Hello folks. I thought I'd take a couple of quick snaps of this Ritterkreuz before I consign it to the 'ol repop bin! I've got to say, it shows some real age, but as I've never owned one of these before (real or otherwise), I'm far from well versed in their construction or intimate details. What I will say, is that the cross itself is completely un-marked (no silver content, etc). The frame has started to separate in one corner, and has these interesting little "hashmarks" (for want of a better word), stacked 3 high in each corner where the arms of the frame intersect (on each side of the swastika). There's a lot of hairline crazing on the paint, especially on the front but also a little bit on the back. The oakleaf / sword device has got a very small "800" in a box stamped on one arm of the ring, but it's too small for me to photograph clearly (however you CAN make it out a bit in picture number 4). I found it odd that the ring itself was integral w/ the frame and was soldered (sandwiched) together, but again, I've not had another of these with which to make a comparison. The ribbon also shows some real age. Before I just assume that this thing should be relegated to the Bazaar, could some of you Ritterkreuz experts chime in and share your thoughts with this one? I'm assuming that it's just an old knock-off, but just want to be sure to be sure...Thanks in advance!
-
Last edited by Milton; 05-17-2012, 12:27 PM. -
2 -
3Comment
-
Seems to me its a lovely postwar set made by Souval ( clearly spotted by the dipping "3" in the 1939 date ).
Although clearly not wartime made, these early postwar pieces are quite collectable ( to say, I do collect them
).
Guess these were made during the sixties .....
Grtz
MathijsComment
-
Thanks! I figured it had some legitimate age to it, due to its overall appearance. Are you of the assumption that the Eichenlaub / Schwerter device is real coin silver? It does appear to have the right patina...One thing though, in checking the pinned article on Souval frames, it shows the "dipping 3", however mine is very close in line w/ the other numbers in the date (even under magnification) It seems the ones in the article are a bit more obviously out of line. Is it the general consensus that ALL w/ the "dipping" 3 are post-war production? The article mentions that it also appears on some pre-45 examples???..(although not apparently on the Ritterkreuz as from what I just read, they didn't produce them pre '45) Thx again!Last edited by Milton; 05-17-2012, 01:13 PM.Comment
-
..and another thing, the oakleaf / sword device appears stamped (has mirror image on the reverse), as opposed to being solid-backed (if that makes any difference?)Comment
-
Souval offered the thin stamped Oak Leaves and Oak Leaves with Swords as a less expensive article. If it is marked 800 it is made of silver.
Bob HritzIn the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
Duct tape can't fix stupid, but it can muffle the sound.Comment
-
Thank You Bob. Yes, I assumed it was European coin. No chance that the device itself is wartime, or?? Thanks!Comment
-
None
Sorry Milton, but no chance!Comment
-
No worries! It doesn't seem to have the quality finish I'd expect to see on such a high award. It DOES have a nice overall look though, as a "filler" piece! Seems that there's a decent market for these Souval post-war pieces, regardless. Thanks to all!Comment
-
Hello again Folks. Another quick question regarding this cross. Going on the assumption that it's a Souval post-war piece, does it make sense that the frame of the RK itself is devoid of any "L58" or "800" stamping, however it IS stamped "800" on the Eichenlaub / Schwerter device. It seems that the other RK's I've seen on the forum that were id's as postwar Souval pieces were all marked w/ either L58 or the "800" silver mark on the frame, just below or on either side of the suspension ring. Thanks!Comment
-
It would not make too much sense for an item to be marked L/58 or L58 post war. The LDO was not around any longer and there was no need to do this. Unless there was some spurious reason involved. However, there are post war pieces stamped as such. But likely more to fool people unaware that L/58 meant it was supposed to be wartime manufactured.Originally posted by Milton View Post
But that being said, I'd be wary of ANYTHING marked L/58 (with a slash). As it is my (and many others) opinion the whole works are post war made.Comment
-
Hi Darrel. Yes, of course you're right inasmuch as the L code thing was no longer extant post '45. Most (if not all), of the souval RK's I've examined since coming into this one at least have the coin silver mark (800) stamped on the frame of the cross. Any L58 marking as you rightly ascertain, would be a later "addition" (attempt to deceive, perhaps). Mine is unmarked on the frame, however the oakleaf / swords device IS marked w/ the silver mark 800. I'm just curious if it's basically the "norm" for the post war souval RK's to not have any marking on the frame. Thanks for your comments.Comment
-
No ... this is not true. I said (in brackets "with a slash") the L/58 is (again IMO) Postwar. L58 (no backslash) is a known wartime marking on the Souval EK1 Screwbacks.Originally posted by Milton View PostComment
-
Post war Souval pieces may have no marks, just 800 or 800 and L/58 on the top of the frame. I have seen all three. I have been told, but cannot substantiate, that no marks were the earliest post war followed by 800 and then 800 and L/58 in the mid 60's. IMO the markings are neither here nor there, it is the die characteristics of the component parts that one must pay attention to with these or any fakes.
JAndrewComment
Comment