My Ritterkreuz... is it good?

[Klaus O.]

Dear fellow collectors:

I purchased this RK almost 8 years ago and always had a good feeling about it. At that time my knowledge was very little on RK and I fully trusted the Auctionhouse who sold it to me (Hermann Historica, München).

Here the details:

Breite (width): 48.8 mm Höhe (Height): 48.8 mm
Gewicht (weight): 29.9 g
Silberrahmen, Eisenkern (marked 800 on the reverse, top cross' arm)

The ribbon is not original. It's quite a cheap copy but doesn't react to UV light. I just put it on the cross for display purpuses.

Please be good with me... I had so many bad surprises, especially after having learned so much from this site, that I am scared to death to show it on this forum.

If it's fake I am gonna sell it on Ebay... Just joking!

I am anxiously awaiting your hopefully kind and positive comments.

Ciao,

Claudio

[Klaus O.]

Reverse of the RK

I am also posting the reverse of this KC:

[George Stimson]

Claudio,

These RKs are very controversial. Some people are sure they are good, and other people are just as sure that they are bad. My personal opinion of them is that there is more evidence to indicate that they are good than to indicate that they are bad. But I also think that this is one of those cases where we might never know.
(I'm sure that other people will be weighing in on this! )

George

[Dave Kane]

George you knew I'd be jumping in on this!!!
Claudio, I just plain don't like these crosses and just to rehash old commentary here's why: This type appeared on the markets several years ago ( suddenly ) and of those (they) were beautiful and mint. Strangely, a decent (repo) set of Oaks was oftentime attached to them. I have never seen this 'type' offered with a period loop nor have I seen them offered with a period ribbon. There is no rhyme or reason to the design detail at any of the inner or outer corners! Some have an attempt at # and others just end. In other words these just don't have a symmetry to the finish of the frame. The ribs of the frame are very shallow. The 1813 on the reverse is not centered and the 'numerals' on either side lack crispness. I have seen several offered at less than $1,000.00 and up to $1,500.00 but, no takers...not even the dealers.
The other side of the coin is that pictures show what appear to be rounded inner corners but lack clarity. It could be that they are reflective of over zelous filing. Example being...look at the Juncker RK in the "RK count" post. Look at that cross from a distance and you would never suspect it to be a Juncker!
Just my observations!
John

[Adrian]

Hello Claudio,

The swastika doesn`t seem to be central, it appears to be a little high, leaving a gap between the bottom two sides and the corresponding inner corners. Is it the picture or is that how it is on the cross??

Best Regards,
Adrian.

[mott5ranch]

Many German texts and period photos show these rounded corner types. I'm in the group that these are OK. I also believe these were pre LDO rules and most were picked up or whatever since they didn't comply with new rules or were not made by the new AUTHORIZED makers. Who knows what happened to these pre approved types? Remember many places sold these as private purchase. I guess we can only guess.

However, one picture is worth a thousand words. . and there are many from the war showing these being worn. So now what?

I have seen other RK's with fake ribbons, oaks, oaks and swords, even some good pieces have been tampered with to enhance their value. It happens with all of them. Gordon writes he has seen this too. I don't have a dog in this fight, but , TO ME, if I were in the market I'd be more inclined to grab one of these rounded ones from a reputable source for a grand rather than 5K plus for the post LDO rules version. Herman Historica usually knows where their items are from, I consider them to be on the upper end of Militaria items. I would be happy with your cross.

[Ludwig]

KC

Dear Claudio,

Can you please send a closeup photo of the area around the loop (reverse). Looks like it is manipulated in some way. Perhaps only cleaned?
That the swaztika is not centered doesn´t mean it´s not OK.
To me the cross looks handpainted and that´s not good.

[Klaus O.]

Gary, thanks for your nice words... I can still hope that this RK is original...

Ludwig, unfortunately the RK is not with me. As I can remember the iron center seemed not be repainted. Neither seemed to me that the frames have been cleaned. I will ask my brother to send me better pics of the area around the loop. I first thought as Gary, too, that this RK was an early pattern type (pre LDO regulations). Ludwig! I surely have a great RK's collection... I wish that I could own just one of your RK... I wish I could own a "textbook" RK that I can be totally sure of its authenticity!

Ciao,

Claudio

[Ludwig]

RK

Claudio,

I have a textbook "Lazy 2" for sale. Send me your e-mail address and I will send you some jpg.s in case you are interested. I don´t know how to attach images to my posts in this forum.

[François SAEZ]

Ludwig
To be able to attach pics, you need to be an association member.
It is worth to be

François

[Ludwig]

Membership

Dear Francois,

I AM an associate member, but I have never managed to log in! And until today I haven´t had the time to follow it up... Perhaps you can attach them for me if I send them to your private mail?

[François SAEZ]

sure, please make them the right size and send them to fsaez@noos.fr

[Gordon Williamson]

Claudio,

This type of cross has already been the subject of much discussion, I am sure if you go back through earlier threads you will find plenty on it.
Despite what John says, these have been around a long time, and as yours illustrates, are far from always being "mint". Neither do they regularly appear with Oakleaves attached - in fact I have never seen one for sale with oakleaves attached.
Every piece I have seen has had the correct regulation loop.

As for numerals lacking crispness, take a look at the first type early RK with the 3/4 eye, or the Grand Cross to the Iron Cross, both of which have far less well defined numerals than later RKs.

I seem to remember the photos that were posted before to argue John's case clearly shown poor fakes which were nothing at all like this particular type.

It will be virtually impossible to prove that such a piece did not exist during 1939-45. Whilst I agree that this type is not particularly aesthetically pleasing, the bottom linbe is that the only truly safe RK to have is the Juncker for obvious reasons as the others (except perhaps Deschler) have all been faked with
varying degrees of success, but the Juncker has never been accurately copied.

As far as this type is concerned, I will continue to lean towards giving it the benefit of the doubt until someone comes up with a reasonable argument for it being wrong. As far as I can see, up to now, although everyone has the right not to like them of course, no one has come up with anything like a convincing argument for them being wrong.

Gordon

[Bill Gracie]

G'day Claudio,

I'm with Gary and Gordon on this one, I too feel that until somebody can provide evidence to say this this cross is a fake my thought will not change.

If my memory serves me well there were scans on this web site that showed this type of cross in wear, however, others felt that the photo's had been retouched. To my eye I couldn't see the evidence of this reworking of the photos.

As I said, I feel that this Type is alright unfortunately, I haven't the cash to purchase one

Bill

[Dave Kane]

Gordon or anyone...have you ever seen one of these even in the mint condition contained in an original case and with a full length ribbon?