Thanks Thanks:  0
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15
  1. #11
    I noticed this thread when I was moving a load into more appropriate forums.

    I have a period reference showing that Bann 451 existed in September 1938 but it definitely didn't exist in August 1937 so these straps must have been issued at the very end of the life of the pre-1938 pattern straps. With that in mind it is odd to see chain-stitch on these particular ones.

    This is incidentally one of quite a few units I've noticed so far for which Saris gives conflicting dates (according to his book this Bann is first noticed as being in existence in March 1939). It should be remembered that the dates he gives for the units are for when he first sees them mentioned in his sources. They aren't always necessarily the actual date when the units were raised.

    My personal approach to these lists was that the only people who could compile them correctly and reliably were those who were employed during the period to do it. So what I do is to simply post transcripts of these period lists rather than reinventing the wheel by compiling them from many different sources today as Saris clearly did for sections of his.

    Whatever, two different approaches gives the collector two different sets of data to do with as he pleases. We're all definitely in a far superior position than we were a few years ago that's for sure :)

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Garry View Post
    I noticed this thread when I was moving a load into more appropriate forums.

    I have a period reference showing that Bann 451 existed in September 1938 but it definitely didn't exist in August 1937 so these straps must have been issued at the very end of the life of the pre-1938 pattern straps. With that in mind the chain-stitch would put me off these.
    Yes it's an interesting point about the Bann number, agreed. The chain stitch looks handmade one these. Non RZM but the construction, wear and meterial look good. I think this is a good set personally. As period photos show HJ did not always conform to regualtions and insignia updates like they were supposed to.

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Gefolgschaft View Post
    ...As period photos show HJ did not always conform to regualtions and insignia updates like they were supposed to.
    True Darin although it does seem nevertheless very odd to have a Bann created so late wearing straps like this.

    Not conforming to regs was bound to happen I suppose when you make people pay for their own uniforms.

  4. #14
    the stitching does appear home done for sure but are definitely good.

    PAUL

  5. #15
    Agree Garry. The collectors are in a much better position now that more research has been done and shared than when the SHAEF lists were the only thing we had. The Saris book is a massive volume, not surprised to see some errors, omissions, or other things. Important thing is that collectors now have a much better grasp on the Bann structure thanks to those like yourself and Saris that research the history and share that research with the collecting community.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

HJ-Research, the Hitler Youth Militaria Collector Forum
Copyright © HJ-Research.com 2009 -
Web Hosting by Vidahost "Hosting for Life"