EK2 1870 "WuS" Marked

[jani_tiainen]

Dear Friends,

I want to share my maker marked EK2 1870. I do not have doubt on its authenticity, but I am curious to know, from which period this would be?
I know, KO started to mark EK's 1895 or later, but how about Wagner u. Sohn?

All comments are appreciated!

Jani

[jani_tiainen]

more

[jani_tiainen]

more...

[jani_tiainen]

and one more before...

[jani_tiainen]

The makers mark on suspension ring.

[Dez H]

I am no expert on these, however I would put this piece at 1914 period.

[jani_tiainen]

Thanks Dez,

That is what I have been thinking - I just have not seen any other Wagner 1870 EK2 to compare...

Jani

[JensF.]

I also think it is made after 1900. I've never seen a makers mark on an "old" 1870 EKII.

[Tim Tezer]

Jens is correct. Old 1870 EK2s do not have makers marks as a rule. That doesn't mean that an EK2 with a makers mark is fake, but it must be looked at with a great deal of suspicion.

The core of this cross has oakleaves in the 1914 style. It could have been made during or just before the First World War, but personally I think that it is a fake. I don't have a lot of evidence to support that, but I have seen a huge number of 1870 EK2s being sold by decidedly unreputable dealers that have similar core details - 1914 style oakleaves and a style of "8" in "1870" that is not typical for period pieces. The WUS mark is probably meant to be Werner & Sohne or possible Wagner, and is supposed to give an air of authenticity to the cross. It has exactly the opposite effect in my opinion. I don't want to name any names, but I think this cross came from Arizona, where it was found in a Cave near a Creek.

Tim

[jani_tiainen]

... I don't want to name any names, but I think this cross came from Arizona, where it was found in a Cave near a Creek.

Tim

Thanks for info Tim,

I got this cross directly from Germany, so whatever it is - not Arizona origin...

Jani

[Brian S]

Period family piece, EKII, from 1871, unmarked.

[Tiger 1]

Jani,

This is a very interesting cross.

The obverse looks to be 1870 Wagner while the reverse is definately later. The reason I say this is that if you look closely at the crown band on the obverse (front) you will see beading (......) on the band which is appropriate for pre-1914 EKs. There were no earlier 1914s than 1914 as they were not reinstated as an award until the start of hostilities. On the reverse side, the crown band seems to show horizontal diamonds (.+.+.+.) interspersed with the beads. From my observations I have only seen the diamonds on later production crosses from the 1914 era on. Even though some early 1914 EKs by older makers will have beaded crown bands. There may be some examples from the jubilee period that may have diamonds but I would have to check my notes and references to be sure. Off the top of my head I doubt it.

IMO this seems to be a 1914 era 1870 because of the makermarked ring and the later reverse. This would make sense for a company to have made upgraded dies for producing 1914 EKs. The demand for 1870 examples would have been small by comparison and there would have been no need to upgrade the obverse while earlier dies still existed.

I will be retrieving my crosses from the bank vault to photograph the marks on my Godets for another thread so I'll also look at my 1870s to see if I have any makers marks. Though I don't recall them having any.

This cross is not one of the ones that the caveman from Arizona sells. This one is too sophisticated in construction and details.

Somewhere back in the threads are good detailed pictures of my 1870s that Tom Y posted for me for comparison. They may be of some help.

From what I see, It may be a 1914 era example for replacement or for display purposes.

What are the height and width measurements along with the ribbon ring diameter and the weight in grams if I may ask? These figures will give substancial information with which to make comparisons.

Tony

[Brian S]

This what you're talking about;

[Brian S]

Reverse crown;

[Tiger 1]

Reverse crown;

Exactly Brian. Thanks.

Tony