Christian Zulus

Lieber Andreas, from which source did you get such precise informations about the awards of comrade Berija? Do you have also some citations? Beste Gr??e von Wien nach K?ln Christian

Dear Simon, many thanks for your link, which was new to me. But I still think, it is a great movie, but like all movies about the GPW from the West with a lot of (very) significant shortcomings as usual and a tendency to be critical with the Soviet system due to the sources where the finances were coming from for this french production. I appreciate the movie, because: - it shows the perspective from the Soviet side - excellent director - excellent camera - excellent cast I also think, that the role of NKVD was presented rather correct in that movie: It was a critical period for the CCCP and the NKVD had to take "special" measurements. O.K., you can not compare "Enemy at the Gates" to Yuri Oserov's epic masterpiece "Liberation", the Soviet - almost 8 hours long - immaculate movie from the late 60's, which shows the story of the GPW from the battle of Kursk (summer 1943) till the Red Flag at the Reichstag in Berlin. Since 2005 there is a german beautiful - nice booklet + bonus-DVD - DVD-box with that Oserov movie at the market: http://www.amazon.de/Befreiung-Teil-1-5-6-...=UTF8&s=dvd . All orders & medals are presented in the correct way ... Coming back to Berija http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavrenty_Pavlovich_Beria and http://www.diacritica.com/degenerate/9/beria.html . I think, that he got his last 2 Lenins + Stalin Prize 1cl for the nuclear weapons developement in the CCCP. Berija was in the "Inner Circle" around Stalin responsible for the A-Bomb. The question is, why didn't he got his 2nd HSL for the A-Bomb? O.K., Stalin Prize 1cl + 2 Lenins is something special, but all other comrades involved with the developement of the Soviet A-Bomb received a HSL. The fact is, that Berija lost some of his political power in the early 50's - in Stalin's view Berija was too a-political, not a Bolshevisk, pro-western, morally insane and a monster (responsible for the "Great Purge", Katyn, etc., etc.). Enough for not-receiving a HSL? Best regards Christian Zulus

Dear Dave, Knight from Austria (David Ritter von S.), thanks for sharing your great research. Maybe it is time to draw out some statistics of your research and documents - or at least out of the Glory-citations. Statistics are always interesting . Best regards from Austria Christian

Dear usairforce, very nice collection, a lot of battle awards and a beautyful cased Red Banner of Labour. You have also the most magnificent Soviet book - in english language - about Stalin's Russia in your collection, the "Soviet Calendar" (1947). I purchased my book - excellent, almost new condition - from a private collector in Vienna about 10 years ago for USD 250,-. A lot of money, but I wanted to have that book. How much did you pay for your copy? I think, that perfect made book was a great instrument for international propagande at 30th anniversary of the October Revolution. I assume, that a lot of copies went to "friendly" states like China. Soviet orders and medals play an important role in this book - not only the Order of Victory on the cover. Best regards from Vienna, Austria Christian Zulus

Dear Alexandre, here are my suggestions about comrade Berija's 7 medals. For sure: - XX years RKKA - 30 years Red Army & Navy - Victory over Germany 4 medals missing: I guess, that they might be defending and/or capture medals. Emphasis on the defending medals. Comrade Stalin got also the "Defending-Moscow-Medal". Specially in the "defending-period" of the GPW Berija's NKVD played a crucial role, i.e.: Stalingrad, if you remember the great movie "Enemy at the Gates" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0215750/ . Maybe : - Stalingrad - Caucasus - Moscow - Leningrad Best regards Christian Zulus

Dear Soviet, beautiful Glory 2cl with good preserved gold! Early Glory 2cl have to be rather thin - or with a border reverse - otherwise they would be faked. My Glory 2cl from Serg. Gnitienko's Glory-trio with the number 3870 is also very thin in comparison to the 3rd cl and 1st cl. Best regards Christian Zulus

Gentlemen, does anybody have informations, documents, photographs about the production process of orders and medals in the former Soviet Union (or todays Russia)? Years ago that question arose in the "other" forum for Soviet awards, but no one had any material, except some nice photographs of the building of the Moscow Mint . In my home country Austria for centuries the orders are made that way: - design competition (the present awards had been designed by one renowed architect) - the metal parts are struck by the "M?nze ?sterreich" (Austrian Mint) - these parts go to certain juwellers in Vienna, who manufacture awards since the days of the k.u.k. Empire and they finish the orders - the juwellers put the orders in nice boxes - their name is signed at the order and inside the box - and send them back to the office of the Austrian President. I assume, that in Soviet times the complete process of manufacturing had been done by the Montnydwor, (Mint), except the design. Years ago I have read somewhere, that the famous Faberg? juwellers of Russia had been incorporated by the Bolsheviks to the mint after the revolution and manufactured their the orders and medals. This might be a reason for the outstanding quality of Soviet awards ? Are the - rather ugly and cheap looking - Russian awards of our time produced in the same way, as Soviet awards? Who has any informations about what happened at the mints between the approval of the design by comrade Stalin and delivering the awards to the troops? There is a lot of work done by hands and early awards - i.e. "Red Banner of Labour" T2 / V1 - have signatures by the artist/worker, who manufactured the piece (at least my example has a cyrillic letter as a signature) - and I think it was a rather artistic work. Metal parts of the award had been always struck by the Mint and never casted - as a lot of fakes are done. Who has any informations about the making of Soviet orders and medals? Best regards Christian Zulus

Lieber Herr "Kavalier des Ruhmesordens aller drei Klassen", many thanks for further reveals to the topic of the "Glory-Trios". You are exactly right, there are less cavaliers booklets, than Glorys 1st cl. My remarks to the discussion of the "rank of valour" in comparison to foreign awards. The Glory was the only Soviet award you received ONLY for valourious deeds IN THE LINE OF FIRE! The HSU was not - also comrades, who never saw the front line, i.e., comrade Stalin (but he never wore his HSU), got one - and also the Nazi's Knight Cross was not a pure battle award: How often had been Generalfieldmarshall Keitel ("Lakaitel") at the front? He got the Knights Cross up to the "Swords"-class! So you can compare the Glory only to the British VC. If you look, who got a VC during the battle for the Falklands, then it seems clear, that you can not compare a VC to a Medal of Honor, HSU or Knights Cross. Dave you are quoting the Glory-regulations, that one gets for the same greatness of heroic deed 3rd, 2nd and at the end 1st class of the Glory. That's true and that's the written content of the regulations. But there are quite a few cases, where a NCO or soldier got instead of a Glory 1st a Red Banner, OGPW 1 cl or a HSU (o.k., the effect for the soldier was the same - either Glory 1st cl or HSU ). I think, that there might have been the pratice in some (few) armys to award the Glory 1st cl for a "special" heroic deed in the line of fire. But I think the general line was as Dave pointed it out and I documented it with the case of the heroic battalion during the "Weichsel-Oder-Battle", where ALL soldiers and NCOs got Glorys and some promoted to full cavaliers. Generally it is almost impossible to compare military awards of the same time, but from different nations. There exists a nice small book in russian language - with colour photographs, but in rather bad quality - which documents all the Soviet AND Nazi awards of WW II. But the author doesn't try to compare in ranking the Soviet with the Nazi system. Also consindering the outstanding and pure "Art Deco"-design of the Glory, the simple and direct name "Slava" and the beautiful (traditional) ribbon, the Glory is in my opinion the No. 1 battle award of the Soviets. Best regards Christian Zulus

Dear Mr. "Slava 1st Class", what would be the actual price ranges of the different categories nowadays? How do you see the perspective in the price-movements of "Glory-Trios"? Despite the fact, that a "Glory-Trio" is THE soviet order for personal valour, a russian dealer (located in Europe) told me that summer, that in Russia (the most important market for Soviet awards) the demand is higher for Suvorov's, Ushakov's, etc., than for full documented "Glory-Trios". This russian dealer still trades "Glory-Trios" and had serveral in stock, as he told me. Taken the prestige, history and the rarity into account, the Glory's are from their market value still underrated, I think. What is your opinion about the Glory at the market for Soviet awards? Best regards Christian Zulus

Description: [attachmentid=56023]

It is a rather well known badge and for my taste, the design is really nice, welldone and typical for the period. I don't have this badge in my collection . You can find a photograph + descreption in V. A. Durov "Russian and Soviet Military Awards", 1990 from the History Museum in Moscow on page 72. Also in the latest edition of Herfurth's booklet it is included - picture in this posting and descreption in the following posting. The price is in EUROs, but I think a little bit too moderate . Best regards Christian Zulus [attachmentid=56019]

Dear Doc Riley, sorry, for my reply to your "killer-phrase" against my postings . Due to the fact, that I am also acquainted with the history of the Vietnam-Wars, I knew exactly that your "Doc" is a meritorious award for combat medics . Sorry again, if I offended you and I want to apologize. Please come back into the discussions. My last name ist not "Zulu" - I am not from South Africa -, but "Zulus", due to the fact, that the origins of my family are in the western Ukraine, Bukovina. We moved to Austria in the 18th century (Bukovina was part of the Austrian Empire till 1918) and due to the fact, that we are native Hutsuls the people in Austria called us "Huzulus". During the times we lost the "Hu-" and our name is now "Zulus" or "Tsulus" (transcribed in the english way). That's the Wikipedia-link to our people: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutsuls . As the people in Texas, we have a lot to do with horses . This thread shouldn't be a thread of "Proud to be American" vs. "Rest of the World". We want to dedect certain strange things in the pratice of confering awards during the GPW, which show to be a contradiction to the official hierarchy of Soviet orders and medals. Maybe we can make out some general laws or rules about the subject. I am for a sober and civilized discussion. The war is over and the Soviet Union is history for a long time. Our orders and medals in our collections are part of that history. Maybe our (native) US-members might find their way back into the scientific and phaleristic discussion of this thread . I recongized, that there are no remarks about my posting concerning the "Glory-case". It would be great to read your opinions to my theory. Best regards from Vienna, Austria Christian Zulus

Dear Ed, sorry for the "British", but I regarded you for years - style of writing, language, interests and your familiy name - as a member of the British Empire. But Scots are inhabitants of the - so called - British Islands. At least the GMIC IS a British platform - co.uk - and named "Gentleman's Military Interest Club" . I assume, that you have to live in Northern America? Sorry again ... Best regards Christian

Dear Ed, that's not the style of a true British Gentleman . Maybe you could give as a hint, what the reasons might be for your sudden decline in interest to our discussions in this thread? Best regards Christian

Dear Mondvor (or Andrew), no problem, I just reproduced the interesting points of the Baklanov-link in my reply to "Red Threat". I myself can't speak russian at all. But I know the letters, the important words and sentences for collecting awards. So it's rather easy to find some "message" in a citation or document. I think, it doesn't make much sense to collect Soviet awards, if you can't even read what is written on the order or what is written in the order's booklet . So I expect, that most of our members in this section of GMIC can extract the information out of a link in russian language. Best regards Christian

Dear Ed, I can't get your message: Do you mean the "Nevsky-case" or the "Texas-case" ? I think, that my argumentation is rather "sober" and (rather) civil in both cases. My strange experience is, that among the collectors community and at the different platforms, it is always o.k. and tolerated, if a US-guy insults an (continental) European-guy, but if a the European-guy will post the slightest remark against American insults, he will be banned immediatly out of the forum or gets at least a message of a "merited" forum-member with disciplinary charakter. A "clash of civilizations" in the collectors community? So Michael "Doc" Riley posted: "Christian Zulus, I must agree with Ed, Dave, Andrey and Dolf. I find your arguements without merit. Let's not try to "re-invent the wheel". The sources Dolf quoted are among the gentlemen I turn to when I need help with a Soviet ODM. Doc" AND "No matter what each individual feels is a "hierarchy" there still remains the official Order of Precedence. Sure the stories that research reveals may sway your opinion, remember that everyone has their own opinion and opinions are like A**h***s...Everybody has one. For me I'll stick with the Official Order of precedence. To try to tamper with it to suit your own ideas is a waste of time. Doc" Dear Ed, do you think, that the postings of our friend from Texas are "calm" and in a "civil tone"? Why have I to accept, that a person from Texas calls my arguments "without merit"? I expect my reply to the person from Texas rather civil and moderate. Best regards from Vienna, Austria, Central-Europe Christian

ad "Nevsky-case" Dear Mr. "Red Threat" (or what person may ever hide behind the name), you forgot, that Doc Riley posted two (2) rather unpolite remarks about my (our) topic and my postings . Why should have been specially my remark about our honourable Doctor Riley be sooooo ungentlemanly? I just repeated 1:1 his view about our discussion, asked him in which field he earned his PhD and assumed, that he doesen't belong to the scientific community of historians. Maybe he holds a PhD in chemistry, metallurgy, etc. ? Who knows . Back to the "Nevsky-case" & comrade Afanasjev: You are writing about "Kurlyandia". I assume, that you want to point at the (several) "Kurland-Battles" between autumn 1944 and end of the war (09.05.1945). "Kurland" was the germanic term for the Baltics, specially the more southern parts (except Estonia). Parts of the "Heeresgruppe Nord" survived there till the capitulation. O.K., it did make no strategic sense for the Red Army to whip the Nazis completly out in the Baltics. Please Mr. "Red Threat" could you share the documents with us, which proof, that division commander & major general Afanasjev received his Nevsky 1945 for one of the "Kurland-Battles" . Many thanks in advance! The fighting at the Baltics (till to the end) was always very fierce and so it would be quite a small historic sensation, if a division commander received a Nevsky instead of Suvorov 2cl or Kutuzov 2cl. Your two links to the comrades division commanders - Baklanov & Pankov - don't support your argumentation for 100 %. O.K., the first Nevsky was confered in august 1942 to lieutenant Ivan Ruban (naval infantry) - you see, the no. 1 of the awardees was a lieutenant and not a major general or colonel - and comrade Baklanov got commander of the 299th rifle division also in august 1942. A Nevsky is listed in his biography . Besides his HSU, comrade Baklanov is a high decorated officer: Kutuzov 1cl & 2cl, Suvorov 2cl, 3 RBs, etc., etc. - and a Nevsky . My theory: Either an error in typing or he got the (new) Nevsky for a heroic deed before his time as division commander (and also before his time as a brigade commander). Maybe there was a great military act of comrade Baklanov in the second half of 1941. At that time the authorities were rather "stingy" with giving awards . Maybe colonel Baklanov made some pressure to his generals and so he got a reward for something what he has done 1941/42 in form of the (now) approbriate Nevsky. Otherwise it makes no logic, why such a high decorated division commander would get a Nevsky - an award mainly for platoon and company commanders. But, as I documented it in the "Weichsel-Oder-Battle"-case, the Nevsky had been primarily a special award for lower ranking officers. Nevertheless the Nevsky is still one of the most beautiful of all Soviet awards . Best regards Christian Zulus

Nevsky to a division commander? Gentlemen, we should never forget, that it took in some cases (there were quite a hughe number!) years or even decades till someone received his award for a special heroic deed. It was wartime and everything was on the move. So it seems, that the mentioned division commander might have received his Nevsky for a heroic deed - maybe a long time ago - at battalion or company level. It is also rather unlikly, that he got the Nevsky as a regiment commander. He would have received a Suvorov 3cl or a Kutuzov 3cl. Look at the case of comrade Brezhnev: He received his 4 HSUs + Order of Victory decades after the war . Best regards Christian Zulus

Gerd, thanks, simple solution, but it should work Christian

[attachmentid=55235]Commissar's cap? Dear Soviet, many thanks for pictures of the cap badges! I bought this cap 2 years ago at a flee market in Belgrade. The dealer told to me, that the cap badge is from a political commissar. That badge is named in your list "Elite Troop Officers". - "Elite Troops" = guard units? - belonged the political commissars to "Elite Troops"? Thanks for your help! Best regards Christian

Question - access to ebay? I never managed to get access to Soviet awards at ebay, because they are in the WWII-section, and these sites are blocked, when you enter ebay from Austria or Germany. That's due to austrian and german laws, because there is also a lot of Nazi-stuff on thes sites of ebay. Gerd, you are located in Germany: Is it for you possible to enter the WWII-section at ebay? Best regards Christian

The "Glory-case" This might be the most interesting anomaly to the official hierarchy and there is also no dispute among the forum the member, that Glory in any case ranks higher, than a Red Star. Only Doc Riley still believes at any cases in the official hierarchy - I don't think that Doc Riley received his PhD in the science of history . Again, this should be no discussion about the official hierarchy, but about the practice in awarding during the GPW and conclusions frome these historic facts. Can we make out somehow general laws? My humble theory, how it could have happend: As we all know, the Soviet award system took up some czaristic traditions in the design of orders and medals in mid 1943, due to the fact, that it was actually a real "Great Patriotic War". The most prestigious award for soldiers & NCOs till 1917 was the "St. George's Cross for Soldiers" in 4 classes on the ribbon, we all know. Important fact: The "St. George's Cross" was never a authentic order, but only a medal, despite the fact, that it was seen somehow as the 5th class of the "Order of St. George", the highest ranking russian military order. Again: It was a medal! After the great victories at the front against the Nazi-invaders the idea came up to create special awards for the greatest generals and on the other side for the most heroic soldiers & NCOs. "Pobeda", the "Order of Victory", the most precious order for collectors in the world (King Michael's order is in private hands!) and "Slava", the "Order of Glory". For the soldier's award it was obvious to take up the tradition of the tradition of the "St. George's Cross". But two crucial points: - now it has to be a authentic order, due to the socialstic constitution of the SU - and not the same name like under the czarist-regime, becaus a "Saint" would be rather odd in Sozialism. O.K., but in 1943 there was already a rather fixed hierarchy of orders. I think, that the phaleristic experts at the Supreme Soviet assumed, that a new order for the grass-roots-soldiers, which stands in the tradition of a former czarist medal, has to become the bottom of the hierarchy of the SU-orders. There is some phaleristic logic in such an arguementation. O.K., now the name of the new order. The first plan of the experts was to name it "Order of Bagration" and the design of Moskalyov was already rather authentic and on the famous ribbon, despite the fact, that instead of the Spassky-tower there had been the rather ugly face of general Bagration. What happend now? A number of prototypes of both orders - Victory & Glory - were presented to comrade Stalin & friends at the Kremlin. The Victory-design was o.k., but he was not so much pleased about the successor ot the "St. George's Cross". The "voshd" decided the following: - the name has to be "Slava" (Glory) and not "Bagration" (historic proven fact!) - as the "Order of Victory", the - now - "Glory" has to show the Spassky-tower of the Kremlin - as the former czarist medal, it has to be a very special award for outstanding heroic deeds - very sophisticated regulations (had to be adopted by the Suprem Soviet!) - three classes and the 1st in massive gold - and the highest privleges for the recipients of all classes - same level as HSU. Comrade Stalin had a great heart for the "small screws", as he named the common soldiers during one of the victory-dinners in 1945 after drinking too much glasses of his favorite dry georgian white wine. Another historic fact is, that comrade Stalin was constantly interfering with all sort of things - not only awards. He was a clever and pragmatic person, who knew about the important role of awards for the fighting troops - a matter of motivation. Stalin's interference caused our anomaly. On one side the Glory was ranked by the experts of the Supreme Soviet at the bottom of the hierarchy due to history & tradition. This is represented in the decree of the Supreme Soviet concerning the official hierarchy. On the other side comrade Stalin blowed up the importance of the Order of Glory - I think with support of the generals of his inner circle. So, in the practice of citations and conferring the commanders followed the wishes of Stalin and not the hierarchy of the Supreme Soviet. But the followed the sophisticated regulations of the order (also part of the decree of the Supreme Soviet). The Glory has the most detailed regulations of all Soviet orders! The fact is, if you compare the exact regulation of the lower ranking Soviet military orders, the regulations of the Glory don't fit in. According to them the Glory should have ranked somehow under or above the OGPW 1cl. The reason: There had been first the ranking in the hierarchy of the new soldiers-order established and afterwards the special regulations and the "wishes" of Stalin & friends. Gentlemen, what's your opinion to my theory? Best regards Christian Zulus

The "Nevsky-case" The fact is, that some excellent officiers promoted rather quick in the GPW. So it is quite normal, that a former commander of a company, who received at that time a Nevsky and promoted to a division commander and major general (despite the fact, that a big number of division commanders never promoted above the rank of a colonel!), wears a Nevsky on his chest. Just a product of his fast career! At the cover of the PMD-bible you see a major as a full cavalier of the Order of Glory ... Anomaly: In the statues of the Nevsky division commanders are mentioned. But I think, that acually no divsion commander - as a division commander - received a Nevsky. Due to sources in literature and memoirs a Nevsky is a very typical award for lower ranking officers, like platoon and company commanders. Everybody here in the forum has the small booklet of Georgi Putnikov "Ordena i Medalii CCCP" (english or german version) from Novosti, Moscow 1990, in his bookshelf. Please take it out and open the exact middle of the booklet showing the section "Order of Glory". There you will find a highly interesting historic case: 14th of january 1945, "Weichsel-Oder-Operation", 1st battalion of the 215th guards rifle regiment. For their heroic deed everybody in the battalion got an order. So which ranks got which orders? - soldiers & NCOs: Glory (3 promoted to full cavaliers) - platoon commanders: Nevsky - company commanders: Red Banner - the battalion commander (major Boris Jemeljanov): HSU No Red Stars or OGPWs! For me, that case reveals a lot. First, the "Weichsel-Oder-Operation" was no operation of less importance in the "Hinterland", but the spearhead of the Soviet assault to Berlin. Everybody knows the involved commanding generals . This operation was also under direct contral of comrade Stalin. So the order of precedence at the 14th of january at the border of Germany is - to my opinion - a rather examplary case. Result: My opinion is, that the Nevsky was - in the practise of conferring - a very typical award for heroic deeds, fullfilled by field officers of lower ranks (platoon & company commanders). That case shows also, that the OGPWs and the Red Star seemed (1945!) not to be THE battle awards for heroic deeds anymore. Best regards Christian Zulus

General remarks to the discussion I started the topic, so I will give some remarks Ed, you brought the discussion to the point: Nobody denies the official order of precedence, but everybody knows, that there are certain "anomalies", as Wild Card pointed it out, which contradict to the official hierarchy. Best known example: Glory vs. Red Star. It was my goal to find out through the discussion at GMIC, where these anomalies can be dedected and if you integrate these anomalies into the official hierarchy, who would a - as I called it - real hierarchy look like? Despite the fact, that GMIC is a collectors forum and not a scientific forum for historians dealing with Soviet history, it is by far the best place in the www to discuss that topic. Awards reveal a lot of Russian history! Dave, you are right, that there might be some different hierarchies (in different periods of GPW): Nayy vs. naval infantry, fighter pilots vs. bomber pilots, commissars vs. staff officers, etc., etc. But your point of view seems to me a bit rather "unscientific" (in the European tradition). You say, that there are millions of individual cases and there is no "general law" to dedect. As a historian (and a person, who read a lot of memoirs - specially from NCOs und field officers) I don't think so. There is already one general law we dedected: A Glory 3rd cl is always ranking above in practical hierarchy, citations, etc. a Red Star in 1945. Nobody in this forum would deny that fact. As far as I can compare, we created the fastest growing (postings & quality of content) topic in this section of GMIC. I want to thank all participants in the discussion and hope, that we might bring some light to certain anomalies to the GPW-award-system and maybe dedect certain rules and laws in conferring orders and medals to Red Army soldiers and officers, which doesen't match the exact order of precedence published by the Supreme Soviet. The collectors hierarchy is different and a product of the market: Supply & demand. The rarity and also some artistic aspects + maybe the content of precious metal (Lenin!) play a role. I hope, that this fruitful discussion will go on Best regards from Vienna, Austria Christian Zulus

Dear Jim, it is also printed in the orders booklet "ukas presidenta CCCR", but there was NO Gorbacev president of the SU in may 1989 . Head of the Supreme Soviet after Tchernenko's death had been Gromyko and always the signature of the secretary of the Supreme Soviet - for decades Georgadse - is on the stamp. Best regards Christian