UBB.threads Forums Uniform & Accessories German Military Uniform Forum General's Tabs

Any thoughts on these collar tabs?

and the back....

In my opinion look the tab good. Regards, Guido

I surely love to see them, real or not. They are magnificent in design. I wish I had some. Maybe at the SOS?

Mark

Hello Shinerb,
I would love a "hands on" to this uniform, but for sure I do not like what I see. Take a good look.
Regards,
Aylson Doyle

Here is the front

...and the eagle. Is the collar simply an earlier more pointed version? Odd how it sits partially across the breast eagle.

Its probably a tailormade piece.
Its a really beautiful generals eagle which goes nicely with, in my opinion, early original collar tabs. The eagle also seems to be neatly hand sewn on. A good sign! Still it needs a hands on ofcourse.

I like what I see so far!
/Felix

Hello again Shinerb,
I have reasons to believe that the insignias are may be real but NOT original to the tunic, the position of the right side collar tab is not the same to the left side. On a special made tailored tunic for a General this cannot happen, they have to be symmetrical. Part of the insignia on the right side are out of the collar, this is not good.
BOTH ribbon bars are wrong and could not be worn together this way, no doubt it is not original to the tunic.
The eagle, by this picture, is placed a little far right from where it should be.
The tunic seems to be in mint condition, and in most cases there´s something wrong. Did you try a black light inspection?
Regards,
Aylson Doyle

Alyson,

Thanks for the reply and insight. This is definately while I wanted peoples thoughts. The sewing isn't square to me on the backside of the boards where they are attached to the collar. I'm not sure if this is seen much or not.

Also, the tunic is dated 1944 which might reflect it's "new-looking" condition.

I'm not concerned with the ribbon bars. They are definately not original to the tunic but on there haphazardly just because the owner doesn't have a long one.

Not all collar tabs were placed perfectly as can be seen is this RK photo of General Dietl. Also note the placing of the breast eagle.

Just to give some ideas.

Cheers,
Felix

Hello Felix,
I don´t know what do you mean. This beautiful and very rare model 1937(order dated 12 July 1937, HV 37, No.926) ornamented field blouse belonging to WH-GENERALOBERST EDUARD DIETL is perfectly symmetrical, looks a little odd because the angle that this picture was taken.
And both collar tabs are not placed outside collar.
Regards,
Aylson Doyle

Gerard has one on his site currently with the collar boards that seem large and appear above the edge of the collar.

General's Tunic

AD; I mean that on the tunic Dietl is wearing the collar tabs is placed almost outside of the collar as well. Im sure minor variants did exist. I think the angle in top photos of this thread is somewhat incorrect. I mean like visually from the image.

Cheers,
Felix

Aahh, regarding that Army General's tunic refered to on Stezelberger's Site, somebody should tell Stezelberger that, on the maker's label, June is spelled "Juni" in German, not "Juno".

quote:

Originally posted by Schloss 1:
Aahh, regarding that Army General's tunic refered to on Stezelberger's Site, somebody should tell Stezelberger that, on the maker's label, June is spelled "Juni" in German, not "Juno".

Hello Schloss,
I fully agree with you. It looks like that this tunic is a "put together" one. I like nothing on this tunic.
Best Regards,
Aylson Doyle

I in turn agree that this General's tunic is a 'put-together'. Aylson, I do have to admit I've seen something regards this tunic that I do like a lot,- (it's the belt & buckle!) And I'm willing to bet the same person who sew'd the 2 ribbons to the front (EK2/Russian Front) thru the buttonhole is the same person who put the 2 ribbons on his tunic #21. Take a look. I do love that label. "Juno" Beach was one of the landing sites of the Normandy Invasion, perhaps the tag serves to indicate that Gen. Beelitz served as defensive Kdr. of "Juno" beach??!! Seriously tho, G.S. advertises his Site on here, & with his proclamations of having impeccable expertiese, should have caught that miscarriage before buying it & offering it for sale.

Shinerb sent me these photos for comment, blind. I hadn't read any of the comments above at the time, and I generally concur with Aylson. I do not like the positioning of the tabs at all.

One other issue that concerns me is the number of buttons. This is a five button tunic dated Mai 1944. The change to six buttons was dated 26 Mai 1941. Whilst some tailors did produce five button tunics after that date, three years is a long time.

We all know generals were allowed far more leeway in their dress than lower ranks, but why persist with five buttons?

Another issue of interest to me is the tailor. The tag indicates a Berlin maker, but the collar design and location of the breast pockets are far from standard. The collar dips very low, and the breast pockets usually commence below the second button, even on five pocket tunics. Such variation usually indicates a tailor from an occupied territory or small German town, not the hub of German military fashion.

What do you think?

David!

I agree, the location of the pockets and tabs would worry me . Was this a Holters Tunic ? If so .. I have 3 named, Holters Tunics and Shinerb's does not match ..to start , look at the pockets and collar. The Tunic on the far right is dated Sept 1942 .

look at the position of the tabs & pockets, size of the collar

close up

#2

No, this was not a Holter's tunic but rather Averbeck & Brosxxxx, Berlin W.

I wonder if the high pockets have something to do with the point of the collar partially covering the breast eagle?

Maybe the Tailors style or , it was designed this way ....for whatever reason. It sure does have the John Travolta look going for it though!
..One thing that really bothers me is the tabs,also they were not sewn on correctly and look out of place. I've never seen an original tunic where the tab overhangs the edge of the collar. This makes me wonder what else has been added to the tunic or if it was an early style reworked.

Mike,

Can you send me an e-mail. I've got some pics of a general's tunic that I'd like to get your input on.

Thanks, Douglas_Ostermann@admworld.com

Threads like this amuse me. Tailors measured and 'tailored' tunics to their owners....not their insignia. If any of you have collected Generals insignia on even a casual basis you've surely noted the difference in sizes and manufacture of both tabs and boards. There was no 'one size fits all'. Regardless of the provenance of this piece, if you're basing opinions on whether the insignia fit a tailored tunic or not, you're all way off base. General's uniforms didn't come pre-made from some factory in a regimented fashion.

Originial insignia is original insignia. Tailored clothing is tailored clothing. Neither was designed to fit the other.

By the way, I recently re-tailored my business wardrobe (a downsize, fortunately) and asked for some radical changes that my tailor wasn't prepared to make, and advised against. Even then, my desire won out over the tailors advice (and the tailor didn't come out screaming, "you can't do that, that coat is from 1988, its not the style/regulation now"). Imagine back in the day when the only response back from the rather intimidated tailor would've been, 'Jawohl, Herr Generale!". Nuff said?

By the way, nice tabs

Mike, I would like to send you an email.

robert_hassler@hotmail.com

Robert....my email is listed...just sent you one.

quote:

Originally posted by Brigadefuhrer:
Threads like this amuse me. Tailors measured and 'tailored' tunics to their owners....not their insignia. If any of you have collected Generals insignia on even a casual basis you've surely noted the difference in sizes and manufacture of both tabs and boards. There was no 'one size fits all'. Regardless of the provenance of this piece, if you're basing opinions on whether the insignia fit a tailored tunic or not, you're all way off base. General's uniforms didn't come pre-made from some factory in a regimented fashion.

Originial insignia is original insignia. Tailored clothing is tailored clothing. Neither was designed to fit the other.

By the way, I recently re-tailored my business wardrobe (a downsize, fortunately) and asked for some radical changes that my tailor wasn't prepared to make, and advised against. Even then, my desire won out over the tailors advice (and the tailor didn't come out screaming, "you can't do that, that coat is from 1988, its not the style/regulation now"). Imagine back in the day when the only response back from the rather intimidated tailor would've been, 'Jawohl, Herr Generale!". Nuff said?

..by the way , you wouldn't happen to have a picture of GFM Rommel in his open collar Tunic ..you know , the one with the smaller red field on the collar tabs ..that the Tailor obviously cut down so that it fit the collar style ?
There's no way that any Tailor would make a custom Tunic and then take stock insignia and just stick it on ...even if it didn't really fit. I don't know how many General Officers Tunics you've handled but , they really paid attention to symmetry and detail. A Generals Tunic where the collar hangs over and rubs against the breast Eagle ? (we're not talking about a Panzer Wrap style here where the overhang is intentional) And the Tabs are sewn on hanging over the edge of the Collar ?
If that's acceptable to you , you should contact the seller and buy it ...could be a good investment!

If you look in Brian Davis' book on Luftwaffe Uniforms and Insignia, Volume I, page 83 to be specific, you'll notice a nice photo of GFM Milch sitting at his desk in a beautifully tailored fliegerbluse.....in which the tailor put his shoulderboards on the wrong sides. Guess that tunics no good either.

....That's actually GFM Sperrle on page 83 not GFM Milch.
You've been at this long enough ,so I know don't have to explain anything about shoulderboards to you. What I would to know though is what's going on with you ? Did I offend you in some way ? The sarcasm was not really needed.

Sorry, Mike. I guess I detected sarcasm in your reply to my initial post and believing that this was your manner assumed you would have no problem with me using it back. Thats the problem with 'deciphering' keyboard dialogue. I'm sure with our common interest and passion in this hobby we'd probably enjoy each others company if we met face to face. My apologies, again.

And you're right, you don't have to explain anything about shoulderboards to me. Putting them on 'backwards' was a fairly common tailors mistake. Problem is, I've seen other threads where perfectly good Generals uniforms were trashed by people because the boards were on backwards. Had these 'experts' spent any time studying period photographs they'd realize this did happen. Thats my beef with the absolutism that is often spouted on these forums....another forum in particular has a big problem with this and perhaps I've just spent too much time reading threads at that place lately.

I do not profess to be an expert. I've collected since the late 60's, owned four Generals uniforms (two of which I still possess), seen and yes 'handled' a fair share too. However I find the most revealing information by looking at period photographs, not only in reference books but individual officers and em's photo albums. I am a passionate observationist and cull my own opinions and beliefs from these period photos and some basic logic. As you know, Mike, much of the stuff out there now has been messed with, so handling militaria these days isn't necessarily the be all and end all to determining what was and wasn't done.

If tailors were capable of putting shoulderboards on backwards on a regular enough basis that the photographic evidence is somewhat common, sloppy collar tab jobs are certainly possible as well. I've even seen a period photo of a breast eagle on the wrong breast.

It seems for every professed absolute, eventually a photo surfaces to dispel the practice. I've seen some goofy tailoring mistakes, including on officers tunics. You want a good laugh, look at Davis' Army book on page 36 at Generalmajor Kreipe, who is sporting Generalfeldmarschall collar tabs. Or how about page 170 where Generalmajor Ravenstein's photo shows that Rommel evidently didn't bother to share his tailor as Ravenstein's open collar tropical tunic has the tips of his collartabs riding over the top of the collar too.

My point is this; tailoring by its very nature is a personalized alteration of a garment. Generals in particular, as you well know, exercised a great deal of personal freedom in how their uniforms were tailored, often going beyond regulation. Those long, pointy collars were very popular (You ever see Demelhubers??? Those babies looked like if there ever was a big gust of wind he'd turn into the Flying Nun). Granted, those long collars on this particular uniform are butt ugly, but thats not to say that this guy didn't want them that way. This we will never know, unless a period photo of him in the tunic surfaces. And hey, if it is a put together, it sure ain't the first.

No prob ..I read your post the wrong way too and my apologies as well .And I agree there are so many period made screw-ups out there that if it wasn't for the photos ..we'd doubt every variation we'd see. My TK Tunic came from the Vet with a Political Eagle on the Visor. But , that's how it was when (he admitted) he took it out of the guys closet in 45.
When it comes to General Officers however , I think there's less of the Tailor screw-ups because an Ego was involved (big Egos)...these guys wanted to look sharp and really tried to go by the book. Or (like Rommel) create a personalized look ..but still be above the criticism. I bet a room full of Generals would sound like old ladies ..."Did you see Hans's Tunic ? Vat da Hell is dat ?"
About 15 years ago I met a FJ Lt. that served with Skorzeny (he was in on the Musso deal) ..by accident. He ended up in Alaska after the War ...anyway , I asked him about Otto's Uniform. He said that it was standard practice for the higher ups (on front line duty) to take Enlisted Tunics and add the insignia themselves and beat the Hell out of them rather than wear an expensive Tailored Tunic and destroy it ...picture how many of those Tunics would be labeled Fake if they surfaced today !
Since many of us started collecting a long time ago (I got my first helmet when I was 8 ..41 years ago , ugh)I think we are really lucky because we still have items that came right from the Vets and have not been played with ..we can use these for ref examples. But with over 60+ years of items being played with,altered and outright fakes ...everyone is paranoid , and at today's prices ...I don't blame them.
Unfortunately the hobby has changed to more of an investment and we all want to know and be sure that the items we buy ..are the real deal.
It was so much easier back in 1970 when the Fake Medals had "GERMANY" in English and in bas-relief on the back ..remember those ?
Anyway ..sorry again about the misunderstanding..
talk soon
--Mike

Hey Mike, not to turn this into a Germanuniforms.com love fest, but sounds like we probably have quite a bit in common. I know our age is one of 'em as I turn 49 just before Hitler turns 117. We also share the same first name. Write me offline when you get a chance, we've probably got some good Generals knowledge we could swap.

By the way, great story you shared about the higher ranks giving their uni's the 'field' look. Its little nuggets of the past like this that the vets share that really open our eyes about how things things weren't all quite so textbook as we'd like them to be. Expensive lessons are learned in this hobby when we're not careful, but sometimes we all get too careful and too busy trying to find Waldo and forget the reality of how things sometimes actually were.

Good thread, everyone. At times I worry that this forum is in its dying throes, but every time I post (which is rare) good information is always shared and it starts to feel all over again just like it did a few years back.

If I had a period photo of the General in question it would definately make a tough descision easy. Unfortunately, the only photo is him in an M36 officer's uniform.

Shinerb what's the price on the tunic, if you don't mind me asking?

Oh, and another question. In the picture you do have of this guy, is he fat or barrel chested?

U can drop me an E-mail and I'll go over the details with you. wehrmachtvii@yahoo.com

I've got a couple of questions for all regarding General's tunics.

On page 134 of Brian Davis' book, it shows a photo of two Generals, one wearing a Reichsheer tunic (with the upward slanted slashed side pockets), and one showing what is referred to as the M36 tunic (with the box pleated pockets). It states that many Generals preferred to continue wearing the Reichsheer-style tunics throughout the war.

I'm wondering when exactly the so-called M36 tunic actually started to appear - was it really 1936, or did this style appear earlier than that? Does anyone think its possible for an M36 tunic to exist (with these types of pockets) with a tailor's label dated 1935?

And what would you think about a tunic with General's insignia that had a label in it that indicated that when the tunic was made, the wearer was a major? Do you think that it's conceivable that the owner would have continued wearing the same tunic through two promotions?

Thanks,
Clive

It was very common for owners to keep on wearing tunics through promotions and this is not at all unusual to see. Simple logic comes into play here too; why go to the expense of buying a whole new tunic when you are just changing the rank?

Somewhere in one of my many books I read about one of the army field marshals who took it to quite the extreme and wore the exact same tunic, every day, to the point where it was not too pleaseant to be around him (I think he was not a regular bather either). Evidently it was pretty ratty and had been continually patched up and repaired over the years by his adjutant. He even wore this when called in to see Hitler, much again to the dismay of his adjutant. Don't remember which GFM it was, perhaps somebody else can contribute the name in the meantime.