Announcement

**Gerdan** · 08-23-2011, 04:32 PM

Kesselring always wrote his signature as "Kesselring" not "Keßelring" !

http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=h...w=1280&bih=830

Gerdan

**415514** · 08-23-2011, 04:52 PM

hello gerdan
you all right but this is not an original signature
this is a stamped one and is similar to other original afrika document
i wonder" since the afrika campaign decoration was imtroduced on 1 st january 1943 why it carries the date 1942? mistake or fake?"

**Brian R** · 08-23-2011, 05:19 PM

The date is clearly wrong. I would say its a typo but I don't like the stamp nor the fact that the date is actually typed with a typewriter. It was in that book?

**afrikasandman** · 08-23-2011, 08:14 PM

well all the above and its listed for schutzen which is a rifle regiment and not a specific unit and the Heer documents are different than this luftwaffe one. Im not saying that some heer soldiers didn't get these but it would be few and far between as this is a luftwaffe design. Matt

**415514** · 08-24-2011, 12:21 AM

hello brian
yes ,it was folded and put inside a book edited in 1943 in germany as in the 2nd pic
the edge uncovered are more yellowed than the covered area

**paulj** · 08-24-2011, 08:04 AM

Aside from the "42" (could be a typo) everything else looks fine. The major's signature on the document is correct as is the printed spelling of Kesselring.

See http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/camp..._documents.htm

The Schuetzen rank? Maybe someone can explain that.

**Simon O.** · 08-24-2011, 09:14 AM

From those examples i've seen, this stamp should have a 4 at the bottom of the wreath and the date of course is completely wrong. I also don't particularly like the blotches or burn marks, they look fabricated from here.

**hucks216** · 08-24-2011, 09:25 AM

Here is an original for a ground crew member of JG 27, showing the small '4' that Simon mentions.

Attached Files

**Brian R** · 08-24-2011, 11:09 AM

This is one of those documents where it generally looks ok, but the combination of various minor issues makes it very questionable. Kevin, does your document have the same glossy look on the black lettering as the one on the top of the thread?

It seems weird that it says schuetzen, that the date is wrong, that it is typed (although that may be okay), and that the stamp doesn't seem right. I also kind of find that the name, Sturm, is suspect but I may be splitting hairs. And, I agree that the aging seems questionable... sometimes I think its beneficial to hold an award document in hand and smell it. Many of these docs seem to have a certain smell that help with determining authenticity.

**hucks216** · 08-24-2011, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by Brian R View Post

Kevin, does your document have the same glossy look on the black lettering as the one on the top of the thread?

No it doesn't looky glossy at all, not even in bright sunlight.

Attached Files

JG 27 d.jpg (168.4 KB, 72 views)

**Ian Thomson** · 08-24-2011, 03:08 PM

The burn marks certainly look like the`ve been added for effect.

Cheers
Ian

Announcement

afrika document 1942 ??!!

afrika document 1942 ??!!

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread