Imperial EK2 - unmarked

[Graeme]

Hi Guys

I picked this up about 5 years ago and was wondering if it looks all original and if there are any unique details that can point to a maker.

The back has a label on it, which I will post after a few opinions.

Many thanks for any feedback

regards
Graeme

[Graeme]

reverse

[Graeme]

After researching on WAF, and checking out the different makers from the pinned thread, I notice that the crowns are not very detailed and the acorns are very distinct in their orientation.
Regarding those two features it resembles an "ED" but mostly an "S" marked cross.
I will dig mine out again and try to check the ring for any marks.

For those familiar with iron crosses how does the frame, core and ribbon look as originality goes.

best regards
Graeme

[Graeme]

No maker marks on the rings

Size is 43.5mm
Weight 20.16g (without ribbon etc)
Core is Magnetic
Frame is Non-Magnetic
Rings are Non-Magnetic

cheers
Graeme

[Graeme]

Wow, a hard crowd to please !

76 views and not a comment..

If any of you guys know an experienced collector of Imperial EK could you please PM them so that they may comment on my cross.

best regards
Graeme

[Stepdale]

Hate to throw his name out without asking first, but streptile comes to mind - you might shoot him a PM.
Dale

[Don D.]

Hi Graeme, don't know how I missed this thread. Try comparing it to a KO cross in the data section. http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=263078
d

[Graeme]

Thanks Dale

Will check out the thread Don . I think I went through most makers and felt the "S" marked were similar, but I may have missed that thread

cheers guys
Graeme

[Graeme]

Hey Don

Thanks for that thread, When I was trying to find a maker for my cross I must have checked the first few crosses in that thread which did not show the characteristics of mine, but since you pointed the thread out I see that there are a couple of cores that look very similar from post #59 onwards. They have the not so detailed crown and the acorn pattern. In fact the left acorn points upwards and not seen that detail on many crosses except the KO you pointed me to and the S type.

Here is the last pic I have of the reverse of the cross, and I do not know how this fits in with the scheme of things. The label looks original to me, so maybe the cross and medal bar were not originally together.

Any thoughts welcome

regards and thanks
Graeme

[Miro O]

This core is generic, shared and used by many makers, so focusing on the core shape can only narrow down the number of known and unknown makers but not completely answer your question. So more important, though harder to "read", is the frame identification. This method will quickly rule out KO (Klein, Oberstein) from the list of suspects, because this maker used platform (hump) for soldering the jumpring, which is not present on the frame of your cross.

You are correct, maker S also belongs between usual suspects, but if I remember correctly, S has more curved shape of the frame. Another maker using this core and slightly wideframish design is the small "v".

Identification of unmarked WW1 cross can unfortunately end up, from known reasons, as a lifetime hobby. And even if you succeed quickly, all you get is in most cases - just a letter from the alphabet.

Nevertheless, I would be really happy with what it clearly is - nice single mounted cross in very good shape.

[Graeme]

Thank you for the detailed information.

I also noticed the lack of "hump" for soldering the smaller ring to.

It is nice to have maker marked crosses but as with other badges, for me it is not important. Not being very experienced with imperial items I was more concerned with the lack of detail to the crowns and hoped that it looked to be an original core and frame. Which it seems to be.

I will check out the small "v" cross that you mentioned.

Thanks again
regards
Graeme

[streptile]

Hi Graeme,

Sorry I'm late to the thread but I just saw it. I can't give you a better analysis that Miro has done below:

This core is generic, shared and used by many makers, so focusing on the core shape can only narrow down the number of known and unknown makers but not completely answer your question. So more important, though harder to "read", is the frame identification. This method will quickly rule out KO (Klein, Oberstein) from the list of suspects, because this maker used platform (hump) for soldering the jumpring, which is not present on the frame of your cross.

You are correct, maker S also belongs between usual suspects, but if I remember correctly, S has more curved shape of the frame. Another maker using this core and slightly wideframish design is the small "v".

Identification of unmarked WW1 cross can unfortunately end up, from known reasons, as a lifetime hobby. And even if you succeed quickly, all you get is in most cases - just a letter from the alphabet.

Nevertheless, I would be really happy with what it clearly is - nice single mounted cross in very good shape.

Identifying a maker for an unmarked 1914 EK1 is more often than not impossible to do with any certainty. There are a few makers that are very distinctive, like KO or AWS or KMST for example, but for the most part Imperial makers cross-pollinated so much, sharing cores and frames and even reverse hardware, that unless you have a mark, or the cross is one of the "easy ones," you usually get just a guess. And, as Miro said, that guess is often just a letter in the alphabet, as so many makers' names remain unknown to us. Even one of the most common Imperial makers, KAG, is not yet identified, and the most common maker, KO, is only thought to be Klein und Quenzer, with some evidence but no proof to back up the claim.

[Graeme]

Hi Streptile

Many thanks for your feedback. It is much appreciated.

Thanks also to all those that have replied, I will have a couple more to show shortly.

best regards
Graeme