Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
474 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
638699
 

·
Moderator / Gold Bullet Member
Joined
·
9,951 Posts
My guess is early 30's. The piping around the collar tab and the lack of the swas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: keoki7

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,603 Posts
+1 for the early 30s...Bill
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
474 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Which calls into question the dating of the Wachdienst groups as found in Wiki. Wiki seems (note I say "seems") to be the only reference to the Nazi's and the Wachdienst groups. Other references seem to be simply a cut and paste of the Wiki reference.

The uniform gave me pause. It struck me as "early", just a feeling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Just a general note:

„Wachdienst“ is a standard German noun for a guard or security service, and you could expect the word on any badge or uniform of a private or public security guard in Germany or Austria. It is not necessarily the name of a specific organization and is certainly not limited to the groups described under that term in Wikipedia.

If you google the term with German language settings, you will find many modern „Wachdienste“ offering services from IT to building security. The picture style would make me put this photo between the 1920s and 1940s. Figuring out that shield logo might be the key.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
472 Posts
I would guess the picture was taken post WWII. I am seeing the above wearer's left armband is missing, his holster looks postwar (but I am no expert) and his hat is missing the 3rd Reich eagle insignia of these armbanded Wachtdienst individuals below (whose uniforms look very much like the above individual's such that the date of the uniform above is likely 1933-1945):

638733


................ picture borrowed from Rolf Selzer's website
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Good catch. That is obviously the same uniform. I‘d be curious to know what that white emblem actually showed. But the Nazi Wachdienst appears to have been such an obscure and irrelevant thing at war‘s end that details are hard to find. There isn‘t even a German version of the Wiki page.

The uniform could either have been denazified and been issued to a “Wachmann” in the immediate post-war years, or the absence of the “correct” hat, Nazi buckle and armband could be a reflection of war-time shortages. The Nazi Wachdienst does not seem to have been a top-priority organization.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
Is there a way to have a better view of the cap badge?
On most early post war West German caps the cocarde was moved upwards (WWI style) to repalce the eagle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Interestingly, Selzer is speculating that these gentlemen belong to a Wachdienst of the Luftwaffe, and is asking for information. So this would mean they have nothing to do with the late-war Nazi Wachdienst described in Wkipedia. He thinks the armbands might say „Wachdienst Baultg. d. Luftwaffe” (Guard service, construction management of the air force).

“Bauleitung” would make sense as the Luftwaffe organized a significant number of “Luftwaffen-Bau-Bataillone” (construction battalions), made up mostly of foreign volunteers and later POWs. They would have needed a Wachdienst.

638750
[/QUOTE]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
964 Posts
Wachdienst is defined as Guard Duty (special group of the Arbeitsdienst based on decrees of Aptil 29, 1936 (RGBl.I, p.405) and January 15, 1937 (RGBl. I p.14) as found in the July 3, 1944 War Dept. Civil Affairs Guide /German-English Dictionary of German Administrative Terms.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
474 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Interesting. As I pointed out in another post, the Wiki entry seems a bit dodgy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Wachdienst is defined as Guard Duty (special group of the Arbeitsdienst based on decrees of Aptil 29, 1936 (RGBl.I, p.405) and January 15, 1937 (RGBl. I p.14) as found in the July 3, 1944 War Dept. Civil Affairs Guide /German-English Dictionary of German Administrative Terms.
Is that a verbatim transcription with the parentheses, or your summary? The first part is a simple translation; Wachdienst in the broadest sense does mean guard duty, so as a soldier I‘d say „Ich habe heute Wachdienst“ if I were on guard duty today. The parenthetical information references the legal basis for something different, an organization, but one different from the one referenced in the wiki article, which didn‘t exist yet when your dictionary was put together.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
474 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Frankly, I would not put much faith in the Wiki piece.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
964 Posts
Is that a verbatim transcription with the parentheses, or your summary? The first part is a simple translation; Wachdienst in the broadest sense does mean guard duty, so as a soldier I‘d say „Ich habe heute Wachdienst“ if I were on guard duty today. The parenthetical information references the legal basis for something different, an organization, but one different from the one referenced in the wiki article, which didn‘t exist yet when your dictionary was put together.
That is the verbatim transcription of the entry in that source material. I realize that even some pre-April 1945 US War Department publications have some problems, but I have a great deal more faith in that original source than some fanciful Wiki entry which usually is sourceless. The entire dictionary is full of standard German terms explained for the soon to be occupying powers. I have had it in my reference library for decades. With the virus around, I don't have access to the Reichs Gesetzblatt issues referenced which are available at our local university library. I only have 1933 and 1940 copies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
It's not a matter of faith. The wiki entry and the War Dept dictionary talk about two entirely different things, neither of which in my estimation has anything to do with the guys in the photo. The generic German meaning of the word Wachdienst is not helpful. Rolf Selzer's attempts to read and interpret the wording on the armband, referenced above, are really the only promising lead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
964 Posts
Au contraire, as Rolf's attempt to decipher the cuff title suggested Bauleitung, which is a type of work force (Arbeitsdienst), perhaps there is a connection. The first picture with the simple sleeve insignia looked to me like a type of Wach und Schließgesellschaft company.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
What puzzles me about your original quote is that it capitalizes Guard Duty and then references the „special group of the Arbeitsdienst“. If somebody was talking about „the“ Arbeitsdienst in Germany in 1936/37, that can only be the RAD (Reichsarbeitsdienst), and their uniforms and headgear looked distinctly different from the pictures here. To clarify the quote‘s context, we‘d really need the Reichsgesetzblatt‘s text.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
964 Posts
I looked at the definition again and found that I capitalized Guard Duty when it in fact was small case letters. I apologize for any confusion. When I saw the underlined word Arbeitsdienst, I check the index and it noted each underlined word was further defined. You were correct. It refers to the RAD created by law. So we really will not learn what this special service group of the RAD was until someone can access the Reichs Gesetzblatter of those years.

As for Rolf's interpretation of the image above, I believe there are two cuff titles on the two men, not one. The two can be better seen on the cuff of the man on the left.. Two lines of test are usually too much for a single cuff title. So, perhaps we have a members of the Wachdienst with arm insignia and cuff title who were seconded to duty with the LW construction group as guards.
IMG_7726.JPG
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top