Article about: Hi Guys, I just picked up this little slice of history – an original “filled out” medical attachment tag, related to a Munich citizen who was injured during an allied air raid. Trouble with
Hi Guys, I just picked up this little slice of history – an original “filled out” medical attachment tag, related to a Munich citizen who was injured during an allied air raid. Trouble with that claim by the seller is …
1) There was no allied raid on Munich in early July
2) The tag mentions “grenade shrapnel”
I wonder how he got injured then??
Anyway, to the tag itself..... the title is "Tag for injured"
( note how the edges are perforated to allow 1, 2 or no stripes showing )
Immediate transport - two red stripes
Not Urgent – one red stripe
Walking – no red stripe
The penciled entries on the front read as follows:
Name: Hans Weber
Wohnort (Residence ): Munich
Strasse (Street ): Schelling Street
Verletzung (Injury ): Grenade shrapnel on left thigh
Erhielt an starkwirkenden Arzneien (Received strong drugs ) Morphine 0.5 at 11:40 am
The entries on the reverse read:
Abbildung durch abschnürbinde oder dreieckstuch ( Tying by triangular cloth: ) at 11:40 am
Wo? ( Where? ): Hospital
Sonstige hilfeleistungen (Other assistance services ): Operation preparations
Name of doctor: Doctor Klaus
Issued on 4th July 1944
I'm sure my translation skills are lacking - please forgive me..
Nothing mind-blowing but just a nice bit of “collection candy” that amazes me that it has survived…..
Cheers, Dan
" I'm putting off procrastination until next week "
Hi Guys, I just picked up this little slice of history – an original “filled out” medical attachment tag, related to a Munich citizen who was injured during an allied air raid. Trouble with that claim by the seller is …
1) There was no allied raid on Munich in early July
2) The tag mentions “grenade shrapnel”
I wonder how he got injured then??
by Danmark
I know. ... but I'll be guided by Hpl and our other paperwork experts.
I would never claim to be an expert on paperwork (or anything else, for that matter), but here are my two cents:
The entries as such wouldn't worry me. Munich is simply the casualty's place of residence; nowhere on the card does it says that this is where he was actually injured or that it had anything to do with an air raid (that is just the seller's conclusion). Also note that it says his torniquet was applied at a field hospital "Feldlaz." = "Feldlazarett". The entries also look good to me in terms of period handwriting, spelling and plausibility.
In any case, the tag is clearly of a civilian nature (maybe used by the German Red Cross), as it differs from the Wehrmacht tag in several aspects, using civilian terminology throughout (for example "Verletzte" rather than "Verwundete", omitting the "rank" and "unit" remarks for the attending physician etc.).
But... According to this thread over at the WAF...
...these Anhängezettel für Verletzte are post-war ones, often sold as being from the Third Reich (which would mean the entries are totally fake after all).
I cannot vouch for the accuracy of that information. So, either it's period, but civilian, or a falsification...
Thanks Andreas!
For some reason for me that link doesn't work. ....?
For sure its a civilian tag - even the repro ones are all the military type - so i am hoping for period done. A lot of effort for little gain if post war. ....
" I'm putting off procrastination until next week "
So the member "JanB" at the WAF says these are 'postwar for reenactor purposes'??.
Well, for me the logical question to ask must be - (if) these were made postwar for reenactors, WHY are they patently different to the repro military ones available today ( in construction, card stock and eyelets? ) I mean on some of these, the perforations are only printed, not actually perforated in the card.
And why reproduce a civilian one?...... doesn't make sense ...........UNLESS these are ACTUALLY wartime stock used in postwar Germany BECAUSE of the fact that they cover civilian injuries and as such are perfectly useful in a post-war medical triage scenario. ( waste not want not as we say )
...its plausible - AND if Andreas doesn't see any red flags in the grammar or script, it could well have been written in 1944 and on the same base card peddled out decades later from bulk supplies of NOS ( new old stock ) and assumed to be PW production....?
hmmm.......
" I'm putting off procrastination until next week "
Bookmarks