EK1 on estand

[DavidM]

Hello

A bit late to the party, but for what it's worth my comments are:

1. I've seen a couple of WW1 period EKs with rings, but not in this style.
2. I like it and (only my personal opinion) believe it to be a genuine piece.
3. The price is to high.
4. Why would anyone stitch an EK on? The best answer I can come up with is if they need to keep the cross flat and tight to their tunic or what have you, perhaps because they are working around machinery or operating in a confined environment or somewhere where they can't afford to have the cross potentially flapping around on a pin.

Regards
David

[Steve Campbell]

David, you ask why anyone would stich an EK on. To that I say, who knows? Is there any accounting for taste? Perhaps someone, either the owner, who perhaps commissioned the item, or a jeweller thought it would be a good idea to try and attach an EK right to a jacket. It would be fastened on securely, always on a particular coat and visible for all to see. We know medals were worn on civilain clothing after the war and unlike these days I would say most people had one or two jackets at the most in there possession. Ever been in a house from this era? The closets are tiny, no such thing as a large walk in closet like we see today. I think people often had one good suit and that was it. This is where a sewn on EK would make sense.

Look at the crazy attachements from this era we come to accept. Godets with fangs, KMST with sliders, safety catches etc, the myriad of screwbacks. A precedent does exist for experimentation with attachments. The afformentioned crosses are all private purchase and most likely post 1918.

I'm not saying yay or nay on this item. I think it's big problem is it is highly unorthodox, hasn't been seen and it's tough to say what it's origin is. It does have some positives going for it however as many have pointed out.

There have been a few crosses shown here with sloppy safety pins attached and other obviously owner done modifications that have been viewed positively, so maybe this one should be looked at with an open mind. No era of Iron Cross was as wide open as the 1914 series, especially the private purchase examples.

[VtwinVince]

Perhaps this cross was produced for sewing onto a sash or regimental item?

[morel5000]

Hi Jimmy,

But none were passed on simply because they have never seen one like it, that is very narrow minded and should be challenged.

Point taken.

Could you give a close-up of the loops?

Thanks,
Best regards,
Michel

[joelhall]

.
4. Why would anyone stitch an EK on? The best answer I can come up with is if they need to keep the cross flat and tight to their tunic or what have you, perhaps because they are working around machinery or operating in a confined environment or somewhere where they can't afford to have the cross potentially flapping around on a pin.

Regards
David

like steve says, theres plenty of variety in 1914 eks, and usually to solve the same problem - far less likely than a simple pin and hook to come loose in battle or indeed with hooks or a screwback, if it is sewn directly onto the tunic. having said that the loops dont look substantial enough on this it seems a little like a solution which adds to the problem.

im not sure i go with the idea it was sewn onto a good suit though to be honest - too much faffing around if you were to wear something else.

i noticed that the rings arent merely attached to the corners though, but they project out where they were soldered on - could it be that this was pinned to something? a plaquard or something like that maybe as some sort of patriotic display maybe?

[Steve Campbell]

Maybe it is a legit private purchase piece that ended up flopping as an attachement system. Wouldn't be the first time a new idea or variation was tried that never worked out properly and subsequently faded into obscurity.

I mean, there was no one regulating what could or could not be done. Any maker or company was free to try what they wanted, and we have seen many examples of this as I pointed out in a previous post. No doubt some worked better than others. The thing is, most of us have never tried wearing the variety of EKs we have in our collections out and about for a day or two. How do we know how well the fangs on a Godet work? I don't see that attachement on any other crosses. Maybe it was a useless gimmick. I know I won't be wearing mine out tomorrow to find out. Is a KMST with the slide attachement an effective way to keep an EK on a jacket? Who wants to attach thiers tomorrow and get back to me on how well it stayed on or in place? Not many people I would say.

[Brian S]

If I were frontlilne and had to wear this under a greatcoat I was taking off and on over and over I'd want an arrangement just like this. The stitching would hide the loops metal with a thread that matched the uniform color. Uniforms were brushed not dry cleaned so I have absolutely no problem with this setup. As for cost, an officer of moderate rank would have access to a soldier whose job was working with metal, fixing things, etc. Not unplausable.

Jimmy, it looks like a field upgrade as I've described. It's maybe my imagination but on the back top portion it's looking like the top hinge attachment is visible through the patina. A much more defined photo would help. Field upgrades do not detract from the originality.

[Chris Boonzaier]

.
But none were passed on simply because they have never seen one like it, that is very narrow minded and should be challenged.

In this hobby, it is all about challenge... My argument on EKs is never that I have never seen one like this, they are

1) Many a hobby collector/Jeweller with a polishing wheel can remove fittings.

Does that mean I am saying it is fake? No, just stating a fact.

2) I find the system totally unpracticle for a uniform. snag the cross on a side arm of the cross and you will break off a ring, rip out the thread, tear your tunic.

I think anyone who has been in the army knows how fast things can get damaged. Does that mean I say its fake? No, I just question what logical purpose this serves. A pinned on cross moves... snag it and it turns, there is a bit of give. Sew a cross on like this and snag it.... riiiiiiiiiiip ... something tears.

3) Try sewing this on a piece of feldgrau cloth and see how it looks, big "ears" in each corner.... I wonder who would have bought it...

4) Discussion forum... and cross is being discussed. I have voiced some opinions, others have voiced others. They may be buying, I would not. Then they have the cross they like, you have the money... and I have my beer... and we are all happy...

Its what forums are all about me amigo....

[Jimmy]

Closeup

I have a brand new computer with a newer version of Photo shop that I'm used to. I hope this looks OK. As you can see they are soldered to the tips on the underside. As far as there having ever been any work to the rear of the cross, if you had it in hand you could see that it hasn't been worked. Here is quote from the COA from a respected dealer who sells I would guess 6 or so 1914EK1's on average per week.
"As can clearly be seen this cross has never had a pin or screw back"
As to speculation on its use all we can do is speculate, but I believe it to be sewn to the uniform and as we well know it wasn't a popular idea. Which makes this scarce.
What else can I do?

[joelhall]

there is a similar looking type - of sorts - of an 1813 cross in the iron time, page 28. of course this isnt an actual cross, but it has the same eyelets at the corners. however, it does show the same sort of set up. i still think this is something that was attached to something other than clothing, pinned to some sort of display.

if of course its original.

[Montgomery Burns]

Jimmy ,,,wy don't you send this ek to Detlef Niemann ,,
fore 35 or so you have an expertise on it ,,

or not,,, if it is not a obscure variation from 1914


at least it makes sure you can sell this ek without a lot off trouble


regards kay

[schönbeck]

Detlevs opinion isnt wort more than paper, save your money.

IMO this cross has been modified. I can promise that its possible to remove the hardware without leaving any traces. I have seen similar crosses used after the war. Just like someone above suggested, they didnt have a large wardrobe like today,

[Steve Campbell]

Detlevs opinion isnt wort more than paper, save your money.

IMO this cross has been modified. I can promise that its possible to remove the hardware without leaving any traces. I have seen similar crosses used after the war. Just like someone above suggested, they didnt have a large wardrobe like today,

"After the war" isn't a problem when it comes to 1914 Iron Crosses though is it? If it was our collections would be mostly KOs and KAGs. Not that's there's anything wrong with that.

[schönbeck]

Steve, That was what I meant also. There were so called Schutzen Vereins and similar which people joined when Germany had no regular army after ww1.

[Montgomery Burns]

[QUOTE=schönbeck;3772675]Detlevs opinion isnt wort more than paper, save your money.

strong words ,,,

and I disagree if you don't mind,,,,fore reasons I named earlier.
fore this case

but I do respect you're opinion on that matter ,

regards kay