In another thread recently there has been some debate on wheather wear can be taken into account when establishing wheather a cross is likely to be original or not. In my point of view, it is likely that a 'backdoor' replacement cross purchased after the war would show more wear than an original wartime awarded piece, as it would have been handled/worn for 60 years at re-unions etc, whereas the wartime piece may only have been worn for a few years and then hidden/confiscated to end up in a collection. Here is a 1957 RK useing K&Q frames, probably leftovers, which shows considerable more wear than its 1939 counterpart.......
-
Last edited by Harry; 07-10-2007, 06:44 AM. -
some details of the '57er......Last edited by Harry; 07-10-2007, 06:44 AM. -
some of the tell-tale marks that confirm genuine Klein & Quenzer frames.......Last edited by Harry; 07-10-2007, 06:44 AM.Comment
-
-
-
-
-
the beading.........hard to get a image of the wear....Last edited by Harry; 07-10-2007, 06:44 AM.Comment
-
This set is one of my favourite items, it came from the estate of Fritz Burkhardt, along with his early '57 DKiG and other awards........Last edited by Harry; 07-10-2007, 06:44 AM.Comment
-
Harry,Originally posted by Harry
Of course there are exceptions and I personally know of one proud RKT who wears his awarded RK to all the meetings but just back to front. It would be interesting to see how many RK's exhibit more wear to the front purely from being worn in this manner?
RichComment
-
Harry-
As the recipient was required to wear his RK during the war on a daily basis and under potential extreme conditions, I would disagree with your contention. If one did wear his post war "replacement" RK for an annual meeting, that would total for 120 days for a two day annual meeting. On the other hand, a RK recipient late in the war would have more days of wear and the medal itself would sustain more abuse in a combat situation. Just a thought.Comment
Comment