any info on the 73 PZ Jag. Abt., please help

[Mike Pinkus]

can not find what division this Abt. was assigned....the 73rd infantry had the 173 Pz. Jag. assigned.
any help out there??
thanks
mike

[Ian Jewison]

Mike,

Is this on a document or something? If so can you show it?
I have just checked my sources and can not find reference to a Pz.Jäg.Abt. 73......

Regards, Ian

[Mike Pinkus]

pics

as you can see an EK2 dated April 1943...appears to be officer cannidate....facsmile of Keital signature...
thought it should be the 73rd infantry division but their Abt. was numbered 173
mike

Mike,

Is this on a document or something? If so can you show it?
I have just checked my sources and can not find reference to a Pz.Jäg.Abt. 73......

Regards, Ian

[Ian Jewison]

Mike,

Can you show a larger scan of the stamp and signature please......initially I am not so keen on the stamp!!!

Thanks, Ian

[Ian Jewison]

I have tried to make a large image....

What does anyone else think of the stamp and signature?

[bhholst]

Doc.

hello Mike.
Besides the apparent misgivings expressed by Ian which I share, here are more points to make this document one I would not consider adding to my collection:
-why would a E.K.II document supposedly be signed by Feldmarschall Keitel ?
-the unlikely unit besides Pz.Jaeg.Abt. 73 given here as II.Pz.J....73 which would in German military terms indicate II.Abteilung of Pz.Jg.Abt. and therefore makes no sense at all.
-the abbreviation "O.A." ?? One may see O.U. on occasion but O.A. ?
Bernhard H.Holst

[Mike Pinkus]

ok
attached is a clear scan of the stamp, it is crisp and very legible...the pics above were taken under glass(docuent is in frame)....as far as Keital i have seen his signature before, i am not sure if it is original or a facsimile, however it is his signature, imo....the O.A. stands for officer cannidate according to my investigation...so my thinking is he was in school somewhere when this was received...a school directly subordinate to the HQ of the wehrmacht, thus the Keital sig.
the paper is correct and obviously old the reverse has old glue on the back....
i agree with the unit designation as being odd and have not been able to explain that though i am not very proficient with German unit ID methods
mike

hello Mike.
Besides the apparent misgivings expressed by Ian which I share, here are more points to make this document one I would not consider adding to my collection:
-why would a E.K.II document supposedly be signed by Feldmarschall Keitel ?
-the unlikely unit besides Pz.Jaeg.Abt. 73 given here as II.Pz.J....73 which would in German military terms indicate II.Abteilung of Pz.Jg.Abt. and therefore makes no sense at all.
-the abbreviation "O.A." ?? One may see O.U. on occasion but O.A. ?
Bernhard H.Holst

[Ian Jewison]

the O.A. stands for officer cannidate according to my investigation...so my thinking is he was in school somewhere when this was received...a school directly subordinate to the HQ of the wehrmacht, thus the Keital sig.

Mike,

This is correct it can stand for Offizier Anwärter, however this is a rank appointment to it should read something like Unteroffizier u. O.A. Thomas Hirsch.....O.U. stands for Orstsunterkunft or in the field....a normal expression of where he was...Div.Gef.Stand, Afrika, Im Feld are other examples.

Also correct in what Bernhard says...II Abteilung of Panzerjäger Abteilung 73???!!!!
There are some obscure units similar to this actually as in I/Geb.Jäg.Ers.Btl.98 and II/Geb.Jäg.Ers.Btl.98 abbreviated as I/98...you would expect to be First Battalion of Regiment 98 but it is not!!! These were independant replacement battalions in Mittenwald and Garmisch but I will leave it there as not to confuse matters.....

There could be a typo on the unit, however I do not like the overall document....I can not say for sure if it is right or wrong without having it in my hands but from what I see I would pass......

Regards, Ian