Knight's Cross for Review...I assume it's bogus, but I appreciate expert opinions, so feel free to critique this one for reference. Thanks for looking. Ed
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Knight's Cross for Review
Collapse
X
-
The one with the dates which are very close to the lower beading is a copy which has been around for a long time, found with many different markings ("2", "20", etc.). Note how the "1" and "8" on the reverse date are virtually linked. There is some thought that these legitimately started out as an early war cross by a private maker which never supplied the government and then were "born again" after the war. I must say that I have seen a couple of examples of such a cross which were simply marked "800" and were very nice, indeed (but did not have the linkage between the "1" and "8"). This type is shown by Gordon Williamson as a copy and actually appears in Dietrich's book (with 1957 type core) attached to a set of Brilliants (although no mention of maker is made).
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leroy View PostThe one with the dates which are very close to the lower beading is a copy which has been around for a long time, found with many different markings ("2", "20", etc.). Note how the "1" and "8" on the reverse date are virtually linked. There is some thought that these legitimately started out as an early war cross by a private maker which never supplied the government and then were "born again" after the war. I must say that I have seen a couple of examples of such a cross which were simply marked "800" and were very nice, indeed (but did not have the linkage between the "1" and "8"). This type is shown by Gordon Williamson as a copy and actually appears in Dietrich's book (with 1957 type core) attached to a set of Brilliants (although no mention of maker is made).
Comment
Users Viewing this Thread
Collapse
There are currently 3 users online. 0 members and 3 guests.
Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.
Comment