new world Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Colleagues,Please post your opinions about award book for this early group (1940 Red Star!).Does the book look legit and does the combination of awards make sense?Thank you,William Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new world Posted January 8, 2008 Author Share Posted January 8, 2008 Some stamps look pale, so here's the list of awards as they are entered in the book:Red Star - sn 18992Red Star - sn 33239OPW 1 cl - sn 184474OPW 2 cl - sn 173709OPW 2 cl - sn 180854Red Banner - sn 515134William Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rick Research Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Red Banner from the final long service Ukaz 30 December 1956...nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 1951 long service Red Starnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 1946 long service numbered MMM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Zulus Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 (edited) Dear William,besides the two missing long service awards - MMM & RS -, it looks like, if 3 different persons made the entries in the different sections of the order booklet and that the entry of the long service RB (from the 1950s) had been made at the same time and by the same person, as the entries for all the other GPW-orders (from the 1940s) ?Have a closer look at the writings:Just compare it to the Baranovsky order booklet http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=24254 (also with long service awards), where the two dates and the entries of his first orders & medals (as shown on the photograph) had been filled out by the ident person.Best regards Christian Edited January 9, 2008 by Christian Zulus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Haynes Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Research.Research. Research.Research. Need I continue???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new world Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 Research.Research. Research.Research. Need I continue????True 100%, but research will take months and I need to make a decision on this group now. William Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rick Research Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 NOW?What PURPORTS to be IN this "group?"Is it an obviously ruined Orders Book with just the first Red Star, or all those items? Priced what loose anonymous Orders would be, or at some supposed "premium" for being bundled together into a mock "group?"Because as far as I can tell, ALL of the entries are fraudulent21 March 1941 "first" award ORS (18,995 on that date--see dated serial numbers list)--->http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=7861BOOK ASSERTS APRIL 1940 bestowal-- when ACTUAL Red Stars were still in the high 4 digit serial numbers.May 1942-ish second ORS (so far so good, numbers-wise if not to the same person from this Book) May 1945 OPW1 (still in chronological progression, if nothing to do with any of the other entries)July 1944 OPW21944/45 OPW2demonstrably fraudulent 30/12/56 Red Banner-- and THAT being forged, with the stamp and ink that IT was forged with...Group?WHAT "group?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new world Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 (edited) Guys,you are tough!Here's first page of the book - Major wearing all awards in the book except Red Banner. Edited January 9, 2008 by new world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new world Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 2nd page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new world Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 3rd page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjcp Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Don't mean to get involved where I'm not wanted, but I've just got one observation....I've collected many Mongolian documents and more than a few have had pictures added etc. So I was wondering how the picture in the booklet got all folded etc. while the cover of the booklet is just fine?I can't imagine that they would use an old picture in a nice new award booklet........The stamp matches well enough but still....Ok, I'm leaving.....JC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Zulus Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 So I was wondering how the picture in the booklet got all folded etc. while the cover of the booklet is just fine?I can't imagine that they would use an old picture in a nice new award booklet........The stamp matches well enough but still....Dear JC,that's true, but maybe the paper of the orders booklet had been somehow "ironed", that it wasn't folded anymore - and you can't iron a photograph without ruining it. In that case, the cover of the orders booklet has to show traces of getting folded ... The photograph was a rather new post-GPW one. Maybe our comrade Victor himself ruined the picture by accident before he gave the photograph to the clerc in the office - alcohol .... Another point makes me worry:The stamp is rather strong on the photograph, but very, very weak on the paper of the booklet page - you can't read it anymore . Usually it's the other way round, because the stamp stays longer on booklet-paper, than on a photograph.Just for comparison, here are the two pages of the above mentioned orders booklet of major Baranovsky http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=24254 :Best regards Christian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new world Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 Friends,thank you very much to all who contributed to analysis of this group. :thumbsupI had my own doubts, just wanted to hear broader opinion. In addition to the questions about the award book there are questions about awards themelves.I decided not to keep the group and will return it to the seller. William Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rick Research Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 That's what we're here for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Zulus Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 I decided not to keep the group and will return it to the seller.Dear William,I would have acted in the same way .I think, that this is the only genuine entry in the orders booklet - all the rest is doctored:Best regards ChristianBTW: Which dealer offered you the "group" & orders booklet ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new world Posted January 10, 2008 Author Share Posted January 10, 2008 Friends,Interesting update on this group.I just talked to a person who bought this group earlier last year. Upon buying the group he ordered research and the research confirmed that last three awards were added to the group.Again, kudos to your comments, you were right on target!William Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Always unfortunate when faked groups are returned yet continue to be sold on as a group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rick Research Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 More than "unfortunate," Bob! How many times does a dud "group" "have" to be re-sold over and over again until somebody who doesn't question it is STUCK with it?Uh, that depends on the integrity and honour--or lack thereof--of the Repeat Seller then, doesn't it?How many times does a "group" need to be proven B-A-D?Just once.Only once.AFTER that, the seller is totally, directly, personally responsible. ONCE is an unfortunate accident, carelessness, or indifference.TWICE is deliberate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seb16trs Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Friends,Interesting update on this group.I just talked to a person who bought this group earlier last year. Upon buying the group he ordered research and the research confirmed that last three awards were added to the group.Again, kudos to your comments, you were right on target!Williamhello William.Should we suppose the photo has been added too (a researched file from an officer often shows a photo)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new world Posted January 13, 2008 Author Share Posted January 13, 2008 hello William.Should we suppose the photo has been added too (a researched file from an officer often shows a photo)?I think so.I like the photo though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seb16trs Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 I think so.I like the photo though.and ofcourse, the stamp! was is readable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now