HisCol

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Knight Crosses today

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    RK awarded to Hauptmann Albert Brachat
    Zugführer 1./InfRgt 14
    Awarded on: July 4th, 1940

    (Photo credits to WAF member frankscholz)
    Attached Files

    Comment


      Front and back of Brachat's KC

      (Photo credits to WAF member frankscholz)
      Attached Files

      Comment


        And finally, zoom on the preliminary award document.

        (Photo credits to WAF member frankscholz)
        Attached Files

        Comment


          RK awarded to Oberleutnant Erich Lepkowski
          Führer 5./FschJägRgt 2
          Awarded on: August 8th, 1944

          (Photo credits to WAF member AndreM)
          Attached Files

          Comment


            RK awarded to Leutnant Willy Kleemann
            Führer II./Panzer-Pionier-Bataillon 51
            Awarded on: January 11th, 1945
            Attached Files

            Comment


              One more photo of the grouping.
              Attached Files

              Comment


                Originally posted by Sepp45 View Post
                RK awarded to Leutnant Johann Lutz
                Zugführer Divisions-Begleit-Kompanie / 116. Panzerdivision "Windhund" / 7.Armee / Heeresgruppe B
                Awarded on: December 9th, 1944
                .
                Attached Files

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Sepp45 View Post
                  Zoom on Schirmer's KC document.
                  .
                  Attached Files

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by frankandfrank View Post
                    Schwerin document: Where is the date????????????????????
                    Here is the document that Schwerin himself contributed to the book on the Ritterkreuztraeger of the 116. PzD - "Wir fur Alle" by Kurt Wendt
                    Attached Files

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by John M. Donovan View Post

                      What is your source for the 5.5.44 date?

                      John
                      The original award document from Schwerin

                      Compare the position of the stamp -
                      Attached Files
                      Last edited by naxos; 04-24-2016, 03:16 PM.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by frankandfrank View Post
                        von Schwerin swords : 04. November 1943 - approval date: 05. Mai 1944 !!!
                        The delay of 6 month is due to several things.

                        Schwerin was to receive the swords during his leave on February 15. 1944. He was unable to accept the swords before because he could not leave his division while in heavy fighting during the collapse of the southern front after the defeat at Stalingrad.

                        In February 1944 Schwerin was accused by the Oberbefehlshaber of the 6th Army Hollidt to be responsible of the break down of the southern Russian front by:
                        a.) of moving his 16. Panzer-Grenadier Division from a critical sector and thus exposing the front line to the advantage of the enemy.
                        b.) not reporting to the General Kommando in due time
                        c.) in a critical situation not have followed orders and neglected the communication with his superiors.
                        Hollidt relieved Schwerin of his command (von Manteuffel took over) until the investigation of the charges was completed.

                        On February 15, 1944 Schwerin notified the Fuehrer Hauptquatier that he felt he could not accept such an high award (the swords) until he has been cleared of the accusations against him.

                        When the investigation completed, clearing Schwerin of all charges, he accepted the Swords on May 5, 1944.

                        .
                        Last edited by naxos; 04-24-2016, 04:10 PM.

                        Comment


                          Hi Naxos,

                          What is your opinion of the 2nd document without the date posted earlier in the thread? Clearly it differs from the one you've posted from the book. Is it original? Fake? Are they both original? I have my own thoughts...

                          Regards,
                          John

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by John M. Donovan View Post
                            Hi Naxos,

                            What is your opinion of the 2nd document without the date posted earlier in the thread? Clearly it differs from the one you've posted from the book. Is it original? Fake? Are they both original? I have my own thoughts...

                            Regards,
                            John
                            John, the one without the date is a fake. It is definitely a facsimile (scan) of the original (same as in the book) with some changes to deceive (like the stamp). The one in the book is the original that was at the time of publishing in the possession of Schwerin.
                            Last edited by naxos; 04-24-2016, 07:35 PM.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by naxos View Post
                              John, the one without the date is a fake. It is definitely a facsimile (scan) of the original (same as in the book) with some changes to deceive (like the stamp). The one in the book is the original that was at the time of publishing in the possession of Schwerin.
                              Hi Naxos,

                              If that undated document does actually exist in the real world and is not just an image online, then it would have to be real because all the component parts shown are real - document, typeset, signature, stamp, etc. There couldn't be a fake document with a real Burgdorf signature.

                              Now with the benefit of a second document to compare with, I tend to agree with you that it appears someone has quite probably photoshopped the original to create an original-looking (but not original) document with the intent to deceive viewers online.

                              Nice work putting the pieces together!
                              John

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by John M. Donovan View Post
                                Nice work putting the pieces together!
                                I agree! Thanks Naxos for making the comparative photos and analysis

                                Comment

                                Users Viewing this Thread

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 9 users online. 0 members and 9 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.

                                Working...
                                X