Interesting Set

ANZAC · 07-11-2007, 06:52 AM

I have my doubts about this set:( Too good to be true me thinks.

Just as as an outside issue here. This soldier should have and would have been entitled to be a Full Cavalier of the Order OF Glory;)

What's some thoughts on this one. Interested to hear from the big 2 here, Alexei and Paul;)

Brendan

Nexorcist · 07-12-2007, 12:32 AM

It looks good to me and also the doesn't have a Glory 1st class to have Full Cavalier of the Order OF Glory, he have one 2nd class and two 3rd class.
Hope this helps.

ANZAC · 07-12-2007, 01:06 AM

I should voice my doubts on this group.....

The ribbons on the Glory IIIs are......well what are they? I haven't seen this colored ribbon before, certainly not on GloryIIIS
The rings on the middle Glory III and II are suspect.
The engraving of the numbers, on what I can see is also suspect and don't compare to the number ranges of 'real' Glories.
The depth of the engraving for the number ranges are suspect.
The document itself I would suggest is false, though I am not an expert on documenation.
A Cavalier Group for 1k.......I don't think so.
Most soldiers who were awarded a second Glory III handed them in at the end of the war or later when they found out they could hand them in and be upgarded to II and I Orders of Glory did so.

That's just to name a few issues I have with the Glories, which are the focal point of the group.

Brendan

Nexorcist · 07-12-2007, 02:59 AM

I just noticed the ribbons....:laff

***desantnik*** · 07-12-2007, 05:58 AM

I feel it's pretty safe to declare this an assembled set. Yes, it did happen that soldiers were awarded repetitive Glory IIIs in the field, but the #749.xxx one would have been awarded way after the war and they would have had time to "unscrew" the multiple awarding situation.

If I had my s/n database handy I'd look up all the awards to see if they were even from the same front or army, but at first glance this set looks like someone took a bunch of awards, wrote them in a real award booklet, and then is trying to sell the set as belonging to one person.

Green ribbon for the glories is wierd...

alnigi · 07-12-2007, 06:18 AM

This guy sallying weekly sets on ….. And all of them fake 99%
In my opinion just 2 first entries in this book is original (my oldest comrades can correct me if I am wrong)

Eryk · 07-12-2007, 05:16 PM

Even being the amature newbie that I am, looking at his other auctions would give me pause. The Red Star, being sold "without document," is a very low number. (Coincidentally close to the number in McDaniels for that type.)

The document shows an order of Kutuzov, cl III as the first entry. That award was created in 1943. Yet the third entry is the Red Star, which had been around since 1930, and the version being sold is supposedly a Type 2, with a 4 digit sn. According to McDaniel the Red Star was awarded over 21,000 times before 1941, making the Red Star obviously prewar.

Yet how is it that an award from maybe a decade before 1943 shows up after the Kutuzov?

And the dates in the award booklet are conveniently obscured in the photo... :laff

Nexorcist · 07-13-2007, 12:02 AM

OK... another interesting set that I'm looking forward to buy (obviously not without this forums approval).
So dear experts Green light or Red light on this set.

Nexorcist · 07-13-2007, 12:03 AM

and 2 more scans

Nexorcist · 07-13-2007, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eryk

Even being the amature newbie that I am, looking at his other auctions would give me pause. The Red Star, being sold "without document," is a very low number. (Coincidentally close to the number in McDaniels for that type.)

The document shows an order of Kutuzov, cl III as the first entry. That award was created in 1943. Yet the third entry is the Red Star, which had been around since 1930, and the version being sold is supposedly a Type 2, with a 4 digit sn. According to McDaniel the Red Star was awarded over 21,000 times before 1941, making the Red Star obviously prewar.

Yet how is it that an award from maybe a decade before 1943 shows up after the Kutuzov?

And the dates in the award booklet are conveniently obscured in the photo... :laff

Enlighten me please... where did you see Kutuzov, cl III in that book ???:confused:

07-12-2007, 01:06 AM	#3
ANZAC Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Brisbane, Australia Age: 59 Posts: 343	I should voice my doubts on this group..... The ribbons on the Glory IIIs are......well what are they? I haven't seen this colored ribbon before, certainly not on GloryIIIS The rings on the middle Glory III and II are suspect. The engraving of the numbers, on what I can see is also suspect and don't compare to the number ranges of 'real' Glories. The depth of the engraving for the number ranges are suspect. The document itself I would suggest is false, though I am not an expert on documenation. A Cavalier Group for 1k.......I don't think so. Most soldiers who were awarded a second Glory III handed them in at the end of the war or later when they found out they could hand them in and be upgarded to II and I Orders of Glory did so. That's just to name a few issues I have with the Glories, which are the focal point of the group. Brendan __________________ "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." Marshall Geogi Zhukov to General Eisenhower, 1945

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Interesting Service Cap	slava1stclass	Army Uniforms And Insignia	2	07-19-2006 08:48 AM
Interesting list	Keith	Russian Federation	4	05-12-2004 11:22 AM

07-12-2007, 12:32 AM	#2
Nexorcist New Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: San Rafael, California Age: 44 Posts: 13	It looks good to me and also the doesn't have a Glory 1st class to have Full Cavalier of the Order OF Glory, he have one 2nd class and two 3rd class. Hope this helps.

07-12-2007, 02:59 AM	#4
Nexorcist New Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: San Rafael, California Age: 44 Posts: 13	I just noticed the ribbons....:laff

07-12-2007, 05:58 AM	#5
*desantnik* Forum Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Eurasia Posts: 2,340	I feel it's pretty safe to declare this an assembled set. Yes, it did happen that soldiers were awarded repetitive Glory IIIs in the field, but the #749.xxx one would have been awarded way after the war and they would have had time to "unscrew" the multiple awarding situation. If I had my s/n database handy I'd look up all the awards to see if they were even from the same front or army, but at first glance this set looks like someone took a bunch of awards, wrote them in a real award booklet, and then is trying to sell the set as belonging to one person. Green ribbon for the glories is wierd...

07-12-2007, 06:18 AM	#6
alnigi New Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Malbourne Posts: 14	This guy sallying weekly sets on ….. And all of them fake 99% In my opinion just 2 first entries in this book is original (my oldest comrades can correct me if I am wrong)

07-12-2007, 05:16 PM	#7
Eryk Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Portland, USA Posts: 234	Even being the amature newbie that I am, looking at his other auctions would give me pause. The Red Star, being sold "without document," is a very low number. (Coincidentally close to the number in McDaniels for that type.) The document shows an order of Kutuzov, cl III as the first entry. That award was created in 1943. Yet the third entry is the Red Star, which had been around since 1930, and the version being sold is supposedly a Type 2, with a 4 digit sn. According to McDaniel the Red Star was awarded over 21,000 times before 1941, making the Red Star obviously prewar. Yet how is it that an award from maybe a decade before 1943 shows up after the Kutuzov? And the dates in the award booklet are conveniently obscured in the photo... :laff

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)