Soviet Hierarchy of Soviet Awards?

[Gerd Becker]

Excellent discussion Gentlemen Lots of things to consider....

[Wild Card]

if I see yet ANOTHER Glory 3rd awarded to an artilleryman or mortarman who killed "up to a platoon of Hitlerites", I might just hurt myself..... Dave

[Wild Card]

So, I think we can all agree that there was an unofficial hierarchy of awards amongst soldiers, just as there is an unofficial hierarchy of awards amongst collectors. Both of these unofficial hierarchies are different between collectors, just as they were between soldiers - everyone has their own opinion and there's rarely a "common" ground.

Dave

Exactly... Thank you.

[Riley1965]

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

[Wild Card]

Hi Mondvor,

Wow, there they are!

While I realize that these two Nevskys were likely awarded before the recipients made general officer status, no doubt they held high field officer ranks. Citations for these two could be especially interesting. Thank you for sharing.

Best wishes,

Wild Card

[Guest RedThreat]

Gentlemen,

Why is everyone surprised that generals were awarded Nevskys? By statute, Nevsky could be awarded to a division commander who was supposed to have a rank of major general.

Simon

[Mondvor]

Gentlemen,

Why is everyone surprised that generals were awarded Nevskys? By statute, Nevsky could be awarded to a division commander who was supposed to have a rank of major general.

Simon

That is correct only on the paper. In a reality no Army or Corps commander would recommend one of his division commanders to Nevsky. If you want your divisions to fight well, you have to give some positive reinforcement to people who are under your command. Giving them low graded Nevsky instead of higher graded Suvorov 2nd class would be an example of stupid behavior

Edited September 30, 2006 by Mondvor

[Wild Card]

Gentlemen,

Why is everyone surprised that generals were awarded Nevskys? By statute, Nevsky could be awarded to a division commander who was supposed to have a rank of major general.

Simon

Everyone?Whoa, please!

I, a neophyte collector who admittedly does not know everything (who in fact, is still at the low end of an endless learning curve) about Soviet awards is the only member who has expressed any interest, or surprise with Nevsky awards to General Officers.

All I know is that although, as I was aware, General Officers were eligible for this award, I had never seen such a case, until Mondvor graciously shared his pictures as shown above.

Still learning,

Wild Card

[Wild Card]

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

Okay, I guess I?m missing something here. I fail to see where anyone in this thread denies either the existence or status of the official Order of Precedence; or for that matter seriously suggests that it be replaced by one, or a combination of, the ?unofficial? hierarchies so far discussed. It has merely produced a discussion of what would strike some as anomalies that exist within that hierarchy.

I do know though that in conducting what may seem like a futile exercise (or tampering and wasting time, if you prefer), I have seen more interesting and useful information presented from some of the most knowledgeable people in the area of Soviet collecting than I have seen in any other single thread that I can recall, for which I thank them all.

Regards,

Wild Card

[Guest RedThreat]

All I know is that although, as I was aware, General Officers were eligible for this award, I had never seen such a case, until Mondvor graciously shared his pictures as shown above.

Neither had I. However, keep your mind open. Don't assume that such case doesn't exist simply because you haven't seen it.

In a reality no Army or Corps commander would recommend one of his division commanders to Nevsky. ...

Giving them low graded Nevsky instead of higher graded Suvorov 2nd class would be an example of stupid behavior

Division commander colonel Afanas'ev must have had a stupid Army commander.

http://www.warheroes.ru/hero/hero.asp?Hero_id=1134

[Riley1965]

Wild card & All,

I'll have to look at this thread with fresh eyes tomorrow. News of a failed heart proceedure that I had several years ago has left me a bit tempermental today. I'll take a look tomorrow and hopefully be more open-minded.

Doc

Edited September 30, 2006 by Riley1965

[Wild Card]

Relax, above all take care of Riley1965

Rest up and GOOD LUCK, we'll save your place -

Wild Card

[Mondvor]

Neither had I. However, keep your mind open. Don't assume that such case doesn't exist simply because you haven't seen it.

Division commander colonel Afanas'ev must have had a stupid Army commander.

http://www.warheroes.ru/hero/hero.asp?Hero_id=1134

Afanasiev was not a General. He was a Colonel. And we were discussing Nevsky orders, presented to Generals. Still, for his Nevsky it would be interesting to see the citation.

[Guest RedThreat]

In a reality no Army or Corps commander would recommend one of his division commanders to Nevsky.

Afanas'ev was a division commander.

[Ed_Haynes]

Doc-

While there was, of course, an official precedence, buy there was also the way (or, more accurately, WAYS) in which the awards were actually given out -- who was elegible for what for which acts. The "official" is easy, and I hope no one ignores it. Reality is, as always, more complex, and given the nature of our sources and the aggressive strength of some of our opinions, much more difficult (and therefore fun) to discover after all these decades. By determining how things were actually done and understood -- sometimes "by the book", often not, I suspect -- we can go beyond just quoting regulations and understand how the GPW-era system of awards really worked and a little of what these chunks of metal and enamel actually meant to the folks who won them. This is as important, I think, as getting research done on individual numismatic items. Although the individual award research is seen by some as adding value, and what we are trying to here adds knowledge, which has no market value, alas.

And feel better, buddy. I know how it can be.

=====================

Regarding generals and the Nevsky-

I may be dense, but I get the feeling we are mixing two things up here: (A) general-grade officers who got their Nevsky as generals and (B) general-grade officers who are seen wearing a Nevsky. "A" is very interesting and calls for study and research. "B" just means they got it at a lower rank -- like my guest Kravchenko http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=6207 -- and continued, of course, to wear it after promotion.

[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

[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

[Christian Zulus]

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

[Wild Card]

Doc-

Regarding generals and the Nevsky-

I may be dense, but I get the feeling we are mixing two things up here: (A) general-grade officers who got their Nevsky as generals and (B) general-grade officers who are seen wearing a Nevsky. "A" is very interesting and calls for study and research. "B" just means they got it at a lower rank -- like my guest Kravchenko http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=6207 -- and continued, of course, to wear it after promotion.

Thanks Ed. When I raised this point back in post #44 (?I do not recall ever having seen a Nevsky awarded to a general, and think that such could be exceptionally interesting. Anybody out there got the details on one??), I did not make that point clear. Although I was referring to general-grade officers who got their Nevsky as generals, I found the responses so interesting and informative that I did not want to derail the related discussions.

Best wishes,

Wild Card

[Mondvor]

Afanas'ev was a division commander.

Yes he was. But (1) this exception only supports general rule, because every rule should have some exceptions. And (2) I'm not sure that information on this article was entirely correct. I would not make any conclusions without award card or citation. It was a chance that he received Nevsky still as a regimental commander (date of Prikaz), but the delivery of award was delayed, so he was bestowed with it few months later already as a division commander.

[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

Edited September 30, 2006 by Christian Zulus

[Guest RedThreat]

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.

If we are to believe warheroes site, colonel Baklanov, Nevsky awardee, commanded a division from August 1942. Since Nevsky order was established in July 1942, Baklanov had to earn it while being in charge of a division. On a photo he doesn't wear his Nevsky and some other orders mentioned on the site. Is there a typo on the website? Maybe, maybe not.

http://www.warheroes.ru/hero/hero.asp?Hero_id=1036

Major General Pankov was a division commander since August 1943. We don't know when he received his Nevsky. Until proven otherwise, we can't exclude the possibility that it was awarded for command of a division.

http://www.warheroes.ru/hero/hero.asp?Hero_id=770

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 .

That was an ungentlemanly comment.

Yes he was. But (1) this exception only supports general rule, because every rule should have some exceptions.

Now it is an exception. It is no longer an example of a stupid behavior. IMHO, it is a real-life case which proves that Nevsky was given to a division commander in real life contrary to your claim that such awards were only possible on paper.

Even if Afanas'ev earned Nevsky while commanding a regiment, he qualified for Suvorov 3 at that time. Applying your logic, we conclude that his commander made a stupid decision by giving him lowly Nevsky instead of a higher-ranked Suvorov 3.

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.

Afanas'ev was given Nevsky for battles in Kurlyandia in 1945. At that time, he was div. com.

[Christian Zulus]

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

[Ed_Haynes]

Christian, please calm down and adopt a civil tone. OK??

[Christian Zulus]

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