SS Lettisch Erkennungsmarke

[Matt L]

Hi Nick & Matt , I am not trying to "muscle in" on you guys as you all know a damn site more than I ever will , but I would personaly say that these both look like "sell it to the punters" items. I do not like for ONE BIT that the SS side of things is "tough to see"??/ Surely it should be the opposite? But as I say "I do not know!! Sorry for my un-informative ramble!! Leon.

Not at all Leon- it's brilliant when people who are interested just give it a shot and participate; it's boring when everyone's just quiet and a few of us do all the writing As for your suggestions, you might be surprised at how crappy Erkennungsmarken can look sometimes- but then you have to bear in mind it's a purely functional item, rarely to be seen or examined; and more importantly I expect, that since they were most often made letter-by-letter with a stamp and hammer, it's not hard to imagine how tedious it could become for the poor buggers doing the work LOL Strikes being less or more deep, clear or straight aren't difficult to understand for the 20th or 50th disc of the day. And it's definitely the case that the SS was no different- they didn't have a higher standard or consider their discs more important and thus had to look better than others. Ironically, it was actually the Kriegsmarine that had the best-made discs; but that's because they often used a pantograph setup, so the markings are straight, legible, etc.

You are correct though that discs can look like something just to 'sell to the punters'; but unfortunately I think it takes a fair amount of experience to be able to recognize them vs. a legitimately 'crappy' original disc LOL After seeing thousands of the things, I can sometimes just get the impression that a crappy disc just looks likely to be real, or something's wrong with it and it needs to be examined more closely- but I couldn't say just what the reason is except experience. The disc Nick asked about actually has a number of elements that initially make it look not unrealistic- so in this case, it's 'crappiness' isn't a bad thing. I had to look at the unit to discover there were problems.

[Matt L]

And another one that I kept the picture…

Attachment 545486

Good Gazal- this is exactly the right way to learn good vs. bad and in the future be able to check things quickly onesself- a database of images is invaluable. Have you or does anyone else notice a further issue with this disc vs. the others previously posted?

[Gazal Al Shaqab]

Hello Matt, and thanks for your knowledge, as always.

As for me, before comparing the letters, I looked for the unit, and I found in my book (French Dictionnaire by Bernage and de Lannoy) that any of the two Latvian divisions had any IR (Infanterie Regiment), just as you explained everything in your first post, only Grenadiers Regiments (that is not the same, correct me if I ma wrong, even if it is close).
I saw however that in the 15th Division, the Waffen-Gren. Rgt. der SS 32, 33 and 34 were also officially called "LETTISCHES Nr. 3, 4, 5" Regiments (that stands in the book).
So I was wandering at the beginning if on the disks maybe the way used to count the regiments was this one (Nr. 3, 4, 5), and "IR 4" could stand for the Regiment 34, but it does not explain the "IR", as I didn't see "Infantry" anywhere in official denominations.

[Matt L]

The designation 'Infanterie' was changed to 'Grenadier' in 1942, so they're technically the same thing- one's just from the early part of the war, the other's from the later part. That further demonstrates why 'Infanterie' is not a proper term for this case since the Lettisch-SS-Freiwilligen-Legion only became a Division in September, 1943; a year after the term Infanterie went out of use.

My reference notes SS-Freiwilligen-Grenadier-Regiment 42 as being "(lett. Nr.4)", and Waffen-Grendier-Regiment der SS 33 as also "(lett. Nr. 4)"; then there's the listing under the Lettisch SS-Freiwilligen-Legion: "SS-Freiwilligen-Regiment 2 Lett. SS-Freiwilligen-Legion, sp. 2. Regiment/Division, dann SS-Freiwilligen-Grenadier-Regiment 33 I.-III." - so 33 was Regiment 2 not 4. So it's a bit of a confusing situation involving weirdly complicated nomenclature LOL All this really shows that just plain 'IR4' simply can't work. The real units' designations were far more involved and couldn't be simplified so much. Even if 'Infanterie' were ever a proper designation, which it doesn't seem to have been in the first place since even the earliest unit, the Legion, has 'Grenadier' Regiments.

The further issue with that last disc you posted is that it's marked to the 1. Kompanie, whereas all the others are marked to one of the Bataillone (II. and III.), which doesn't make any sense; rolls were typically kept at Kompanie level, and so far as I know there wouldn't be both Kompanie and Bataillon rolls in the same unit. It'd be one or the other and generally the only time you'd see a Bataillon marking in a unit that kept Kompanie rolls would be for the Batailon command, which essentially is its own un-numbered Kompanie. So we could expect either 1., 2., 3., etc. or I., II., III., etc. but not both. There seem to be exceptions to most every rule of course, but I've not seen one to this particular rule. Fakers, on the other hand, rarely undersand what they're marking, so it seems infinitely more likely that if you see this issue, it's a faker's mistake and not some super-rare original. Since there are all kinds of other problems with these discs, it's fairly clear it's just one more error.

[piterb1]

Sorry Matt , you are wrong. West-Europinian and American collectors (without Germans) have poor knowledge about german-dogtags, beaucous they have no accesss to a findings of tags. Sometimes inscriptions of ORGINAL tags have not sense or have many mistake (e.g. with non-existent company )
All serious collectors from Germany , Poland and Latvia when tags of 15ss div were found in large quantity, knows the first two tags in this topic are 1000% good!
I found many german tags ( about 1000?) in this some ss .
this mine latvian tags found near Landeck -all 100% good.
especially curious is 15 lett ss freiw diw - but is real and good .

[Matt L]

Sorry Matt , you are wrong. West-Europinian and American collectors (without Germans) have poor knowledge about german-dogtags, beaucous they have no accesss to a findings of tags. Sometimes inscriptions of ORGINAL tags have not sense or have many mistake (e.g. with non-existent company ) All serious collectors from Germany , Poland and Latvia when tags of 15ss div were found in large quantity, knows the first two tags in this topic are 1000% good! I found many german tags ( about 1000?) in this some ss . this mine latvian tags found near Landeck -all 100% good. especially curious is 15 lett ss freiw diw - but is real and good .

LOL Well I'll try not to take offense to all that. What I wrote IS all perfectly correct- it just seems it may not actually mean the disc is fake, which I didn't actually state as a fact either LOL Most of the time when markings don't make sense, it's because the disc IS fake- so in the extremely rare circumstance that there's reason to believe otherwise, it's simply a curious exception and hardly a failure.

None of the discs you posted, except those that are identical to the one I said didn't make sense based on the reference material, are themselves odd at all; not sure why you're posting them if your suggestion is that I'm wrong because many discs have what seem like errors on them (and I never said anything to the contrary). 1. San. Kp, 1. Art. Rgt., and 9./II./G.R. 32 are all proper, legitimate markings in the way that just 'III./ J.R. 4' is not- although I'd have expected the GR one to have SS in it. They're interesting to see though

If your contention is that you've personally dug up examples of the JR4 marked discs, then okay that would seem to suggest they're legitimate despite what seem like problems with them. It's a rare example of one of those discs that doesn't evaluate well because it doesn't make sense from a unit structure, reference list perspective, and that one can't possibly know might be real unless one just happen to know others had been found- hardly something that affects how serious or knowledgeable someone is LOL

[piterb1]

Hi Matt. A'm only suggest -sometimes good tag make not sense . a gruond verifies a different strange things .
furthermore sometimes good ground dug up tags have different letters like well-known good tags , sometimes good tags have differnt 1-2 letter , or all different numbers. this is because a stamps at different times wore out and were replaced.this is not simple matter.
I recommend to the colectors of ss tags book :die erkennungsmarke der ss einheit .
has some imperfections but only good tag / contrary by hoidal .
in this book are five tags like first two and about 30 other latvian ss tags.
regards

[Matt L]

That's a funny way of stating something as simple as good tags occasionally don't make sense, but okay LOL

And we're all aware of all that about the stamps varying, sometimes in the same unit- I tell people those things here all the time. And yes, I've seen many dug discs that do seem odd by conventional standards, and provide the exceptions to rules, as I mentioned. In this case it's only because you yourself dug up those examples- if that is the case (you still haven't said)- that I couldn't disagree about its authenticity; but even then there are stories of fakers 'seeding' search grounds with their fakes where they know legitimate diggers will recover them and 'prove' they're real so they can then sell them more easily. There apparently being so many of those really still very weird JR4 'Latvian' discs suggests they're either unissued hoard finds, or they're fakes but nobody knows it. There's nothing objective that suggests they're real- and all the circumstantial evidence says they're not. Only a claim that some were dug up legitimately exists to suggest they're real.

And books are only useful for the exact examples they show- since virtually every unit had its own unique discs, and as you've pointed out, sometimes more than one variant over time, the only real use a book's photos are is for direct comparison. But that's the case for any disc photos. There are dozens or hundreds here, and quite a lot as well on sites like Erkennungsmarken emarken.de all for free to study.

I am curious though- just what unit is the JR4 disc from? Do you know? I should very much like to understand why such an odd marking might be legitimate so perhaps I can better understand other odd markings in the future.

[piterb1]

hi .jr4 is mine own ground find ,sanitas and artillery dug friend. 33 ss grenadier regiment is ovcours latvian infantery regiment 4.you must know they have nationaly designation their regiments. they regard 15 and 19 div like 1 and 2 division of latvian national army . therefore double name.
about ground dug fake tags - only begginer collectors can mistake. in many reasons. fakes are bad or well know or can,t be good aged by fakers. some place were tags are found are all know ,but other place can know only few people . when you dug many years you know when,who and where somebody dug similiar tag. then you know wich tag is 100% good , and wich to be confirmed in other found.
in many times ground finds confirmed tags from questionable veterans drawer .e.g.
i have tag from old drawer- begleit regiment HG- its look like modern fake. I did not believe in its originality. two years ago friend found lw soldier with exactly the same tags (the same company) it was identical. before i never saw any tags (good or fake from begeit regiment). now is confirmed.
many tags are good ( e.g. found with soldier body or other period militaria)but unit never exist. it was makers errrors or sometimes made specially for period maker- i found tag with description arschloch
about jr4 -are fully corect tags .all people with knowledge about latvian tags know that. it was many times found in ground in Poland and Germany with other good militaria .from place when they left i have nice ss oficer buckle and latvian regiment badge worth together over 1000 euro .the fakers had to be very crazy man to dug it all
you can not believe me , ask international collectors with knowledge (e.g from Germany) about it.
in net its more fake then original dt .
for beginner and more advanced ss tag collector that book is good source beuacus have only good ground found ss tags.in book are small mistake with descriptions and missing some fundamental ss tags , but have all non questioned tags.
In Canada you can imagine about orginality (often rightly) but we about some
questionable tags know that are original. e.g. - i dug two dirlewanger tags and friends few more and we know like they should look.
regards

[Matt L]

So you're saying this is SS-Freiwilligen-Grenadier-Regiment 33 (lett. Nr. 2), and the J.R. 4 is its Latvian designation? That's something I would never have expected- and it means the marking isn't a mistake, but rather a choice of an alternate 'identity' that isn't possible to discover from proper unit references. So much for being able to understand other weird discs better from this example- the only way to know it's legitimate is to have dug one up yourself or know people who have LOL

Luckily my friend Jan S here on the forum has been sharing his and his friends' great discoveries with me for many years now, and there are dedicated fora around for metal detectorists who often post identity discs. I too have encountered the situation you did with the HG disc- believing something very odd probably wasn't real because of the quantity of fakes, and then discovering a dug one proves it's real. That's exactly what happened here in fact- there ARE fakes of this Latvian type, and the marking being completely 'wrong' by all Erkennungsmarke standards, and yet its proven to be real by discovering originals.

It's certainly the only good way to be incorrect in an evaluation- to find out something IS real, when it seems to be fake LOL Much worse the other way around because then someone's been cheated...