Roles and Missions of RZM d. NSDAP

[Friedrich-Berthold]

This firm as licensed under A 2, though its products are noteworthy on a scale that belies an artisan or crafts outfit.
Such should make them more rare and hence desirable, no?

[Friedrich-Berthold]

Who knows?

I for one am highly non plus ed about who made an object, in fact.

I only wish it to be authentic.

[Friedrich-Berthold]

Further aspects of this important and rare document as seldom found on any site.....read and weep.

[BenVK]

I for one am highly non plus ed about who made an object, in fact.

I only wish it to be authentic.

I understand this point of view entirely but I must confess that I am facinated in comparing different hats with the same hersteller number.

For example, look at these two.

There is one quite obvious difference between the two but also one unique detail that link them together.

Can you see it?

[BenVK]

2nd example.

[Friedrich-Berthold]

Dear Ben, we take your point. Great variations existed which put the lie to the fata morgana of standardization proffered by the stitch fairies and terrible simplifier a la Mode de Lubstein pi pa po.
I think what is more significant, myself, is the decline in quality of the black SS cap from its inception to its phase out, such as it was, if it was ever truly phased out...
The RZM data allows one to map this process with more precision than has heretofore been the case.
In our little band, there is room for a variety of approaches. I just don't care so much about the makers as visible in the caps.
You have before you a cap made with a super sweatband, which others would assay as a repair or an act of deception, which it is not....

[BenVK]

Great variations existed which put the lie to the fata morgana of standardization proffered by the stitch fairies and terrible simplifier a la Mode de Lubstein pi pa po.

A valid point but not really the one I was trying to convey.

Rather, I'm interested in the observation that this particular Hersteller, #26 is attributed to Otto Schlientz but as we are discovering, RZM licences were revoked rather frequently so can we be certain? Well, we can be fairly certain that the sturndruckfrei cap is a Schlientz because orginal Wehrmacht caps for example have been discovered with similar construction details. (and hence throw out the replaced sweat leather theory) That's one benefit of being interested in who made what.
The other benefit is that we also link the other #26 marked cap without the pressure free band fairly certainly to Schlientz because look at the distinct way the RZM tag is attached in both caps....
So, now we can ascertain that Schlientz changed at least one fundamental design feature of the hats made under his RZM license. So what you may ask? Well, the sturndruckfrei system was a design protected by patent laws. What if the manufacture that held those patents was not actualy a licensed RZM maker themselves. Would that be enough to revoke a license? I doubt it but we are now beginning to see that the consequences of such things as refusing to accept a sample example from the RZM could mean losing ones license.
It also opens up a whole different avenue of questions, such as, were the A2 mutzenmachers who supplied the bigger firms answerable to non compliance of their RZM licenses or that of the firms they were supplying. In other words, where did the buck stop?