SS Document on epier

[Mike Dunn]

Anyone have any thoughts as to if this SS Award document is original or not? Epier auction 264966. Thanks in advance. Mike

[Mark Holden]

Hi Mike,

I have seen the document, my concerns would be that the officer who signed it was Otto Baum who according to my info did not assume command of the Das Reich until 28 July 44. Mark Yerger's book has Baum in Germany until June 44. I find it odd that Baum would sign a Document as Div Commander when he wasn't.
I would also like to see a scan of the top of the document. If Gordon Williamson reads this he may like to comment further on my thoughts.

I would be suspicious. If original this sort of document to Das Reich is very desirable.

I also note that the dealer has a no return policy!!!

Hope this helps

Cheers
Mark

[Ian Jewison]

Mike,
To be honest I don't like the look of it full stop! The authorising stamp does not look too convincing for a start, this is for "SS Panzer Aufklärungs Abteilung "Das Reich". For an EK document I would expect a Divisional stamp! The signature does look like that of Otto Baum and as Mark said Baum was not yet the Division Commander, however the i.V. means "a representative" which really means he is signing on the behalf of the Div. CO.....
Either way I would say keep your money....
Regards, Ian

[Mark Holden]

Hi Mike,

Just to support Ian's comment I have just checked An EKI document that I own to an Unterscharfuhrer in the Das Reich Flak Abteilung it has a Divisional stamp and was
issued in Aug 44. Other lesser Documents to the same man his promotion and Black Wound Document are Unit stamped or Fp Nr. You can see a scan of the Unterscharfuhrers Document on my thread on Das reich Documents Collectors about a month ago.

Cheers

Mark

[Gordon Williamson]

I too would have some reservations about this piece. I am always suspicious of non-standard documents, especially those with SS-Runes emblazoned on them. Almost all of the EK docs I have had to SS men have been the standardregulation type. I haven't seen a genuine piece in this format before.
The price is also suspciously low, as Mark says, these docs are rare and command a high price.

On Ian's point though, the signature block "i.V." over a facsimilie signature is OK.
Mark the doc you refer to I assume is the Schröder piece which used to be mine. You will note it has the same set up. with "i.V." simply I assume, denoting it was done on behalf of Baum (for those of you not familiar with the doc it is on page 92 of Forman's Guide to Third Reich Diocuments Vol 1.

I suppose the critical issue is that the date is for a point at which Baum was not in fact the Divisional commander. However, I have a funny feeling that the term Div.-Führer as oppopsed to Div.Kdr is significant.
He may have been physically "in charge" of or leading the Division but not actually at that time appointed formally as Divisional Commander.

I still don't like it though!

Gordon

[Eric JB]

What I do not like on this document is the letter type in the document stamp, particular the ch at the end in the Das Reich. This lettertype is often seen on fake stampers.
Take also a look on his other "special ss document for the Panzerbadge in Silver", also for the ss. This unit stamp is a fake, known for many years.
The signature/stamp on both documents are done the same way. Both documents have the same very low price for a ss document.
I think both are faked.

yours friendly Eric-Jan Bakker

[Mike Dunn]

Wow! Thanks for the comments! This is what makes this forum so great. Thanks to all. Mike