WW1 Iron Cross. Any good ?

[Peter Brydon]

Thanks Frank,

I am offering the medal in the Classified section at what I hope is a fair price.

Peter

[Brian Conyngham]

Peter

I too feel it could be OK, no real demand for WW1 crosses for "biker gangs" etc, they all want the NAZI versions...and yes suspect it is a later version.

Handled a few of these, many versions around.

Brian

[Marcus H]

Hello Peter,


Sorry for the delay in a response, however, in answer to the query of the likely era: ''Third Reich or maybe Weimar-era medalbar zweitstück. The maker is either F.W. Assmann, Lüdenscheid; Friedrich Linden, Lüdenscheid or L/54 - a yet unknown attributed maker.''

Basically, with the further pictures provided by Peter the details pertaining to the construction of the cross would perhaps be best described as consistent with later interwar-period techniques, that also includes very early second war too.

When it comes down to dimensions and gauge: these are not technically defining, or conclusive in identification; that is, size being far from the the ultimate relation and guide to a period of manufacture, per se.

Imperial EKs came in all manner of sizes and indeed shapes, too; yet, there is some measurable and verifiable criteria. As in the standard Imperial EK2 being endorsed at 42mm, but in reality and contrary to this, it ranges from 41mm to 45mm. And, prior to the reinstitution of the Iron Cross in 1914 the 1870 crosses - by maker - can be found in the 44mm range, including the wider width in the rim too, which is synonymous to the ''standardised'' 1939 crosses. The distinctive 1870 example cross can also be evidently and positively attested to by a 1908 catalogue depiction and matching period crosses in addition - that maker was ''AWS,'' Albert Werner & Sohne, a Berlin jeweller. Of course, it's not as fundamental as just that, there are a multitude of attributes that define such an essential finding.'' I think, C.E Juncker, Berlin is also another candidate for the wider framed examples of earlier manufacture, and such frames as used by these two makers for the 1870 crosses were subsequently used again from 1914 onwards. There was no need to re-tool the frames, only the relevant core redesign, and this is further proved by the 1914-series crosses by such makers with such earlier frames designs in use.

By this very same token in manufacture and usage, at the beginning of the war in 1939, the repurposing of the Imperial frames with the new swastika claimed cores gives rise to certain classified crosses known as ''Schinkel'' types.

Below, is a picture of my Deumer Schinkel (very, very early war) and the ''standardised'' version (again, earlier, but of the standard TR design and within the stipulated dimensions) next to it also by W. Deumer, Ludenscheid.


Kind regards,

Marcus

[Frank Kelley]

Hello Brian,
Why on earth do they do it, I do find these people rather offensive, perhaps if they themselves had the experience of coming face to face with the wretched hun in 1914 or 1939 and witnessed their behaviour they would think twice.
Regards Frank

Originally Posted by Brian Conyngham

Peter

I too feel it could be OK, no real demand for WW1 crosses for "biker gangs" etc, they all want the NAZI versions...and yes suspect it is a later version.

Handled a few of these, many versions around.

Brian

[Peter Brydon]

Thanks to all who replied especially to Marcus for his comprehensive response.

Peter

[hagwalther]

Originally Posted by Peter Brydon

Thanks to all who replied especially to Marcus for his comprehensive response.

Peter

It was pretty darn good too!

Regards

Chris