DKiG Recommendation - Obstbf Lammerding

[Mike C]

Hello all,

Would be grateful for any help that can be provided on the DKiG document referenced here:

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=261665

My thanks in advance!

Mike

[Mark C. Yerger]

Many awards for the GC and KC were not approved, a large number getting it from a later submission. "German Cross in Gold Holders of the SS and Police" volume 1 explains the process, document types, procedure, signatures, etc in detail. Approved awards have the word "Verleihung" and the approval date at the bottom, most written by Hans Kment who was Himmler's primary decorations officer and a GC holder himself. Unapproved awards, like the one shown, are considerably less desired, especially with typed names instead of signatures.

Mark C. Yerger

[sdesember]

The Vorschlag document, the one shown on the link w/ the Fraktur-esque type font uses "Verleihung" on it too. Why would that one not be approved?

[Mark C. Yerger]

Thats just part of the proposal document title, not the approval written at the bottom in approved cases which is handwritten in 99.9% of cases. A tiny number have it typed. Beside that will be the actual approval (award) date. Numerous examples are in the book mentioned.

I've seen several men who didn't get a KC or GC till a 3rd recommendation. Also some forms were changed to propose a different award that the original form. Such as a Gold GC form for a Silver award, or a GC form changed to an Honor Clasp. One in the link could be used for a Silver or Gold, don't recall seeing that before but the variations were numerous.

Mark C. Yerger

[sdesember]

I see now. Here's the 27.03.43 Vorschlag of the Lammerding's. This must be the .1% approved Vorschlag that you just mentioned where there's no handwritten "verliehen" + the date as it looks like Lammerding received his DKiG a month latter (24.04.43) - see his 31.03.44 Dienstlaufbahn. (Docs Source: John Moore's "Führerliste...")

[sdesember]

Lammerding's

Dienstlaufbahn

[max history]

Many awards for the GC and KC were not approved, a large number getting it from a later submission. "German Cross in Gold Holders of the SS and Police" volume 1 explains the process, document types, procedure, signatures, etc in detail. Approved awards have the word "Verleihung" and the approval date at the bottom, most written by Hans Kment who was Himmler's primary decorations officer and a GC holder himself. Unapproved awards, like the one shown, are considerably less desired, especially with typed names instead of signatures.

Mark C. Yerger

Mark,
I have a slight problem with what you have written here.
I was always under the impression that approved award documents had the handwritten word "Verleihung" followed by the date of the actual presentation, not the approval date as you state. The approval is usually typed as part of the body of the document with the word "einverstanden" (approved/authorised) is it not? And this date is usually different from the Verleihung date. In some documents I have seen, the actual "einverstanden" entry has also been handwritten and signed, whilst in others it has been omitted totally.
Max.

[Mike C]

Gentlemen,

Thank you very much for the information provided - may I ask a fair and reasonable price for this document? As I do not collect documents, I intend to list it on the e-stand.

Again my thanks - and all best wishes for the New Year to you and yours.

Mike

[Mark C. Yerger]

I've written with dozens of KC and GC holders, few got the award on the approval date. The approval date is when they were FORMALLY GRANTED the award, then normally presented the physical decoration at a date when possible or when a ceremony was planned. See the post-Kharkov awards ceremony in "German Cross in Gold Holders" vols 1 and 2 when a large number gathered at one time to receive their certificate and actual medals. Likewise, Weidinger getting his KC for actions with Kampfgruppe "Das Reich" and unaware it was approved until told by Wisliceny when he returned to France (and later presented it by Lammedring). The entries for "einverstanden" I've seen are normal counter approvals going up the chain of command to final approval. Within a division there can be a regiment or battalion commander submission, seconded by a regiment then divisional commander. Some have more than 1 cover sheet for the purpose, though most have 1.

I'd personally have no idea as to value of an unapproved award.

Mark C. Yerger

[max history]

I've written with dozens of KC and GC holders, few got the award on the approval date. The approval date is when they were FORMALLY GRANTED the award, then normally presented the physical decoration at a date when possible or when a ceremony was planned.

Mark C. Yerger

Mark,
Isn't that what I am saying? The date written with the word "Verleihung" is the date they are physically given the decoration, not when it was approved.
Max.

[sdesember]

When taken into account, which would then be the timeline for determining the ordinal sequence of the recipient, the official approval or the physical awarding of the award itself? Or, perhaps this would matter more in awarding other higher awards like the RK or above which I've often seen the use of the example of the handwritten note "verliehen (date) als (ordinal sequence)".

[max history]

When taken into account, which would then be the timeline for determining the ordinal sequence of the recipient, the official approval or the physical awarding of the award itself? Or, perhaps this would matter more in awarding other higher awards like the RK or above which I've often seen the use of the example of the handwritten note "verliehen (date) als (ordinal sequence)".

Surely, a decoration cannot be physically presented without prior approval. One can't present a bloke with a medal and then take it back if it's not approved.
Max.

[sdesember]

That's not what I meant!

An example below for Hausser's EL m. S (I can't seem to find a DK example at the moment), note the handwritten Verliehen: 26.8.44 als 90. Soldat. Does it mean it's the approval date or the physical awarding? Sometimes for beauracratic reason, the notation could be for file keeping to note that the award has been physically delivered to the recipient. (Doc: John Moor'e's "Führerliste)

[max history]

That's not what I meant!

An example below for Hausser's EL m. S (I can't seem to find a DK example at the moment), note the handwritten Verliehen: 26.8.44 als 90. Soldat. Does it mean it's the approval date or the physical awarding? Sometimes for beauracratic reason, the notation could be for file keeping to note that the award has been physically delivered to the recipient. (Doc: John Moor'e's "Führerliste)

That's the point I've raised with Mark. To recap once again.......

Thats just part of the proposal document title, not the approval written at the bottom in approved cases which is handwritten in 99.9% of cases. A tiny number have it typed. Beside that will be the actual approval (award) date.
Mark C. Yerger

Mark,
I have a slight problem with what you have written here.
I was always under the impression that approved award documents had the handwritten word "Verleihung" followed by the date of the actual presentation, not the approval date as you state.

In other words, it has always been my belief that the handwritten entry by Kment (“Verleihung..[date]..”) is the date of the physical presentation of the decoration and not the date of the approval as Mark has written.
Max.

[sdesember]

If the word "verliehen" meant the physical presentation of the award and if this would also apply to the Vorschlag documents for the RK or higher, wouldn't it be unfair for a recipient being mentioned as the tenth recipient of any of these awards, hypothetically for example, when in fact he were already officially approved as the first recipient on paper, but were physically presented as the tenth? I've encountered a lot in reading of lists of the RK or higher Träger where the ordinal sequence as to when they receive the awards is mentioned besides the date of the awarding, similar to the verliehen+date+als on the Vorshlag files. So, from this, I'd assume the sequence had some great importance to it??

Accidently when searching for a DK Vorschlag file that would bear "verliehen+date+als", I found that the Vorschlag files which had the annotation were usually for EL or above. The RK ones were occasionally found with the annotation, but they mostly just had the word "verliehen+date" on them. I've found none thus far on the DK files and even for the Ehrenblatt Vorschlag the annotation would just bear "nennung+date" instead of the usual "verliehen+date".