Soldbuch photo question

**Glenn66** · 01-18-2015, 05:19 PM

I read recently on another forum that Soldbuchs issued prior to 1944 that have a photo in them are to be viewed with suspicion. I wonder why this is the case? Surely if orders came out to add photos to Soldbuchs then wouldn't any Soldbuch regardless of age be likely to be updated with a photo of the owner?

I have a Soldbuch to a Kanonier originally dated 1939 and the photo shows a guy with Unterofficier litzen and an EK2 which ties in with the promotion and award dates in the Soldbuch dated to June 1943 for the promotion and February 1943 for the award so to my eyes this ties in well.

As such is there any reason to be suspicious of this Soldbuch?

**Espenlaub Militaria** · 01-18-2015 05:19 PM

We also buy and trade your items and full collections!

**hucks216** · 01-18-2015, 07:02 PM

Not sure why they would think that but it is wrong. As you rightly assume, if a SB was issued prior to 1944 then it would just be updated, i.e. a photo put in and stamped. The one you show is fine provided the stamps tally with a unit/lazarett he spent time with.
Where it would be suspicious is something like a Soldbuch for someone with the Afrikakorps who was captured and spent from 1942/43 in Allied captivity. If that had a photo in it then I would be very dubious about it.

Bear in mind though that there are exceptions to the rules. Sometimes a Soldbuch made it right through to the end of the war never having a photo put in.

**harryamb2** · 01-18-2015, 07:34 PM

I agree with Hucks.

**Glenn66** · 01-18-2015, 07:41 PM

Thanks guys, this just goes to prove that you can't believe everything you read on the web (especially on the WAF)

**hucks216** · 01-18-2015, 08:12 PM

Here is an example of a Soldbuch issued in 1939 that had the photo put in it in 1943 and has an added note confirming that the person in the photo is the man concerned.

**Glenn66** · 01-19-2015, 06:14 AM

Very good information!

.

I should start on thread on this Soldbuch of mine, I think it is quite interesting as the owner was wounded twice and ended up being discharged in early 1945 due to a nervous condition. I would have expected it was a case of 'all hands on deck' in 1945 and probably many individuals saw the writing on the wall and tried to avoid duty (i'm thinking Klinger from M.A.S.H) and yet here is a guy who was genuinley excused duty. I guess he was a real mess?