EK2 spange help

[Filip]

Hi guys,

I don't have any other pics of this , but perhaps you would still be able to tell me, Is this thing for real or what ?

[Robert P.]

This looks like a four-pronged Prinzen size spange. I have a two-pronge in my 'accepted as original' file which resembles yours...a little, but not the exact badge. Take a close look...

Robert

[Robert P.]

rev

[tinmantis]

took me a while to reply... I was searching my files/brains
as I thought I'd seen this one recently and didn't like the look of it...
http://www.regimentaldepot.com/TR/TR...Class/2801.htm
what does everyone think about this one? (and the others)
regards
jon

[ben bijker]

2 prongs or 4, I still don't like it.......

Sorry....

Ben

[Will Brown]

I'm on the fence regarding this spange. I think it is a good one. If not, it is very convincing.

[Robert P.]

There is no doubt that this is one of the most controversial areas in TR badge studies, the 2nd class spange. There have been attempts made in the past to identify all of the known 1st class spanges. And, there were many who posted excellent photos of marked and unmarked badges. Our forum's archives are full of many other photos as well. We moved into a more 'secure' knowledge of the 1st class spanges doing this. At least I did. On the other hand, my files are filled with 2nd class examples that have been given the in the past on this forum, making them candidates for my 'original' folder/file. I once heard that there were just a certain number of 2nd class makers. I believe my 'original' file has double that number by now. A lot of the badges just get an 'I like it', and are added to the file. I've held back many times in wanting to address this issue of just how many makers can be honestly proven out to be original. If there ever needed to be a book written on a subject, this is it! I know you all agree that just an 'I like it' should not be interpreted as 'original'. Just as 'I don't like it' should not necessarily condemn it. So where do we go with this? I'd like to see some 'absolutes' established on this forum. I believe we do have some. I think with each badge that is brought to the screen for judging, no one (including myself) should be allowed to accept or reject anything without sound evidence of originality. Does anyone agree with this? Can anyone bring to this study a known list of 2nd class makers, and begin to post known examples? I'd love to streamline my files into an accurate working portfolio of the known 2nd class examples.

Robert

[AVRORA]

One more L/12
This spange I removed from the veteran`s medal bar. Also has been surprised having seen mark L/12. Medal bar was originally. ( old fabric and the thread). All awards was original too. Spange was fixed on the metal basis on the EK-2 1914 band .

[tinmantis]

why remove it from the medal bar?
and
didn't we all discuss a medal bar recently that had this style spange 'added'?

I'm not sure on this one, I just 'don't like' (sorry Robert) that L/12 mark
regards
jon

[ben bijker]

Robert, I understand what you meen, but:
without commebting based on gut-feeling at least % of the postings for opinions would get zero replies.
Just because it is hard or impossible to proove either way sometimes "I don't like it" is all there is.

I did reply with "I don't Like it" as well, but I will explain:
The style and quality is way off from the known and accepted originals.

The L/12 mark I don't like because it is not similar to known and aacepted original marks.

This is the best way to put it.
Gut-feeling, but no proof...

Best regards,
Ben

ps: doesn't the big gap between haed and left wing remind you of another well-known fake??

[Robert P.]

Robert, I understand what you meen, but:
without commebting based on gut-feeling at least % of the postings for opinions would get zero replies.
Just because it is hard or impossible to proove either way sometimes "I don't like it" is all there is.

I did reply with "I don't Like it" as well, but I will explain:
The style and quality is way off from the known and accepted originals.

The L/12 mark I don't like because it is not similar to known and aacepted original marks.

This is the best way to put it.
Gut-feeling, but no proof...

Best regards,
Ben

ps: doesn't the big gap between haed and left wing remind you of another well-known fake??

Thanks Ben,

Thank you for expounding further. I fully agree that this is not what a Juncker 2nd class spange looks like. Here is what I have in my files regarding a Juncker 2nd pattern on left, 1st pattern on right...

Robert

[Robert P.]

Sorry - double post.

R

[tinmantis]

here's what I have as a list of EK2 spangen:

1st patterns
prinzens
55?
L/11
L/13
L/14?
L/15
L/16?
L/18
L/53
L/56
L/57
and few unmarked

I also have heard of, but never seen:
21
44
L/12
L/50

please let me know of any more or corrections
regards
jon

[AVRORA]

why remove it from the medal bar?
and
didn't we all discuss a medal bar recently that had this style spange 'added'?

I'm not sure on this one, I just 'don't like' (sorry Robert) that L/12 mark
regards
jon

Hi Jon . I removed spange from medal bar, because it has been bought by the other buyer. I took spange, he took medals.

[Robert P.]

jon ,

Thank you very much for this list. Gordon Williamson's book 'The EK of 1939' lists these 2nd class spanges, which have been identified by the maker's name on the award packets:

21, 44, 111, L/11, L/12, L/16, L/18, L/50, L/57

I have heard of, but have never seen:

4, L/10, L/22, L/55

jon, this next photo is of a stamped Juncker. I believe it looks identical to the 2nd pattern I posted earlier. Do you think this stamp is original? If so, we have a marked Juncker for the records...

I'd like to continue on posting other known, and stamped examples to build a solid base of originals.

BTW, jon, I don't like the L/12 maker mark in post #8 either.

Robert