1813 EKs - ...question.

[AlikN]

I got those from the 'Holy Grail club' thread, I hope the owners of those wouldn't mind...
There are some different types of 1813 eks out there, some from those ten maybe of the same type,
...can we get an idea how many different types,
...time line from stepped core to flat core?
...1830s production, were there any later productions?
...are there any other types of 1813s than those on the picture?
Thanks
Alik

[CSForrester]

The best informations are still found in Heyde´s "Das Eiserne Kreuz-Sammlung Max Aurich". His systematic is the best until today, starting with his C4-cross. Previtera gives some additional informations, but nothing from original sources. If you study Heydes book have a look on the date 1813 on the different crosses !

Regards
CSForrester

[AlikN]

Thanks! Is there an english version of that book? I googled it comes up in german.

[Brian S]

These lie in the biggest minefield of Imperial collecting...

[streptile]

Core #4 in your chart above is known to be a later issue core (1830s--). It is most identifiable by it's bent oakleaf stem, but there are a few other differences. The other original 1813 cores come with both serif and sans-serif dates, and it's unclear (to me, anyway) which was earlier, or if they were contemporaneous. The stepped-core and super-thin flanges are among the first issues. The very first issues had two-piece cores and notched, four-piece frames. But none of these is shown above.

Here is a notched-frame example. I'm not 100% sure it's an original, to be honest, but it does show the construction used:



Heyde's book on the Aurich collection is absolutely indispensable to me as a collector of 1870 and 1813 EKs. Unfortunately it has never been translated.

By the way, the fakes are getting better, so be very careful.

FAKE:

[CSForrester]

For comparison my 1813 EK II. The core has seen some rust and the frame some damage. The ring is typical for that time - hollow. A sheet of silver was bend around wire and then the wire removed, in german this is called "kaneliert".

Regards
CSForrester

[CSForrester]

...... the ring in detail:

[streptile]

Very nice, CS.

[CSForrester]

Very nice, CS.

Thanks Trevor,

the obverse shows, that this cross may have lost the core by some damage, the parts of the frame were resoldere. This fragile construction is in my opinion one of the early variants.
The construction is very similar to Heyde C4, note the ring on Heydes piece is also hollow, also the fixing of the small eye(-ring) and the serife date.
The steps of my core are covered by the silver parts of the frame after reparature.

Regards
Markus

[streptile]

Yes, it does appear very similar to Aurich's C4, but with slightly wider flanges.

I, too, believe that the crude-construction EK2s are the very earliest examples. You have a very nice EK2 there!

Andreas Thies just offered one almost identical to C4 in his recent auction. I'm not sure how much it sold for, but it was probably the finest example of any early 1813 I've ever seen. This one looks so much like Aurich's C4, that it must have been made by the same person, or the same maker, around the same time:

[DavidM]

Hello

Some really nice 1813 EKs there, especially the Thies one.

Markus, despite repairs etc, I really like yours A good honest original.

Regards
David

[streptile]

The very first issues had two-piece cores and notched, four-piece frames. But none of these is shown above.

By the way I was wrong to say no notch-frames are shown above. I should say that #2, and probably #1 and #9, are indeed notch-frame examples, upon examination of further photos via the link.

[AlikN]

Thanks Trevor, ....that cross in post #10 ....looks to nice to be almost 200 years old.
Two-piece cores ...?, two thin sheets of iron back to back, and a step on facing side of each half-core.
Markus very nice cross, I like the wear on it.......

[Elmar Lang]

Hello,

the cross auctioned at Thies' was sold for 3,000.- Euro plus buyer's premium and had its start at 2,800.-

A very fine piece indeed.

Best wishes,

E.L.

[Brian S]

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade because it's not fair for me but...

My biggest problem with these is the fact that the earliest examples ARE by WWII, WWI, 1870 and later produced examples....crude.

Fakers always get something wrong. Always. But on these... You can't get anything wrong because the earliest examples are hand wrought. And the earliest all exhibit individual characteristics and are not cross by cross from the "same die, the die don't lie". Quite the opposite. They are hand made from the impression in the sand mold.

My great great grandfather won this award and there's nothing I'd like more than to have it now. But it was returned upon his death. Most were. Returned to what ulitimate fate I don't know, but returned.

So I've got some real heartburn with doleing out any money on these on the horrible gut feeling I get that the majority of the ones I see may come from modern production and aged to perfection.

RAO and Trevor, you have an article to write/translate. These more than any other award from Prussian history beg a balanced and provenanced report. The GC's are well documented. We need the common man's EK 1813 to be traced beyond reproach.