This style of erkennungsmarke is not just for the military. Certain companies or factories gave there civilian workers an erkennungsmarke and these were the same style as the military. Offcourse there is a difference in the stamping. I will try to find a civilian example and post it here for reference.
Thank you Dschop, I’m learning so much from this thread!
I certainly don’t disbelieve you, BlackCat, as you clearly know far more about this subject than I, and I certainly intend no offence, it’s just that I always expected a POW would have received a standard square tag (I have a couple of those too, but can only find one at the moment, for some annoying and stupid reason).
In reply to your earlier question, I did, indeed, acquire the disc and Tropenmuetze in England.
Thank you both again for all your generous help,
Bob
(Addition: I’ve just had another look at the first link you posted, BlackCat, and realised the veteran did not end his captivity at Stalag-Luft I, having moved to various other camps from September 1941. It, therefore, seems unlikely that it was a souvenir! That said, it also seems strange that he should have kept it throughout his time in at least seven other camps! Curioser and curioser...).
Nice to see a kind of fixed dog tag.
Not so sure whether POW's were reissued new tags each time they moved camps, which might have been a big administrative job for someone.by Kohima
The using of "military style" tags for prisoners is no unusual. You only have to look at ones issued to German prisoners by the Americans, which used standard "US Army style" dogtags.
Very true!
As you say, to issue a new and relevant tag to a relocated prisoner might create massive administrative problems, although one of my square PoW tags has been overstamped - Stalag XVIIA to XVIIB - (presumably) when the wearer was moved to a satellite camp.
Conversely, not to have exchanged the tags seems to offer an equal administrative problem and even completely negate the point of the things in the first place, with the details of the tag having nothing to do with the prisoner’s present location (although it would only be a problem in the event of an escape and recapture - a rare event anyway).
I know it was fairly common among military personnel to retain incorrect unit details on their discs, so this argument doesn’t seem to really hold water.
As you suggest, perhaps it was merely a record of the first induction and retained throughout imprisonment (regardless of subsequent movements), and the prisoner’s number was all that really mattered.
I’m trawling through all my accounts of PoW life again, though I don’t imagine this is a detail that many veterans bothered to even register, let alone record.
I’m leaning toward ‘absolutely anyone who once went near the place’ now!
I’m really enjoying this discussion and learning lots...
Thank you again.
Bob
Similar Threads
Posting Permissions
.
Bookmarks