Jump to content
Gentleman's Military Interest Club
CRBeery

New engraved WW1 EK1.

Recommended Posts

I picked up a small grouping and this was in it. I am fine with the cross. The case is orginal but seems to be the TR style so perhaps these were mated at some point. The engraving looks good to me. There is patina inside of it but it does not show very well in the pictures. I ran the name and the contents of the group by Rick L. and he said it sounded plausible. If anyone sees a red flag please let me know as I do have a short period to return this group if I need to.

Thanks,

Chet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

chet-

i'd be happy to have this in my collection.

it would be nice to say the box was imperial,

but there are so many plausible explanations

as to why it is not, and the cross and case

are both in such wonderful shape.

nice find!

joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when looking at the '800' mark and how dark the recesses are, I don't think the engraving is period as there does not appear to be the same patina.

Just my opinion.

A very nice EK1 though.

Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit that I am having trouble getting the patina to show in the engraving. The engraving is darker than it looks in the photos. I do see a difference as Rich pointed out between the 800 and the rest. I looked at some engraved pieces on WAF and found another engraved cross with the 800 in the middle of the engraving and it had a similar amount on patina to this one in both respects.

On my cross the thin, shallow lines are black with patina as I think they should be. The deeper, wider areas have less patina but seem to have green stuff in them like on early SA dagger hangers where the leather touches. Oxidation of the nickel in the silver??? It seems like the patina is creeping down into the engraving. Does anyone know if this is normal?

Is this style of engraving correct to the period? It seems like it is.

Please do not see this as me defending a piece that may have been engraved at a later date. I am trying to learn about this to make an informed choice. I can return the group if this piece has been enhanced. There is an I/415 on the cross. I went through the documents including research from McDivitt and this is not mentioned. Could this be a key to this? If it is good information then some homework was done at the very least. If it is bad then it shoots this piece down.

Thank you for listening to me and providing any help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chet

I have a silver goblet that was a sailing prize in the 1940's. If I remember later, I'll take a picture of the engraving to see how the patina looks.

Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If, as the last picture tends to suggest, there is a dark patina in the bottom of the engraving cuts that would figure. The cuts appear to be angled and quite sharp so would patinate differently to the stamp. The 800 stamp is much broader and the fact that it is stamped gives it a profile that would tarnish differently to a hand engraved cut as seen in the dedication. It is also feasable that someone has cleaned out the engraving at some point in the last x amount of years. I'm still fine with it. I don't see any problems with the style of script either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is that lacquer at the depths of the engraving, to

provide an attractive contrast?

it just appears to be so absolutely uniform in color.

joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not as far as I can tell. Just tarnish built up over the years.

Compare to the EK and you can see what I was referring to. Maybe the EK has been cleaned often?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the high percentage of darkening on the goblet

and the much lower percentage on the cross are

mitigated by the fact that they appear qualitatively

the same - both are present to a greater or lesser

degree, and both are impressive in the character

they lend to each of the items.

thanks for the pix.

joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problems with the cross, it looks right to me as does the engraving. The only thing I can suggest is somehow trying to match this name to a regimental history or service record to seal this up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gentlemen,

Thank you all for your input. I really do appreciate ALL views. I am keeping the grouping in my collection. I am happy with the cross and to be honest, if I add $0 for the engraving I have still purchased the group at a good price for what dealers want for things today. Maybe not the best way to judge but for now I am happy. I will post the other items soon in the Imperial section for all of you.

@Brian - your killing me! Please don't do it!

Thanks,

Chet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking through old engraved threads... this popped up....

I like the engraving, especially because the Adj. and the Battalion mention to be very convincing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember this one. Nice cross.

Indeed... I think the rank with function and the battalion reference make this a bit more complicated than a faker would bother to do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to own this cross.

Engraved crosses are so tricky. I have one that seems to lack any significant patina - one that makes me quite skeptical. However, the quality is excellent as is the name, rank and battle information. I showed it to a number of knowledgeable Imperial collectors at the MAX and they all agreed it was good, despite the limited patina.

At this point, there are certain engraving styles I know to stay away from. But, I'm convinced that many or most of the engraved crosses we see (as long as what's actually engraved is plausible) are legit. As we've seen (and Chris has pointed out) thousands of Imperial EKs were likely engraved or personalized from the teens through the 40s. I often wonder how cost effective it is today to take the time to hand-engrave an EK to enhance its value. Is taking the time to do it really worth the couple hundred bucks it could "enhance" the value?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I admit that my comments above are somewhat of a leap of faith, but I would expect some debate on this. Surely, some would disagree, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it depends just what is engraved....

if it is a name and some obscure unit... i think there is less problems...

But I have a healthy suspicion when somethig has a really eye catching turns up...

Dont forget, these are often done by hobby engravers... half an hour of work can add EUR100 to the price...

For me it is always a case by case thing..... and then it is a case of your "feelings" for the piece....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Chris however, does the average engraver today have the skill to engrave by hand, with the same care a 1930s engraver did? It's probably all automated today and most engravers hopefully lack the necessary freehand skill. Being very wary of the unusual is always good.

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are very skilled engravers out there even today. Items like firearms are done by hand all the time. On t h e other hand how many of these were engraved at the front by a craftsman who had been called up for service? Look at trench art for examples of period engraving as well. Not everyone had access to a hofjeweller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×