C.E. Juncker EK I

[George Stimson]

It looks to me like the tops of the "9s" are higher than the top of the "3" on Gordon's example, but that they're lower than the "3" on Roman's.

[MH184]

Right I think I've got it now, on original L/12's the 1st '9' is bigger than the '1' and the '3' bigger than the 2nd '9'.

Is that correct ?

I got th information from a listed thread below this one.

Kind regards,

Marcus

[Joseph D'Errico]

Hello Roman,

The points that would raise concerns for me on the piece you posted would be the following ;

- The position of the Swaz on your example is not correct

- The maker mark is not close, the horizontal stroke in the "2" is short as well as the loop on the top of the "2" is to tight.

- The "1" also has a short verical stroke

- The dates are out of the norm in that in that they are not symetrical.

- The beading to the right arm of the obverse meets upper center arm is a horizontal meeting of the beaded are and should be more of a "V" conjuction.


Just my thoughts,

Best,
JD

[Roman]

Thank you very much for your opinions.

So I will have to put this cross in the garbadge?

KR,
Roman

[MH184]

Hi Roman,


No not yet ! Let a few more opinions surface before you condem the EK to the rubbish bin.

I'm not overly keen on it, but lets wait and see my friend what can be concluded.

Kind regards,

Marcus

[MH184]

Here you are Roman not very good pic's but some more to compare yours with.

[TerryG]

Ek1

Great photos Marcus, good camera I guess.

[MH184]

Good grief no, I use this very small magnifying glass which holds the worlds smallest dictionary, it was my wifes grandmothers (20mm x 20mm)

I probably wouldn't be able to use one of those exy camera's, and don't even go there with that Adobe photo shop thing

Of course it's the computers fault you know !

Kind regards,

Marcus

[Peter Wiking]

Incredible that this would be a repro ?
I dont have that book by Gordon, but the cross looked fine to me.

Scarry.
Peter Wiking