Stalingrad Crosses

[Laurence Strong]

What is the story behind the Stalingrad Crosses.


/Jacob

The 44th Inf Divisiopn was formed in Vienna iin 1938. The 134ty Inf Regt was the tradition bearer of the Imperial Austrian Army 4th Inf Regt "Hoch-und Deutchmeister". The original 44th Inf Div was destroyed Stalingrad Feb '43, the 2nd 44 Inf Div was formed June '43 and given the honour title "ReichGrenadier Divisione Hoch-und Deutchmeister". Hope this helps

[Peter J.]

Hi Lawrence.

I don't wanna be picky, but wasn't wearing of the actual shoulder-board
limited to only the 134:th Grenadier Regiment replacement unit and the
Divisional Staff of the Reichgrenadier-Division "Hoch und Detschmeister"?

KR
Peter

[Pieter Verbruggen]

The Stalingrad Cross devise posted by Dave Sutter is unquestionable 100%original, the two posted by djpool are very suspicious to me.


Pieter

[Laurence Strong]

Hi Lawrence.

I don't wanna be picky, but wasn't wearing of the actual shoulder-board
limited to only the 134th Grenadier Regiment replacement unit and the
Divisional Staff of the Reichgrenadier-Division "Hoch und Detschmeister"?

KR
Peter

I dont know the answer to that. Like you I know the Regt wore it, But did the reconstituted Div wear them........I will try to find out, mayby someone else knows the answer?

[djpool]

The Stalingrad Cross devise posted by Dave Sutter is unquestionable 100%original, the two posted by djpool are very suspicious to me.


Pieter

Hi Pieter,

I have no doubts Daves is good and have compared his to mine on several occasions since this topic has come up before. Daves appears to be slightly crisper around the feet then mine do but thats a problem with my photography. The detail is there I just can't seem to capture it with my camera. Can you elaborate more on what you think is suspicious. If mine are bad then it might prevent another collector from making the same mistake.

Since one of the the purposes is to educate members on what originals look like and help them learn from other members mistakes it might be appropriate to provide as much information as possible.Heres a link to another forum where the topic was discussed.

http://daggers.infopop.net/2/OpenTop...196#8183062196

Here are some pictures of other cast reproductions just for info.

Regards Jim

[djpool]

Another repro

[Dave Suter]

Most of the fakes I've seen get the blue color wrong. Tends to have too much of an aqua hue to it. Also, I don't think (but I could be wrong) that they came in any metal color but silver. I haven't seen enough originals to be sure about that either, but all of the 'known' good ones I've seen were silver.

[Brian S]

I have to agree, Dave's is the only one I like.

[djpool]

Most of the fakes I've seen get the blue color wrong. Tends to have too much of an aqua hue to it. Also, I don't think (but I could be wrong) that they came in any metal color but silver. I haven't seen enough originals to be sure about that either, but all of the 'known' good ones I've seen were silver.

Hi Dave,

Unfortunately without the actual German wartime specs regarding their manufacture current references form the basis for trying to determine originality. These days even stating that something came direct from the vet isn't proof for anyone except the owner. Of course the references all differ in their descriptions lets see:

Gordon Williamson-Yellow metal with light blue paint, no measurements given,

Angolia/Schlicht-Grey light metal measuring 3.3 x 2.9 cm, light blue inner arms

Angolia (fuhrer fatherland)-silver finish and blue inner arm color, the picture appears to be dark blue. measures 3.2 x 2.5 cm

Hormann-just states stamped of light metal measuring 33 x 29 mm. The two pictures he shows one in gold metal with a light blue similar to the one I posted. The other cross appears to be of a darker metal with a dark blue paint.

Davis-Grey metal and the inner arms appear light blue.No measurements.

One thing I noticed was the details in the photos were consistent among all the references, despite differences in the base metal and inner arms.

My crosses both measure 3.2 CM by 2.5 CM which IMHO is correct. If the short arms are 2.9CM then they would be too wide for the normal officers shoulder board. I also did measurements of the pictures used in the references and the 2.5 CM width seems to be correct.

So why all the disprencies among the books? Maybe the cross' were manufactured by several firms or the specs only specified that the devices were to be stamped from light metal with blue inner arms. I don't have an answer.

So I'm of the opinion if the detailing is good and crisp,its stamped with 2-4 back prongs (i've heard both are good) and the measurements are 3.2 by 2.5 CM (Just my personal belief) then its likely the Crosses are good.

Dave would it be too much to ask what yours measure out at?

Most of the copies I've seen have tended to be cast. There may be some decent stamped ones out there now. But 12 years ago when I picked up the dark metal set I never saw a repro stamped set.in fact I never saw another set period at any show I went to in Germany.

As an extra note Bender states that from discussions with vets that 3 distinct variations of the cross (one without the Stalingrad banner) were actually made and distributed to the Division.

I would welcome any opinions/evidence to further this discussion. If anyone has pictures of known copies that would be helpful to.

Regards Jim

[nutmeg]

Hi Dave,

Unfortunately without the actual German wartime specs regarding their manufacture current references form the basis for trying to determine originality. These days even stating that something came direct from the vet isn't proof for anyone except the owner. Of course the references all differ in their descriptions lets see:

Gordon Williamson-Yellow metal with light blue paint, no measurements given,

Angolia/Schlicht-Grey light metal measuring 3.3 x 2.9 cm, light blue inner arms

Angolia (fuhrer fatherland)-silver finish and blue inner arm color, the picture appears to be dark blue. measures 3.2 x 2.5 cm

Hormann-just states stamped of light metal measuring 33 x 29 mm. The two pictures he shows one in gold metal with a light blue similar to the one I posted. The other cross appears to be of a darker metal with a dark blue paint.

Davis-Grey metal and the inner arms appear light blue.No measurements.

One thing I noticed was the details in the photos were consistent among all the references, despite differences in the base metal and inner arms.

My crosses both measure 3.2 CM by 2.5 CM which IMHO is correct. If the short arms are 2.9CM then they would be too wide for the normal officers shoulder board. I also did measurements of the pictures used in the references and the 2.5 CM width seems to be correct.

So why all the disprencies among the books? Maybe the cross' were manufactured by several firms or the specs only specified that the devices were to be stamped from light metal with blue inner arms. I don't have an answer.

So I'm of the opinion if the detailing is good and crisp,its stamped with 2-4 back prongs (i've heard both are good) and the measurements are 3.2 by 2.5 CM (Just my personal belief) then its likely the Crosses are good.

Dave would it be too much to ask what yours measure out at?

Most of the copies I've seen have tended to be cast. There may be some decent stamped ones out there now. But 12 years ago when I picked up the dark metal set I never saw a repro stamped set.in fact I never saw another set period at any show I went to in Germany.

As an extra note Bender states that from discussions with vets that 3 distinct variations of the cross (one without the Stalingrad banner) were actually made and distributed to the Division.

I would welcome any opinions/evidence to further this discussion. If anyone has pictures of known copies that would be helpful to.

Regards Jim

I took one of mine off the bar. It measures 3.2 x 2.5 CM but is cast with two stiff prongs. I know the collection I got it from hasn't had anything added since about 1970 so it appears cast replicas were around at least that early. since about 1970

[Dave Suter]

Jim,

What you say certainly makes sense. Do you have any idea how many soldiers would have been authorized to wear the device? I've never been into the 'unit history' thing, so really have no idea.

This evening I'll take the measurements for ya.

[CollectRussia]

Jim, what makes you say the small one, shown in your hand in the photo, is a reproduction? It looks like the one shown in For Fuhrer & Fatherland.

[djpool]

Jim,

What you say certainly makes sense. Do you have any idea how many soldiers would have been authorized to wear the device? I've never been into the 'unit history' thing, so really have no idea.

This evening I'll take the measurements for ya.

Hi Dave,

Everything I've read seems to indicate that only one of the Infantry Regts plus the Div Staff was authorized to wear the device. I figure around 2,000 men. I don't know what each man would have been authorized but I guess 2-3 sets based on authorizations used for Cufftitles. So figure 4,000 sets initially. If you figure 100% turnover a year for 2 years I'm guessing the figure is somewhere around 10,000 - 15,000 sets produced. Of course thats only a guess. Maybe someone else has some solid data.

jim

[djpool]

Jim, what makes you say the small one, shown in your hand in the photo, is a reproduction? It looks like the one shown in For Fuhrer & Fatherland.

I picked this pic off another thread somewhere and it stated it was a cast copy. Unfortunately as much as we rely on good references I think they all are plagued by incorrect data, poor pictures or even repros. I can't speak to the authenticity of the one shown in Benders book. We all hope its a good one. Jim

[Dave Suter]

Jim,

Your numbers on authorized wearers makes sense to me.

Mine measures about 2.4 X 3.2. All I have is a cheap plastic ruler, and it kind of depends on whether you measure from the top or bottom, since the base is a bit wider than the top. I'd guess that yours and mine are the same size. I also agree that the 2.9 measurement for the cross arm is way too wide. It would fit on a board, but with about 1.5 mm to spare per side!

By the way, I got my board from my co-Moderator, Scott. I'll always owe him one for that.