Gothic German notebook captured by New Zealand soldier in WW1

[pukman]

3 hours ago, JWK said:

and @GreyC 

 

To fully kit out a German soldier in early 1915 would have cost somewhere around 300 Mk in total (is Fritz Limbach's estimate).

A (privately purchased, made to measure) litewka cost Fritz 58 Mk in January 1915 (of which he wrote "I find that quite a lot of money.")

 

Fritz Limbach sometimes asked his parents "to slip a 5 Mark note into a letter" every once in a while.

Biggest denomination he got was a 20Mk note.

I used DM without thinking, it should be Mk (but then maybe someone would be thinking "What's he doing with Finnish Markkas?"

 

Anyway: Fritz wrote in one of his letters (about a "holiday trip to the sea-side" his company took in September 1915:

 

Which does beg the question: do the banknotes and the notebook go together?

Did this NZ soldier specifically mention that he "took" these banknotes from Karl Grahn?

Where was this NZ unit before June 1917? Maybe they captured a German HQ on the way? Or came across a deserted bank or something? The mind wanders....

 

 

The notebook /diary was only recently purchased before me . It come from a military collector who also worked in the antiques trade . He bought it from estate of the soldier . So it hasn't ben tampered  with too much, however who knows what has happened in 103 years !! And it didn't cost me any more for what I would expect to buy a WW1 diary, less banknotes.

 

The notebook was taken off Karl Grahn, a Bavarian soldier, captured on the 7th of June 1917 at Messines . George starts his diary entries on the 3rd of June but he must be writing in retrospect after the battle, but still while memories were fresh in his mind . George was from the 8th Southland company, 2nd Otago battalion.

 

''....we captured the first three lines and got quite a large number of prisoners, they were mighty glad they were to get back too''

 

He mentions at the end of the diary entries '' I took this notebook off a German prisoner'' , there is no record of the money being taken . Maybe he looted more than one prisoner ?

[Jaeger6]

21 hours ago, GreyC said:

Actually, it is not.

Of course, you're right. sorry for that mistake.

"Reichsmark" is sometimes misleadingly used for the Mark between 1871 and 1924 to make clear that we talk about the Mark that is valid all over the Reich and not the Mark which is issued by a specific state or singular economic area like in my example the old Hanseatic city states (Lübsche Mark from Lübeck, Hamburger Mark), but historically correct is only the term Mark and therefore the abbreviation M.

Another thing: I find the second note very interesting. It is not a usual bank note but a loans certicicate (Darlehenskassenschein) of the Imperial Treasury's debt administration (Reichsschuldenverwaltung). The notes were exchanged for Marks at the bank, but they were not an official currency. Shop owners were not obliged to take them for payment. The corresponding law (Darlehenskassengesetz) was passed on 4 August 1914, so his certificate was from the first printed lot.

 

Markus

Edited 22 March , 2020 by Jaeger6

[pukman]

20 hours ago, JWK said:

and @GreyC 

 

To fully kit out a German soldier in early 1915 would have cost somewhere around 300 Mk in total (is Fritz Limbach's estimate).

A (privately purchased, made to measure) litewka cost Fritz 58 Mk in January 1915 (of which he wrote "I find that quite a lot of money.")

 

Fritz Limbach sometimes asked his parents "to slip a 5 Mark note into a letter" every once in a while.

Biggest denomination he got was a 20Mk note.

I used DM without thinking, it should be Mk (but then maybe someone would be thinking "What's he doing with Finnish Markkas?"

 

Anyway: Fritz wrote in one of his letters (about a "holiday trip to the sea-side" his company took in September 1915:

 

Which does beg the question: do the banknotes and the notebook go together?

Did this NZ soldier specifically mention that he "took" these banknotes from Karl Grahn?

Where was this NZ unit before June 1917? Maybe they captured a German HQ on the way? Or came across a deserted bank or something? The mind wanders....

 

 

 

[pukman]

7 hours ago, Jaeger6 said:

Of course, you're right. sorry for that mistake.

"Reichsmark" is sometimes misleadingly used for the Mark between 1871 and 1924 to make clear that we talk about the Mark that is valid all over the Reich and not the Mark which is issued by a specific state or singular economic area like in my example the old Hanseatic city states (Lübsche Mark from Lübeck, Hamburger Mark), but historically correct is only the term Mark and therefore the abbreviation M.

Another thing: I find the second note very interesting. It is not a usual bank note but a loans certicicate (Darlehenskassenschein) of the Imperial Treasury's debt administration (Reichsschuldenverwaltung). The notes were exchanged for Marks at the bank, but they were not an official currency. Shop owners were not obliged to take them for payment. The corresponding law (Darlehenskassengesetz) was passed on 4 August 1914, so his certificate was from the first printed lot.

 

Markus

So I am wondering why the above banknote fits into the scheme of things . seeing the events relate to 1917, and it is dated 1918 !!

[AOK4]

The 20 Mark note was only issued after 20 February 1918, so it can't have been from Grahn...

[pukman]

1 hour ago, AOK4 said:

The 20 Mark note was only issued after 20 February 1918, so it can't have been from Grahn...

Yes it certainly dismisses that particular note , maybe the others, but we can't be sure . At the end of the day it is the Grahn's notebook / and Wallace's diary that are the main event . Maybe the notes were added to spice it up , or maybe 3 off the 4 were looted from German prisoners prior to the 12th of October 1917 (when Wallace was killed in action)

Edited 22 March , 2020 by pukman