Hello, I am not an expert on EK's and would welcome comments on this cross which was recently bought by a friend of mine.
To me it does not seem "right".
The makers mark is 51 - I looked in Gordon Williamsons book but could not find a maker 51 - if I missed it can anyone set me to right > (Thanks).
Paint job is "too good" and there appears to be paint on the beading which gives me to think it has been repainted or was painted insitu.
Back of the cross poor symetery and the tarnish comes off on the hand / finger nail.
The 1939 does not look right .
As I say I am not an expert and would welcome your opinions on this cross , if it is a fake is it a well known example ?
I could not get my camera to "co-operate" so I would apologise in advance for the scans.
To me it just does not seem right but in this case I hope you gents will prove me wrong.
Thanks in advance.
Jim S
To me it does not seem "right".
The makers mark is 51 - I looked in Gordon Williamsons book but could not find a maker 51 - if I missed it can anyone set me to right > (Thanks).
Paint job is "too good" and there appears to be paint on the beading which gives me to think it has been repainted or was painted insitu.
Back of the cross poor symetery and the tarnish comes off on the hand / finger nail.
The 1939 does not look right .
As I say I am not an expert and would welcome your opinions on this cross , if it is a fake is it a well known example ?
I could not get my camera to "co-operate" so I would apologise in advance for the scans.
To me it just does not seem right but in this case I hope you gents will prove me wrong.
Thanks in advance.
Jim S
Comment