Himmlers signature

[CARL]

With this example, I would point out several points that lead me to believe that it is a genuine one.

Firstly, the majority of replica signatures are done with black ink. The ink used in the Third Reich period tends to really fade over time, becoming a grey shade as is present above. Study many examples of the Wehrpass for example, and this can be quite evident.

Secondly, examine the signature very closely and you will see the little "flavours" that identify the individual in question, i.e. Heinrich Himmler's signature. The tiny hooks and slants seem correct.

Next, signatures vary from one example to the next. Anybody willing to dispute this can simply take a pen and paper, do 20 examples of their own signature, and compare them. You will always find slight differences, and this must be taken into account when considering an expensive purchase such as this one. Over longer periods of time, people do alter their signatures too. Hitler's changing scribble was a fine case in point. So we must accept that just because something isn't exactly the same, it doesn't mean that it is a forgery. The question is...is it close enough? And what are the differences between the two? Having studied a few examples, I would say that whilst some differences are present, they are not so big as to rule it out.

A microscope will reveal the tiny speckles of ink that should be present around the signature, especially the turns and bends. We don't have the ability to magnify the piece ourselves on the forum but, we can see the detail quite well when using the zoom function.

The document should never be ignored either, the signature is not the only thing that we should study. This one has something that many replicas do not have. Notes. An easy add on I know, but often neglected by forgers.

Overall, I would say yes. This example appears good to me.

Regards,

Carl

[sandgroper]

Thanks Carl, you make a lot of sense.

[Paul D]

Good points Carl and i'm glad we are stimulating some real discussion re this signature and as you correctly point out the actual document itself which also needs to examined . I agree that slight differnces develop over time and whilst they cannot neceesarily rule it out with a signature like this and again as you pointed out an expensive one at that do they actually rule it as correct ?

Re the document some would argue that it seems to have rather a lot of notes and additions to what end we need to find out , hopefully Andreas will translate and give us the benefit of his thoughts on the matter !!

cheers

paul

[talltom]

does anyone know what the document actually says as carl is correct in the way signitures vary but "if" the document is for lets say latrines it isn't going to be original for himmler..... (just a point)

[CARL]

Thank you Paul. And yes, I agree that many notes are present. Help with translating those would be super.

Cheers,

Carl

[Wagriff]

Dave-have you done any looking into as far as the Content of this document? Does it match with verifiable facts? Himmler tended to sign many of his documents in a green pencil but this one is still looking very straight to me. It matches pretty closely to the signature in my collection. As Carl said, no one signs their signature exactly the same way each and every time-I know I don't. It's impossible-and they did'nt have autopens back then, so of course you will see minor variations. Everyone is different-Rommel, for example, tended to sign His documents with a Silver pencil...So, if I can venture an opinion here, I would say that I like this sig, but it all boils down to how You feel on it, of course. William

[CARL]

Yes Tom, the document is concerning the suitability of a Brigadefuhrer for a Field Command position.

Regards,

Carl

[Paul D]

The document is to both Juttner and Von Herff both well know SS Officers and makes refferal to the Wiking Divison and SS Brigadefuhrer Fiedler , it also i believe refers to a telephone call between Heini and Juttner about Fiedler so not an inconsequential document !!

[Paul D]

Herff was Commander of Persönlicher Stab Reichsführer-SS !!

[Woske]

Herff was Commander of Persönlicher Stab Reichsführer-SS !!

Sorry, Paul, but you are mistaken. Max von Herff was not the commander of the Personal Staff RFSS; he was chief of the SS personnel central office.
The document above was the copy sent to von Herff, denoted by the red crayon underlining his name and his initials and date noting he has seen it. It is 100% authentic with a genuine Himmler ink signature.
I would also disagree with Carl that the majority of replica signatures are done with black ink. In my experience, most are created with blue/black ink. Contemporary ink used in the TR period only significantly fades when exposed to light. In most documents that have been filed away, the ink looks almost as fresh today as it did when deposited on the page. The lighter appearance of the ink to which Carl refers is usually as a result of less pressure administered when executing the signature. Tiny speckles of ink are not commonly present around an ink signature, but are there in some examples. This is normally caused by the cheaper type of fountain pen used or as an indication of hesitancy. Pencil and pen notations are also common on forged examples.
Regards,
Woske.