lengths is simply untrue.. is 100% correct, but ask yourself these questions:
- should “forgers” (for such a meaningless and valueless document) go at this length with their efforts, and forge
20 (ALBRECHT + 19 backside) different signatures ?
- If they (as it shows) knew the
names and hierarchy of the men of
Dienststelle 1. , they knew for sure RATTENHUBER and HÖGL and you can bet your ... these names would be one way or the other on the document ...
- If the “forgers” (as the heading “Adjutantur des Führers” clearly suggests) knew ALBRECHT, his function and his (perfect) signature, why did they not simply “upgrade” the document with his known grade and name ? (even if ALBRECHT
is not a high profile figure)
- Doing all this to gain a couple of hundred dollars ... is that realistic ?
I admit, not all questions are answered (Dienststelle 15.), but will that ever be the case? We have to do it with the data available ...
I rest my case,
Some might still use words as “suspicious", "not convinced" etc ... but that’s their good right.
At the end, I’m very happy with it and consider it 100% genuine and period (even if I paid to much).
Enjoy the weekend,
Peter
Comments are welcome