Anyone else has maker-marked 1870 EK2?

[Vadim K]

Just noticed that my 1870 EK2 which I had for a while is KO marked on suspension ring. Would that mean it is a later issue? All the original 1870 ones I have seen were not marked. Any thoughts?

[PaulChep]

agree

All my 1870 (2) are unmarked.

[Tom Y]

Mine too. I seem to remember a post about a Wagner marked one, though. Anything to confuse the issue

[Blitz]

Mine is unmarked too.. I wonder who the maker is.. Any guesses?

[George Stimson]

My two are unmarked as well.

[Bill M]

--There was a discussion on this some months ago and I believe that it was supposed that they were 'later' pieces. My 1870's are all unmarked.
--I believe that marking the EK2's for maker only started happening after Germany was well into WW1 and if that is truly the case, then these 'makered' 1870 2's are actually later-later pieces.

[Vadim K]

Guys, thanks for your replies. So it is a later piece, just as I thought. I would love to hear from anyone who has a maker-marked piece like mine though.

[Doug See]

Maker marks began appearing on 1914's immediately upon the iron cross's reinstatement in 1914, when the royal mint started making them. I've seen a few KO marked 1870 EK2's. In my opinion, these KO 1870's are of very, very high quality and probably were made sometime after 1895. KO could have been making them as reissues as early as 1895 and marking them. Just because we see 1914's with KO marks does not mean KO was not marking 1870's earlier than 1914 when the cross came out again. My theory is that these are 1895-1918 pieces made to replace original issue pieces. They are very nice and valid pieces, although maybe not 1870 wartime issue.

[Brian S]

I'm guessing the 25 year anniversay brought out some interest by the vets in replacement or first time purchase crosses. But that's not to say the KO's are not original 1870...