cancelled KC holders / state of the science / KC lists

Discussions on the personalities of the Wehrmacht and of the organizations not covered in the other sections. Hosted by askropp and Frech.
Jan-Hendrik
Member
Posts: 8581
Joined: 11 Nov 2004 12:53
Location: Hohnhorst / Deutschland

Post by Jan-Hendrik » 29 Mar 2007 15:23

After a first reflection I would state them as KC holders and list them with their units and add the remark that they lost the award by judgement after 20. Juli 1944.
As pointed out in our private correspondence I would go conform with doing it this way.

Jan-Hendrik

User avatar
Bernd R
Member
Posts: 4637
Joined: 01 Feb 2006 15:12
Location: Bavaria, Germany

Post by Bernd R » 02 May 2007 11:49

deprivation of awards

KC recipients who lost all rights of their orders and awards by judgement due to their connection to the "20. Juli 1944" should be listed in general like below.
They will be listed like that in the KC lists of the ongoing KC holders per unit project in the "awardholders/units" thread.
Their KC awards will be counted with the KC awards of their headquarter units to get a number in total of awards after a statistical evaluation.

Regarding their status as KC holders, the loss of this status in 1944 and the possibility of a rehabilitation it is to point out that there is a law in Germany since 1998 called : "Gesetz zur Aufhebung nationalsozialistischer Unrechtsurteile in der Strafrechtspflege und von Sterilisationsentscheidungen der ehemaligen Erbgesundheitsgerichte" (NS-AufhG) [Bundesgesetzblatt 1998, Teil I, Nr.58, S.2501-2502]
Obviously in the moment it is not researched in detail wether the recipients in question are rehabilitated only by this law and if this would also mean to get back their awards by law or if a special proceeding for that is needed. As a matter of fact [which is according to general rules of German Law] every judgement needs a request [here of relatives of the recipients e.g.] to the Staatsanwaltschaft to be eventually quashed. The right institution for these cases is the Reha-Kammer of Landgericht Berlin [V.S., page 87]

Resumé : this field is still open and needs some research from a legal point of view
Heistermann von Ziehlberg, Gustav 27.07.1944 Generalleutnant Kdr 28. Jäg.Div
[sentenced to death by Reichskriegsgericht on 21.11.1944 due to connection to the 20. Juli 1944 plot ; resulting in addition in the loss of all orders and awards ; shot 02.02.1945 at Berlin-Spandau]
Olbricht, Friedrich 27.10.1939 Generalleutnant Kdr 24. Inf.Div
[shot according to martial law on 20.07.1944 , Berlin Bendlerblock (OKH) due to participation in 20th july plot ; expelled from the Heer posthumously on 04.08.1944]
Jäger, Fritz 26.05.1940 Major Kdr II./Inf.Rgt 8
[discharged from the Heer on 14.08.1944 due to his connection to the 20.Juli1944 plot ; as a civilian sentenced to death by the Volksgerichtshof on 21.08.1944, executed the same day at Berlin-Plötzensee ; as a consequence loss of all orders and awards]
Bernd

User avatar
Bernd R
Member
Posts: 4637
Joined: 01 Feb 2006 15:12
Location: Bavaria, Germany

Post by Bernd R » 02 May 2007 12:07

To point out the difficulties and variants of single cases follwing two examples showing the extremes.

My impression : If the OdR accepted Brökerhoff as a member of their association, their right !
If you require a proof or a serious confirmation , is this enough or acceptable ?
Brökerhoff, Wilhelm 08.05.1945 Major Führer Pz.Art.Rgt „Brandenburg“
[no proof in Bundesarchiv ; statement by B. that award was noted down in his Soldbuch, he could not show it on a request because it was getting lost ; several statements of superiors after the war on this case : Div.Kdr Schulte-Heuthaus did recall a proposal ; KG Pz.Korps "GD" General Jauer was not recalling this single case but had no doubts that after a proposal the award would have been approved ; on base of Gen Jauers presumption Admiral Dönitz in 1961 did confirm B. the award of the KC on 08.05.1945 [!]]

Josef Brandner is of other quality, quite tricky case.
Anyone has seen the photo of him wearing the OL ? More info on that ?
Brandner, Josef (“Sepp”) [846. EL] 26.04.1945 Major Kdr Stug.Brig 912
[no proof in Bundesarchiv ; according his own statement Brandner was bestowed in Kurland by General der Artillerie Herzog, KG XXXVIII. AK ; he didn't give a date for this bestowal ; obviously photos are existing which show him wearing the Oakleaves ; OdR presumes a direct award (by Burgdorf/Keitel/Hitler ? , Berlin) ; V.S. is stating that an OL award four or five weeks after the KC award would be extraordinary ; and giving the additional info that several proposals have been rejected because the man was highly awarded just a few month before ; comment / Bernd R : this procedere would be an exception of course, but is not of much weight as an argument against the award -> argument : Peter Frantz awarded KC and OL the same day , Ramcke awarded Sw and Diamonds the same day ! ; award date assumed by OdR]
Bernd

User avatar
W.Vermeer
Member
Posts: 894
Joined: 03 Jun 2004 16:28
Location: Nederland

Post by W.Vermeer » 03 Jun 2007 21:05

I think that it is not really the question wether you agree with an author or researcher or not. If you want to agree on something, you need to research the research questions. After all in historical research every source only tells you the answer to the question you ask to the source. I think it is not to any researcher or historian to say if someone did or did not receive a KC. I think you can only agree here to look at every person on the list and revieuw all primary and secondary sources regarding the KC or higher of that one person. It is then up to any reader himself to make his or hers own conclusion. So I think the topic is now getting on the right track with the last posts.

User avatar
ccj
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 23:21
Location: USA

Post by ccj » 02 Jul 2007 03:02

It just doesn't make sense to even consider any of this. The war is over and the awards were made. The government of the 3rd Reich ended and the are no authorities who have a right to attempt changing history.

I hope the current government doesn't have to pay for such waste...

User avatar
Bernd R
Member
Posts: 4637
Joined: 01 Feb 2006 15:12
Location: Bavaria, Germany

Post by Bernd R » 02 Jul 2007 09:46

ccj,

not changing history, absolutely Yes !

But many of the awards were not made.
The only institution which changed history was the OdR and Herr Fellgiebel by accepting recipients as their member = regarding them as (official) KC holders.

Bernd

Jan-Hendrik
Member
Posts: 8581
Joined: 11 Nov 2004 12:53
Location: Hohnhorst / Deutschland

Post by Jan-Hendrik » 12 Aug 2007 10:25

According to this Announcement for 2nd Edition of Ritterkreuträger it seems that I was right with my thoughts regarding Feuchtinger :wink:

Jan-Hendrik

See: http://kramerwf.de/fileadmin/user_uploa ... /block.pdf
http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-43367851.html
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Feuchtinger

Jan-Hendrik
Member
Posts: 8581
Joined: 11 Nov 2004 12:53
Location: Hohnhorst / Deutschland

Post by Jan-Hendrik » 16 Sep 2007 12:48

As there is an auction with the Nachlass of Major Langer of JG 3 I want to ask what the current status regarding this case is...have a look in the documents belonging to this heritage, especially the "Vorschlag" with the date 31.Mai 1945 (!!)...

Jan-Hendrik

User avatar
Bernd R
Member
Posts: 4637
Joined: 01 Feb 2006 15:12
Location: Bavaria, Germany

Post by Bernd R » 19 Sep 2007 13:30

Karl-Heinz Langer, KC confirmed [sources : Scherzer, Fellgiebel, Obermaier]

geb: 19. 04. 1914 Görlitz
gest: 06. 05. 1955 Remscheid

RK: 20. 04. 1945, Major, Kdr. III./ JG 3 Udet, kein Nachweis im BA
vorhanden, Nachweis durch E. Obermaier u. Gemeinschaft der Jagdflieger
erbracht, Bild mit RK vorhanden

DK: 26. 07. 1944, Hptm., Kdr. III./ JG 3 Udet

Ehrenpokal: 12. 08. 1944

486 Feindflüge, darunter 15 Jabo- Einsätze und 57 Tiefangriffe, am Boden 5
Flugzeuge, 21 LKW, 20 bespannte Fahrzeuge, 3 Stalinorgeln, 1 Lokomotive und
1 Raupenfahrzeug vernichtet

30 Luftsiege, davon 10 im Westen ( 4 Viermots )


It looks like the list was carried on and dated later (?).

regards, Bernd

Jan-Hendrik
Member
Posts: 8581
Joined: 11 Nov 2004 12:53
Location: Hohnhorst / Deutschland

Post by Jan-Hendrik » 19 Sep 2007 17:45

Thanks for this help 8-)

Jan-Hendrik

User avatar
coburg22
Member
Posts: 2205
Joined: 18 Oct 2006 06:34
Location: Denver

Post by coburg22 » 16 Nov 2007 07:38

Hello,

I just read the Scherzer book and feel it was a very informative but I also believe the Fellgiebel book to be the Bible on all Ritterkreuztrager. There is no way the OdR would have let someone wear a Knight's Cross that was not deserving because that would only tarnish their community of RKT and give themselves a bad name. There were cases where if there was no documentation available than sworn statements were taken and that seemed good enough for them providing that the person giving the sworn statement was reliable in the first place. In the case of recipients, he wants to disclaim awards to these members of the Wehrmacht all of whom had probably deserved the Knight's Cross or Higher Awards whether they were formally approved or not due to the overwhelming odds they were facing in the last year of the war and the repeated acts of bravery and sacrifice that were being made. I am sure considering the circumstances of the time that handing out of awards helped with moral in a otherwise dismal situation. It seemed that it was common practice with the Third Reich in general when you think about such coveted awards as the Golden Party Badge and Blood Order that were at first so treasured by it's recipient for being an old fighter and than you see a newcommer with the same awards for being a loyal party member or serving jail time in the name of the NSDAP. If anyone was not deserving of an award that was not listed in his book but received it officially was GFM Wilhelm Keitel, He was purely a desk general and really did not fall under the criteria as a recipient of his rank who was like Brauchitsch or a Armee Gruppe Commander. Scherzer also disclaims Alfred Jodl's Oakleaves which I don't understand because he was entitled to the RK awarded to him five days earlier but not the Oakleaves that he received from the very hands of the new Reich President. Anyway, these brave soldiers deserve to be left in peace and not have their names tarnished as most are already dead and dying. If he denies these men of their bravery than perhaps he should go back farther in German History and review all the high military awards given for Political Reasons to Kings and Princes that were not deserving. To hell with the paperwork and official documentation, unless Scherzer fought in it than he can't understand it as only those who were there can.

User avatar
krichter33
Member
Posts: 843
Joined: 22 Mar 2003 11:37
Location: U.S.A.

Post by krichter33 » 16 Nov 2007 08:07

I agree with you one hundred percent Coburg22!!! I'm reposting my original post earlier on this thread to reiterate my opinion. Because to me this is a very important issue, and I don't like to fact that someone sixty years after the fact is trying to rewrite history and negate these men these awards, just because they might not have followed absolute bureaucratic red tape, especially at the end of the war. Anyways here's my post: And I frankly could care less what the Scherzer fans say to this....

Scherzer's research is interesting, but I still accept the findings of the ODR. If one man can come after sixty years and feel justified in stripping these awards because of bureaucratic reasons, at a time when there were basically no bureaucracies left in Germany, then I guess he is entitled to do so. But as far as I'm concerned the ODR has the final say on this matter, because they are the organization that represents Knight's Cross winners. I think some of Scherzer's bureaucratic nitpicking is quite hilarious as well. Especially the fact that he tries to use such 'rules and regulations' at a time in the Third Reich where the rule of law had pretty much disappeared, and any notion of bureaucratic order had ceased to exist. For example, General Dietrich may have 'officially' awarded these awards, though technically according to the old Fuhrer order he was not one of the original generals in a particular zone that was entitled to do so. Frankly I could care less. First of all, HITLER WAS DEAD by this time. Second, the zones changed shape, command structures, ect... So, If one of the highest ranking Generals in the Waffen SS deems a particular soldier worthy of the Knight's Cross, then I accept that. I could care less about a long dead order. The same goes with Scherzer negating any Knights Cross awards by Doenitz. This I find to be hilarious. Yes the war ended on the 8th, however, Doenitz government technically lasted a few weeks longer. Oh yeah, and he happened to be the FUHRER at this time. So according the Scherzer the very Fuhrer himself could not award these medals, and thus they are cancelled!!! What a joke. Overall, I think Scherzer's research in the bureaucracy of the awarding process, and its breakdown towards the end of the War, is sound and important. But when all of a sudden he feels that it is up to him, sixty years after the fact, to come in with a black marker and "cancel" certain awards because they didn't fit into this nice little bureaucratic box at a time when any such box had ceased to exist, I find that behavior repulsive. And by the way, I'm not taking about outright cheats who lied about their award, that's a different matter, and those cheats should be exposed. But overall I'm glad the ODR has rejected Scherzer's work. My only fear, is in the future, publications of Ritterkreuztrager books, like the Biblio Verlags, or other upcoming ones, that the author's might feel 'pressured' into removing Knight's Cross holders from their works. For this I suggest a compromise. Any future book dealing with Knight's Cross holders should include all holders listed in Fellgeibel's list. However, if the author wants to, he can add an asterisk to any of the cancelled Knight's Cross holder, and mention this as a footnote. This is actually what Florian Berger did in his last book: "RITTERKREUZTRÄGER AUS ÖSTERREICH UND DEN K.U.K. KRONLÄNDERN." He included all Austrian Knight's Cross holders in the book. The ones "canceled" by Scherzer he placed a small footnote mentioning this. Anyways, thats all I have to say. So all you Scherzer people out there can flame away at me as much as you like, I'm done discussing this topic.

Jan-Hendrik
Member
Posts: 8581
Joined: 11 Nov 2004 12:53
Location: Hohnhorst / Deutschland

Post by Jan-Hendrik » 16 Nov 2007 14:06

Sorry gentlemen, but you both ignore the facts...he is no "history rewritten", here was firstly done historical research on a scientifical level...nobody talked about "deserved or not deserved", this stupid argumentation firstly appeared by the OdR as they had to face the outcome of Mr.Scherzer's research :D :D

Here was simply done the task to check the official documentation...which was completly ignored by the Vorstand of the OdR during the decades..to call scientifical research as
bureaucratic nitpicking
allows the interpretation of a complete of lack knowledge regarding the juristical background of an award bestowal :wink:

Your further sentences underlines that :wink:

If you think the OdR was able to judge about awards, to "create" bestowal dates and so on, please do so, nobody will disturb you...but for many of us, who look on this topic with the claim of correct historical work the argumentation presented by the OdR is simply not acceptable.

Jan-Hendrik

User avatar
Dieter Zinke
In memoriam
Posts: 9829
Joined: 02 Dec 2003 09:12
Location: Koblenz / germany

Post by Dieter Zinke » 16 Nov 2007 15:35

Bravo Jan-Hendrik !!

The force of the better arguments should convince all - even the last - doubters.
Prejudicing the statements of Scherzer is only a scream of horror of those who must ascertain that their fool' s paradise has been destroyed deeply.

Nobody is required to accept the "new bible", - maybe you know the quote of the "Old Fritz"
(the king of Prussia Friedrich II.):
"In meinem Staat kann jeder nach seiner Façon seelig werden"
("In my country everybody may be blessed as he likes it")

My old class teacher was often in the habit to say:
"Manche lernen es nie, andere noch später"
("Some will never learn it, others still later")

The long and the short of it is - without any smart- aleck arrogancy for my part - that
"Die Gedanken sind frei ...."

All the best

Dieter Zinke

User avatar
krichter33
Member
Posts: 843
Joined: 22 Mar 2003 11:37
Location: U.S.A.

Post by krichter33 » 17 Nov 2007 00:17

Well to each his own. But Scherzer is then doing exactly what you claim the ODR shouldn't do. By negating certain awards sixty years after the fact due to some very strict criteria that was almost impossible to follow at the end of the war, he's taking it upon himself to remove these awards. Who gives him the right to make such judgements. Like I said before I think his research into the difficult awards procedure, especially at the end of the war, is important, and very interesting. His research shows that a number of Knight's Crosses were "technically" not official, due to their failure to pass ALL so-called legal avenues. Of course the collapse of the Reich can explain why these avenues weren't cleared, but either way, it's good, historical information to know. Yet, what I object to is when Scherzer decides to go one by one through all the questionable Knight's Cross awards and literaly black them out of existence, sixty years after the fact!!! Yes, of course I'll concede that certain awards didn't pass the bureaucratic level that was in place earlier in the war, yet it doesn't give any historian an excuse to dismiss them. On who's authority is he doing this? So, who accepts this nonsense. So far it seems most people still regard those "negated" awards to be of value. If one wants to put a little footnote, noting that that particular award didn't pass all the complicated avenues of approval that were in place earlier in the war, yet is still counted by the ODR, they are welcomed to that. Yet, despite what outstanding research Scherzer did accomplish in exposing the difficulty of awards at that stage of the war, his book will still be taken as a secondary list, a suggestion. Most RK books written in the future will keep the Fellgiebel list as the main source, and maybe include Scherzer's suggestions as footnotes. Just look at the two newest RK books to come out: Berger's book on RK winners of Austria, and The Face of Courage, all list the original RK winners. The only difference is he includes small footnotes mentioning Scherzer's opinion, yet the original lists still stand. So overall, other than his interesting research on late war awards, no one is really going to change everything they have written on RK winners, just to satisfy Scherzer.

Return to “The Dieter Zinke Axis Biographical Research Section”