Urgent Help L/12 Junker?

[Steve Campbell]

I picked this item up on a whim during one of those periodical dealer updates. You know the ones where you have to act quick. It's suppose to be a TR era EK1 marked L/12 for Junker. However, another maker comes to mind and I'm not sure about it being a Junker. It doesn't have the characteristic frosting on the beading or the typical generic TR era screw disc. In fact, one of those disc will not even fit on the L/12 marked piece.

I'm hoping to get some opinions on this one. Was a mark added or is this a Junker cross from another era that the company added the mark to? There appears to be some patina in the stamp itself. Does this look like a Junker and does the stamp look legit? I have to make a desicion on this one soon. Thanks, Steve

[Steve Campbell]

The rear, showing the hardware. This setup is more like an earler era, not TR, but maybe there are some exceptions.

[Steve Campbell]

Here it is without the disc. The aging here looks legit. I don't have a problem with this cross. The only question is the mark and is it an actual Junker made piece.

[Steve Campbell]

A bit better look at the crown.

[Steve Campbell]

Another view.

[Steve Campbell]

Here's the all important stamp. How does this look compared to known originals?

[Mike Kenny]

Hi Steve,

Well, I'll stir the pot by starting with the following - imo the cross is an unmarked AWS probably 20s (maybe 30s) example (a very nice cross with no problems by the way) but I have no idea how/why/when that L/12 mark appeared. The mark itself does not match the few genuine L/12 TR marked non-EK related items I have in my collection.

I'll be interested to hear others opinions.

Regards
Mike

[Steve Campbell]

Does the mark itself have a natural patina actually in the stamping? If the mark was recent, would the metal not be so aged in the recesses? How long would it take to look like this or would it have that look right after it was stamped?

[Mike Kenny]

Hi Steve,

As the back of this cross is probably unmarked echt silber, quick artificial aging is possible (and not-necessarily by a liquid chemical - plenty of that sort of info on the net). If the marking is indeed fake there's no real way to tell when it may have been applied - 1 month ago or 10 years ago. Quick artificial aging ("professionally" done) or longer-term "natural" aging in a non-optimal storage environment (eg a fresh-cut wooden cabinet or on felt) could potentially not show and significant differences.

The bottom line imo is that you/we have to "clutch straws" to justify this marking on this cross.

Regards
Mike

[Steve Campbell]

I just had a similar rant in the TR section where I have also posted this item. Really wish this post was titled "Nice Unmarked AWS Screwback" but instead we have all this speculation. Sad thing is this is a nice piece in very good condition. If this was done by a scammer they tainted a good piece and never really got that much extra if any for it. By the way, this item came with a COA from Detlef Niemann, although that's not where I bought it.

[Don D.]

Just to muddy the water a little more, I have a Juncker style Kampfwagonabzeichen with an AWS maker mark on the hinge. Perhaps there was some working arraingement between them.

[Steve Campbell]

I'd love to get some more feedback on this one guys. My window of oppurtunity to return it is closing.