Hitler's Stamp Royalties Revisited...
Tracy Barber
Hitler's Stamp Royalties Revisited...
Well now, after a little research - only on the internet, mind you -
not in any huge library, philatelic warehouse or serious government
sinkhole, I found some very interesting information about the (until
now I believe) speculative royalties paid to Hitler from sales of his
image on postage stamps.
*******
Phase 1:
*******
Heinrich Hoffman was Hitler's photographer. He also was the one who
created the infamous "Hitler Head" you see on stamps. After a period
of time, he suggested to Hitler that he should receive a royalty on
every one of his images used and every postage stamp that bore his
image. It appears that several sources mention this, including a
relatively recent law suit generated by Hoffman's relatives. Here are
the easiest found sources:
http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/text/x10/xr1040.html
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERhoffmann.htm
http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/98-857.pdf
Hoffman fell out of favor in the Nazi "court" sometime in 1941. Isn't
it a strange coincidence that the "Hitler Heads" came out in 1941?
Hmmm... no royalties for him!
*******
Phase 2:
*******
Apparently, Martin Bormann sought a chance to please his "master" so
he accomodated him with a decree or law of some kind that would make
the royalties official. Bormann was Hitler's financial advisor,
personal secretary and signed off on countless schemes like this
besides what he is more recognized as doing.
http://www.megspace.com/education/trp/bormann2.html
Now this would make perfect sense because Bormann's father worked in
the post office. He would have an "in" to the workings of the P.O.
Further, Project Safehaven mentions Bormann's complicity in smuggling
german philatelic items to Sweden through unnamed sources (in the
article at least) to a stamp dealer there (name in article). Also,
there was a big movement of philatelic items through Morocco.
*******
Phase 3:
*******
Albert Speer mentions seeing royalty checks paid to Hitler in
exorbitant sums.
"Other money earners for Hitler included a clever use of copyright.
Every time his photograph or image was used on a postage stamp some
cash came his way. Albert Speer remembered seeing Hitler receiving a
50 million marks cheque -- worth about £3100 million today -- for
postage stamp rights. Herr Schwarzwoeller says there were probably
several such payments."
http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/98/10/Hitler1.html
*******
Phase 4:
*******
Even after the war, there were claims to copyrights of Hitler and
other Nazis.
"Bavaria claimed to have confiscated the copyright of Adolf Hitler and
of all other Nazi leaders along with their other assets and fortunes.
(By the way, not only Goering gathered huge fortunes. Hitler was
extremely rich, too, collecting one Pfennig for each stamp with his
picture on it.) This confiscation allegedly happened on the basis of
the Allied legislation in occupied Germany in the post-war years."
http://www.freenations.freeuk.com/voices-erik_goethe.html
*******
Wrap-up:
*******
Either this has to be one of the biggest hoaxes coming out of the 3rd
Reich and everyone is a sucker to believe it, or it smacks of some
truth.
Me - I believe the evidence is clear. Rebuttals, refuting or any
other debate is highly welcomed in a civilized manner.
Tracy Barber
(Who knows not one damn thing about stamp collecting, doing research
on the internet, WWII or just about anything else - except fennecs!)
Bob Ingraham
An impressive and convincing bit of internet sleuthing! The evidence does
indeed seem clear. It is always worthwhile to question the written word,
however.
Two quotes, one each from each of your first two sources, raised my
eyebrows:
"Hoffmann's 2.5 million photographs provide a unique record of 25 years of
German history, and helped to make him an enormously wealthy man, as well as
enriching Hitler himself and enhancing his popularity."
and...
Over the next few years he took over 2.5 million photographs of Hitler.
(Your third source -- http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/98-857.pdf -- basically
repeats both of these statements, so it's hard to know who is quoting whom.
History so often seems to be based on quotations of quotations.)
The statements you quote do not make clear whether we are talking individual
images or numbers of prints made from individual negatives. I did a bit of
looking with Google and found this information:
"That same year, Time magazine correspondents looted thousands of
photographs of Hitler and other Nazi officials from a castle and the U.S.
Army also found a stash of photographs of Hitler (which were eventually used
at the Nuremberg trials) in Bavaria. These two discoveries totaled more than
2.5 million photographs detailing Hitler's life, both public and private.
"The watercolors and the photographs were owned by Heinrich Hoffman, a close
friend of the Nazi dictator, and the only man who was allowed to photograph
Hitler. Since Hitler had Hoffman accompany him everywhere during his reign
of power, Hoffman amassed a collection that covers 25 years of German
history."
(http://www.artic.edu/webspaces/fnews/2002-march/marfeatures3.html)
Anyway, I did the math. If Hoffman did indeed take 2.5 million photographs
over 25 years, he was truly an Aryan superman on a Wagnerian scale, because
that's 273.9 images a day, every day of the week, for 25 years. That clearly
is a gross exaggeration of Hoffman's output.
Early in his career, Hoffman would have been working at best with roll film
cameras, which were certainly faster and more convenient to use than sheet
film cameras. By 1928 he might have been using the first Rolleiflex cameras,
but the high quality of his photographs suggests that he never tried out the
Leica 35mm camera, which was introduced shortly after he started his work of
"documenting" Hitler's life. (Early 35mm photographs were invariably grainy
and had a "35mm" look to them, with nothing of the sharpness and clarity
that had long been available with larger-format film.) Even if he worked
12-hour days and skipped lunch, Hoffman would have been hard pressed to
produce that many photographs. I once took more than 300 photographs in one
day, actually got a blister on my hand, and certainly didn't get useful
images with every exposure. And I was using a motorized, auto-focus Nikon
with zoom lenses, high-speed film and automatic exposure.
It is possible that "Hoffman" was really more than one photographer. While
he alone was allowed to photograph Hitler, he might have employed other
photographers who focussed their cameras on lesser Nazis. (The famous Civil
War photographer Matthew Brady got credit for photos that his assistants
took.)
These observations certainly don't bear on the basic thesis that Hitler
received stamp royalties, but they do seem to urge caution in the reading of
history (see my next post). And thanks for your continued interest in my
original question on this subject.
Bob
Tracy Barber
wrote:
>An impressive and convincing bit of internet sleuthing! The evidence does
>indeed seem clear. It is always worthwhile to question the written word,
>however.
Thank-ee... That's without a lot of "digging". More could be
revealed but I think it's out there in black & white (and some color).
>Two quotes, one each from each of your first two sources, raised my
>eyebrows:
;-)
>Over the next few years he took over 2.5 million photographs of Hitler.
I find that hard to believe... not by himself! No way...
>(Your third source -- http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/98-857.pdf -- basically
>repeats both of these statements, so it's hard to know who is quoting whom.
>History so often seems to be based on quotations of quotations.)
But - there's the rub - that reference is a court case. Either the
plaintiffs are lying or it's true. I didn't check the outcome of the
case.
>The statements you quote do not make clear whether we are talking individual
>images or numbers of prints made from individual negatives. I did a bit of
>looking with Google and found this information:
Wasn't trying to count how many, just to state that it was done. :)
...and that Hoffman's "Hitler Head" was pretty much the centerpiece of
the work.
>"That same year, Time magazine correspondents looted thousands of
>photographs of Hitler and other Nazi officials from a castle and the U.S.
>Army also found a stash of photographs of Hitler (which were eventually used
>at the Nuremberg trials) in Bavaria. These two discoveries totaled more than
>2.5 million photographs detailing Hitler's life, both public and private.
More than likely those photos were taken by more than 1 person.
>"The watercolors and the photographs were owned by Heinrich Hoffman, a close
>friend of the Nazi dictator, and the only man who was allowed to photograph
>Hitler. Since Hitler had Hoffman accompany him everywhere during his reign
>of power, Hoffman amassed a collection that covers 25 years of German
>history."
>(http://www.artic.edu/webspaces/fnews/2002-march/marfeatures3.html)
OK, I'll check that out. Now, over 25 years, 2.5 million pictures
doesn't seem toooo bad. Over a few years, I find it impossible.
<Snip - Bob's camera thumb :) >
>It is possible that "Hoffman" was really more than one photographer. While
>he alone was allowed to photograph Hitler, he might have employed other
>photographers who focussed their cameras on lesser Nazis. (The famous Civil
>War photographer Matthew Brady got credit for photos that his assistants
>took.)
I would have to say yes, going by blind faith and no true figures.
It'd be impossible to do otherwise.
>These observations certainly don't bear on the basic thesis that Hitler
>received stamp royalties, but they do seem to urge caution in the reading of
>history (see my next post). And thanks for your continued interest in my
>original question on this subject.
I have found plenty of other places on the 'Net where these same (and
some different) statements can be found. As I mentioned, it's either
one HUGE hoax or it smacks of truth. Too many people seem to think
this is so.
I've had a few replies to my questions by e-mail but will keep them
for backup ammo... Still waiting for more. :)
BTW, it's 46 minutes into "History & The Occult", just before it
segues into a commercial, that Arthur Kent makes the original
statement I brought up a while ago. Maybe the History Channel is
perpetuating the myth - I dunno...
On to the National Culture Fund next!
Tracy Barber
(Who does listen when "spoken" to...)
(But knows nothing, he repeats -nothing-, about stamp collecting)
Denis O'Leary
to prevent royalties going to the Nazis. This started even before the US
declared war on Germany.
I found it again on Google. The link is
http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist6/stamps.html .
--
Denis O'Leary
Ireland
dsolear...@eircom.net
To reply, remove NoSpam from address.
"Tracy Barber" <tr...@adirondack-pc.com> wrote in message
news:3cfac01c...@news-server.nycap.rr.com...
Tracy Barber
Yuppers - The San Francisco bunch started it, from what I read. It
seems that they had the right idea.
Tracy Barber
Neil S. Hawk
Tracy Barber
Must be a protest...
Tracy Barber
Arlene Sullivan
- isn't forceful and articulate enough!
I just hope there isn't something wrong with his computer.
Arlene Sullivan
David French
Not likely, as he has posted more messages since the date/time-stamp
on this one!
Just a slip-of-the-mouse-finger co-ordination problem, I think.
Victor Manta
> Yuppers - The San Francisco bunch started it, from what I read. It
> seems that they had the right idea.
>
> Tracy Barber
>
May I suggest you to publish your interesting findings on your site.
Regards,
Victor Manta
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philatelic Webmasters Organization: http://pwmo.org
1800 Links Online: http://pwmo.org/weblinks/links.asp
Art on Stamps: http://values.ch
Romania Shown by Its Stamps: http://marci-postale.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil S. Hawk
A respectful, but well documented rebuttal, of ALL points made to date is being
crafted by Anonymous Bosch, who is busy painting surreal Satanic scenes while,
in his spare time, perfecting liquefying coal to aid the 3rd Reich!
Perhaps ready by Monday!?!
Tracy Barber
wrote:
>"Tracy Barber" <tr...@adirondack-pc.com> wrote
>>
>> Yuppers - The San Francisco bunch started it, from what I read. It
>> seems that they had the right idea.
>>
>> Tracy Barber
>>
>Tracy,
>
>May I suggest you to publish your interesting findings on your site.
Actually, I may do that down the road. Stamp Trivia research...
Tracy Barber
Tracy Barber
We'll be here for the rebuttal. Let's see the proof. We aren't going
anywhere for this one...
Tracy Barber
(The defense rests - let's hear the prosecution's story)