UNKNOWN GENERAL SIGNED DOCUMENT - HELP
UNKNOWN GENERAL SIGNED DOCUMENT - HELP
Hello guys,
I'm new in this forum so, first, my best whishes to you all!
Now, I got a EKII award signed by a Generalleutenent but I'm not able to know which name is that. Do you help me? Thanks a lot in advance. Gian
I'm new in this forum so, first, my best whishes to you all!
Now, I got a EKII award signed by a Generalleutenent but I'm not able to know which name is that. Do you help me? Thanks a lot in advance. Gian
- Attachments
-
- mistero.JPG (60.13 KiB) Viewed 2036 times
- Matt Gibbs
- Member
- Posts: 3005
- Joined: 23 Mar 2002, 01:46
- Location: United Kingdom
- Contact:
Hmm
For some suspicious reason I get the feeling a few things about this don't add up, as already mentioned the Volksturm was not in being in 1942, hell they haven't even been able to line up the typewriter with the lines of the certificate, something VERY poor for this mid war period. What division was the soldier is, it should be mentioned in the line above..?
Regards
Matt Gibbs
Regards
Matt Gibbs
Re: Hmm
Not, there is no mention about the division. We could know it from the feldpost-number in the stamp (2 ? ). Checking the Marcus'site I found two divisions using number 2:Matt Gibbs wrote:For some suspicious reason I get the feeling a few things about this don't add up, as already mentioned the Volksturm was not in being in 1942, hell they haven't even been able to line up the typewriter with the lines of the certificate, something VERY poor for this mid war period. What division was the soldier is, it should be mentioned in the line above..?
Regards
Matt Gibbs
Stab InfDiv.Nachschub-Führer 354 Mob.-1.1.40
Stab InfDiv.Nachschub-Führer 150 15.9.40-31.1.41
My personal "feeling" handling this document is positive but........
-
- Member
- Posts: 83
- Joined: 13 Nov 2002, 07:27
- Location: Tokyo, JAPAN
- Contact:
- Tim Walker
- Member
- Posts: 80
- Joined: 16 Jan 2003, 02:52
- Location: Middleburgh, New York
No Way......
As it is in the field, a clerk would not take the time to put on the factious swaztika stamp ( I have never seen this stamp on awards in all my years ) Also the signature looks wrong, as it is not signed in the style that a German General would have written in at that time period. The clerk would have been told to re type it with all that sloppiness. I agree with Matt. 8)
Valsente,
Please refer to my first posting about this document.
I checked thru my books and collection of citations last night and I now have very serious doubts about the authenticity of this document - in fact I would recommend you try get your money back.
Paperwork is not often a target for "fakers" but I believe this is not what it purports to be.
My opinion only.
Please refer to my first posting about this document.
I checked thru my books and collection of citations last night and I now have very serious doubts about the authenticity of this document - in fact I would recommend you try get your money back.
Paperwork is not often a target for "fakers" but I believe this is not what it purports to be.
My opinion only.
Hello Dan,DanCz wrote:Valsente,
Please refer to my first posting about this document.
I checked thru my books and collection of citations last night and I now have very serious doubts about the authenticity of this document - in fact I would recommend you try get your money back.
Paperwork is not often a target for "fakers" but I believe this is not what it purports to be.
My opinion only.
thanks for your availability. It's a strange thing indeed. I bought this document in the most important Military Fair in Italy together with a lot of other documents which are all original. I'don't know why somebody should have faked just this document. What's the matter? But all is possible in our world! Thanks again.
Valsente,
I know how you must feel - rest assured we all make mistakes and buy what we believe to be the genuine article only for it to turn out wrong later !! Paperwork was seldom reproduced but I know of one firm here in England who have copied several award documents - they sell them as copies and they are blank - but the rogue dealers fill in the blanks "age" the paper and then pass the document off as genuine.
Usually you will see documents to SS personnel - original SS typewriters can be bought - but I have also seen citations - for example - 25 Year Faithfull Service Cross - "signed" by Hitler. He never signed these - you should only see Meisnner's on this document.
I could go on but I hope this is helpful enough.
The medal/badge collecting field is far, far worse - plagued with fakes and fantasies and the copies are now excellant - I would not like to be starting my collection today. Some 25 years ago when I began collecting - the fakes were, generally speaking, very obvious but there are some from back then that I see today still being passed of as genuine.
Nevertheless - it is a great hobby - welcome to the Forum.
I know how you must feel - rest assured we all make mistakes and buy what we believe to be the genuine article only for it to turn out wrong later !! Paperwork was seldom reproduced but I know of one firm here in England who have copied several award documents - they sell them as copies and they are blank - but the rogue dealers fill in the blanks "age" the paper and then pass the document off as genuine.
Usually you will see documents to SS personnel - original SS typewriters can be bought - but I have also seen citations - for example - 25 Year Faithfull Service Cross - "signed" by Hitler. He never signed these - you should only see Meisnner's on this document.
I could go on but I hope this is helpful enough.
The medal/badge collecting field is far, far worse - plagued with fakes and fantasies and the copies are now excellant - I would not like to be starting my collection today. Some 25 years ago when I began collecting - the fakes were, generally speaking, very obvious but there are some from back then that I see today still being passed of as genuine.
Nevertheless - it is a great hobby - welcome to the Forum.
- Translator
- Member
- Posts: 49
- Joined: 01 Jan 2003, 18:52
- Location: USA
valsente,
I'm not as quick to "rush to judgment" about this document as some of my fellow forum members. I worked as a clerk in the military for six years, and had the opportunity to type literally hundreds of documents, of all kinds. We must remember, after all, that this is a simple EK2 document - there were quite literally millions of these produced during WWII. The lowly desk clerk (on many occasions laboring under "field conditions" - and one can only imagine what the worst of these must have been) was NOT going to care too much about "typing errors". No, far too many period documents have been "torn apart" on these forums because of a preconceived (and totally false) conception of, shall we say, "German correctness". The most important factor to consider (in my opinion) when examining ANY Third Reich document is its "historical framework" i.e. does the piece "fit" into its historical setting or not? It's a pity we do not know the unit designation of this recipient, for this would make confirmation of this piece's "historicity" far easier. I am challenged by this document (NOT "put off" at all, mind you), and so would like to spend a little more time trying to prove its "historical correctness". Obviously, if it doesn't "fit" historically then anyone could (and should) have serious reservations about it.
I'm not as quick to "rush to judgment" about this document as some of my fellow forum members. I worked as a clerk in the military for six years, and had the opportunity to type literally hundreds of documents, of all kinds. We must remember, after all, that this is a simple EK2 document - there were quite literally millions of these produced during WWII. The lowly desk clerk (on many occasions laboring under "field conditions" - and one can only imagine what the worst of these must have been) was NOT going to care too much about "typing errors". No, far too many period documents have been "torn apart" on these forums because of a preconceived (and totally false) conception of, shall we say, "German correctness". The most important factor to consider (in my opinion) when examining ANY Third Reich document is its "historical framework" i.e. does the piece "fit" into its historical setting or not? It's a pity we do not know the unit designation of this recipient, for this would make confirmation of this piece's "historicity" far easier. I am challenged by this document (NOT "put off" at all, mind you), and so would like to spend a little more time trying to prove its "historical correctness". Obviously, if it doesn't "fit" historically then anyone could (and should) have serious reservations about it.
- Translator
- Member
- Posts: 49
- Joined: 01 Jan 2003, 18:52
- Location: USA
- Translator
- Member
- Posts: 49
- Joined: 01 Jan 2003, 18:52
- Location: USA
- Tim Walker
- Member
- Posts: 80
- Joined: 16 Jan 2003, 02:52
- Location: Middleburgh, New York
- Translator
- Member
- Posts: 49
- Joined: 01 Jan 2003, 18:52
- Location: USA
Tim,
Yes; however at this point I'm not quite sure exactly what the stamp says so I'd like to have a better look at it. And I'm no Volkssturm expert, so unless someone can cite me chapter and verse (unequivocably: name your sources) about the institution of this organisation, I plan to "have a look" for myself. That's how we learn (or "unlearn", as the case may be).
Yes; however at this point I'm not quite sure exactly what the stamp says so I'd like to have a better look at it. And I'm no Volkssturm expert, so unless someone can cite me chapter and verse (unequivocably: name your sources) about the institution of this organisation, I plan to "have a look" for myself. That's how we learn (or "unlearn", as the case may be).