EK II Markked ''We''

[Tan Berk]

Just for the record and future reference, a ''We'' marked (on the ring) JH Werner Eiserne Kreuz II 1914.

[Tan Berk]

.

[gregM]

Nice one.

[Tan Berk]

Thank you Greg, love it too. It makes a nice pair with the JH Werner Gallipoli Star in the display cabinet

[Rich G]

Nice cross but how does We = JH Werner?

[pzrwest]

The "We" probably stands for the first two letter of his sir name is my way of thinking

[morel5000]

Nice cross.

But We. why not mark the ring J.H.W.?

Best regards,
Michel

[Rich G]

I have an EK1 marked for We and I do not recall it looking anything like a J H Werner EK1 which is why I am questioning the association.

[feldpost 58]

Hi,

I bought five WW1 EK2 several years ago from an elderly gent dealer in Germany.
One bore this very makers mark, which I am glad to hear is good.
I have tried to describe this mark in words - but a "picture paints a thousand words" as they say

Best wishes,

John.

[gregM]

I have never heard of any connection between "We" and JHWerner.

[Tan Berk]

I think we can dwell into this We and Werner connection, I thought it to be the same because thats how it was declared by the seller whom I trust a big deal.

Tan

[saschaw]

I have never heard of any connection between "We" and JHWerner.

Which doesn't change the fact it's true. From the re-institution of the EK in august 1914 up to april 1917, only five Berlin makers were official suppliers of 1st class EKs: Joh. Wagner & Sohn, Sy & Wagner, J. Godet & Sohn, Gebr. Friedländer and J. H. Werner. As it's apparent the "We." 1st class crosses are award type crosses and as they can be found to be "early", meaning pre-1917/18 made, "We." cannot be any other maker.

But We. why not mark the ring J.H.W.?

Now that is something you would have to ask the GOK or Werner himnself... I don't know. Same is with J. Godet & Sohn who marked "JG&S" on e.g. the RAO4 but "G" on the EKs, and Joh. Wagner & Sohn with their "WS" on RAOs, KOs and such vs. "W", "WuS", "W&S" on EKs.

In my opinion, there was just the regulation they had to use their first letters, with not much more rule given. There were never more than about two hand full of makers involved in Prussian award production at one time, so the guys at the GOK knew which mark was whose, even with some differences in the abbreviations. They knew where they had ordered from, after all!

I have an EK1 marked for We and I do not recall it looking anything like a J H Werner EK1 which is why I am questioning the association.

Indeed, but award type and private pruchase crosses sometimes don't share much...

[SCOTT G]

Greetings Tan,
A great addition to your collection, interesting that the mark is on the loop not the suspension ring as is more common on EK2s .

[Tan Berk]

Thank you Scott, you are right whether it is Werner or not, still good to have one marked on the loop.

And thanks everyone for sharing their thoughts, I think this is still an open case for further discovery of this maker mark.

Tan

[saschaw]

And thanks everyone for sharing their thoughts, I think this is still an open case for further discovery of this maker mark.

Actually not, as I've written. "We." is J. H. Werner without any doubt. The information I gave in this thread is based on Frank Wernitz' tremendous archive work. He even gives delivery numbers by makers... by the way, of the five EK1 makers mentioned above, J. H. Werner made the fewest.

Or did I understand you wrong, and this wasn't your point at all?

interesting that the mark is on the loop not the suspension ring as is more common on EK2s .

While this is indeed unusual, it's common on the J. H. Werner crosses.