Bann 828

[Jack]

As a "regular member" I can't see the current bann number list - so my question: Is this number 828 still a white spot on the map?
Because I know its name.

Regards,

Jack

 

[Garry]

I discovered the correct name of that Bann just a couple of months back actually and incorporated it into the Bann lists. Let me know what you think the Bann name is and I'll confirm if you're right

 

[Jack]

So it's no surprise, sorry. I've got a postcard with a Dienstbefehl (order of service) to a boy and there's a stamp of the Bann on it - so the name is Norden-Krummhörn (Gebiet 7, Nordsee).

 

[Garry]

That's the one Jack I came across it by chance in a 1944 set of orders from Gebiet Nordsee. No need to be sorry though, I would have bitten your hand off for that info a couple of months back

 

[Jack]

So I'm a little late . No matter. By the way - my order is from December 1943 - an already second one, forcible -with threat of punishment - to see the dentist.

 

[Garry]

Ah so your source is from late 1943? That's good to know. I had assumed until now that the Bann was created sometime during 1944.

 

[Jack]

Even earlier. Correction of my posting: The dentist's confirmation is from December 1943. The card was already sent by the Bann office in summer. The postmark says: August 23, 1943.

 

[Garry]

Would you be happy to show the document? You can send it to me if you would prefer but it would be great to be able to place a link to your evidence or at least have a copy of it locally. Incidentally, I found the name of Bann 826, also Gebiet Nordsee, around the same time as 828 in another document from 1944 but in the light of your evidence, 826 must already have been in existence in 1943. It's all a bit weird because I have proof for the exact date when Bann 824 was raised (also in 1943 but some months after your evidence for 828) so it seems that Gebiet Nordsee did not, for some reason, raise these new Banne in chronological order.

 

[Jack]

Here it is, Garry. I just made the name illegible.
The stamp and the partially readable postmark NO(RDEN) 23-8- is in higher resolution to the limit of the size allowed here.

You don't have permission to view attachments.

You don't have permission to view attachments.

You don't have permission to view attachments.

 

[Garry]

Many thanks Jack. Much appreciated! The server accepts attachments where the longest side is no larger than 1000px but it will try to render sizes a little larger than this. If it can't then you'll get an error message.

It's a shame that the postmark isn't very clear but no matter, what is clear is that 828 was definitely up and running in Dec 1943. Would it be possible to fiddle with the quality so that the Bann stamp is a little clearer? I assume that the "43" has now completely faded from the postmark?

 

[Jack]

My pleasure.
Yes, unfortunately the two digits of "43" are faded, and so did the time, e.g. 10 o'clock.

For me, August 1943 is really logical: First came the Befehl, then the treatment at the dentists, which apparently took several months and was confirmed in December 43.

A better photo of the Bann stamp is attached.

You don't have permission to view attachments.

You don't have permission to view attachments.

You don't have permission to view attachments.

 

[Garry]

That's great Jack. Many thanks!

Edit: subsequent to the above I later found evidence showing that this Bann was created in mid-1942.