Marcus H

The designation, this conforms to known and genuine examples in my opinion. Not only does it conform, I can't distinguish between this desigantion and other genuine ones of this larger* (I'll explain that one later)type of designation. As much to stay, I really don't think this personaly is a fake effort or modern ink. Variations in the print will and do exist to proportions of the designation in the same scale. But there are two distinct variation's of this specific style out of interest, that can't be attributed to printing variancies. Three large type desigantion's one of them being the packets in question. (My photo shop skills here don't represent a very good picture)

This one has the Ldo warrenty on the reverse, the packet devoid of the warrenty is exactly the same with this maker mark and came from the same 'hoard'. I've only ever encountered one packet not seemingly from the hoard that came with an unmarked EK. I'll try and obtain that picture for reference also. Note the shade of ink on the Ldo warrenty ?

This has been a recent venture of mine, with little or no avail though. While doubt and dubious reckoning surround this packet for founded reasons in fold, but I must say I'm of the opinion the packet is genuine. The paper and designation prescribe to what I'd purport as genuine of the period concerned. I have no contention with the actual maker mark as a printed facet of this anomalous packet either. I've compared the maker mark to known other examples of this maker on the Mothers Cross packet for one, you've variations in the content of most maker marks and the style, fraktur or 'modern' fraktur the Latin depicted style. Two versions are encountered as such, those with the Ldo warranty (!!!!) and of course those without, I'm of the knowledge as such both 'versions' emersed from a recent hoard, numbers of with and without the Ldo warrenty unknown. I don't proffess to have any inner knowledge of this hoard but I do know an explanation that first eminated from a collector friend in Germany when they were very first circulated. For a bit of background and interest, the packets were bound in paper and came in wooden slated crates, the conditon of the packets was very good to poorly soiled and faded. It's said they were found in an old factory being demolished, my unmarked version came from Dresden it was there subsequently a picker for a dealer bought that whole lot. I'd imagine some circulated from this source others else where perhaps. It was said from the seller that several crates were found and bought up at the time he purchased one crate. Hoard, this makes one sceptical from the onset with preset notions of 'other' stories from past and old on the same theme, we've probably all heard and read similar stories. The condition, again this seems deter collectors......six of one half a dozen of the other, I don't pay to much attention to that concern though. The other contention, this maker Carl Forster & Graf cannot be attributed to an EK marked or unmarked I'm told, nor is this maker as of yet known to have produced EK's that is recorded on paper in some way, shape or form. A provincial though on my part perhaps, but we aren't aware of all the makers of EK's to my knowledge, so why couldn't perhaps this be one of the unknown makers ? Rather than stories and condition etc I've tried to evaluate the the packet first and then consider the other contentions and concerns. I'm no researcher or expert, so all this may seem a trifle and of little conseqence....if not a provincial analysis. This is a non definitive thread, just looking and questioning a few things concerning the the packet itself. Any help advice or idea's, thoughts, I'd appreciate. I'd like to resovle this mystery packet and the maker in terms of EK production perhaps. Lets take a look then: The packet with Ldo warranty, exactly the same as the void warranty packets.

Out of interest I'm at the moment 'researching' the Forster & Graf EK 2 packet, some found with an Ldo warrenty on the back others not. I've some theories (Or is that conjecture) on these, I'll post this latte ron the crosses forum if thats apt ? There's alot of deliberation (If not contention at times !!!) about such packets, and to take such almost ultimate steps in validation as such I think is almost a shame, but on some packets it gets to that point...and indeed other items within this hobby, a prevailing factor of these times and monies involved. Before I get the such like of the F&G packet date tested (If I do...it costs good money for little or no effect) I prefer to deduct things useing my own brain than a buch of chemicals and white coats etc. You just don't learn or discover other things whilst investigating the packet and some how it's not your own work. And it's no fun at he end of the day, I enjoy pondering over these packets with my own devices.....besides TV these days is crap Like I say, I hope this will help collectors to an extent. Kr Marcus

The answer is they are purported to be GENUINE , I'm not sure if I was suprised or not and had to think about it for a while. So that is to say, what is deemed as the, 'spelling mistake dubious packet' is in fact said to be genuine. The tests conducted were done by a lab in the UK, whom specialise in old documentation and papers, from artwork to literature to all aspects of paper work. For legal obligations and further wishes of the contributors to these findings I will not and can not discuss the techniques invloved of the process. If you wish to search the internet for such or contact establsihments for further information you'll find it is a very guarded and a limited response you'll get. And to add to that, the material subjected being of the period does provoke some hysteria It's taken a long time for me to build a relationship with these guys, and after all who am I. The packets hence where subjected to forensic document examination and ink chromatography: the last being available in information wise on the net. Basically, it's removal of a small part of ink and paper, placed in a vile where a solvent is added to dissolve the components, then extracted on a high performance plate. Then depending on the ink type, the sample is placed in a developing tank, the dyes extrude up the plate and there from the components and make-up form the chromatography plate. It's a basic process, nothing new here on ink. Not only though is it tested against, Hansen-Hausen examples but other inks period and not and other packets needless to say. The paper goes through a more elaborate process from simple to complex, all areas covered and compared. I can't tell you anymore than that, I've presented the findings, it's of your own volition how you perceive them. There are further questions regarding ribbons etc etc......I can't answer them, I really don't know. And I can't elaborate or tell you anything further........what you wish believe from now is up to you ultimately. You could even get your own conduction of validity done on these packets via a different source of course ? So thats it, or is it. I'm satisfied with the results personally. I hope this will be of some worth to the hobby and your interest. Kr Marcus (Hatton)

And a view of some of the packets that were indeed tested, this is just a very limited sample shot, of the different designations and spellings found.....there were 30 plus in the test from all differnt sources.

Three of the marker marks found to date, that I'm aware of.

Will this conclude the matter ? I think not in all honesty, so here I propose the finding more for your study than a gospel revelation of fact findings. I've been on both sides of the fence in this deliberation and sitting in the middle. There have been alot of informed and well educated speculative gestures in the debate. But, ultimately it's been a side taking stance. I've often wondered, why the contention over such an insignificant packet ? And truthfully why would a faker produce such a good fake for such a low end scale award, of little money value ? Common is an understatement......I've seen the contended packets in their hundreds, with or without the award. And every once in a while the, wound badge, KVK, Eatern Front medal packets with the same anomaly of the 'spelling mistake.' It is these packets I presented for testing, and further more, the so called genuine (correct spelling counterparts) in a limited multiple. Comparison is a relevant key, I see many a thread on paint and other attributes to awards, which are meaningless unless you can offer a counterpart and so called genuine comparison's. Graphs and data, prove what ? If you understand them you're a better man than I. Thats not a criticisim, but more a discerning factor in the results. The main packets of deliberation: The two West Wall packets

Francois, On the group picture of the boxes Jacques shows there's a blue box with an 'earlier' style Ldo logo on the ouside of the box, this style was the foreruner to the latter boxed faktur Latin Ldo in the oblate oval within a rectangle. We can roughly estimate this design was incorporated and used within the period of 1941 & 1943 and thats even broadly speaking I think (I suspect them as a bit earlier than '43, so post 1939 they aren't all green as such), i.e manufacture respects at least. A transistion period occured to the box format of Ldo logo there after. The reasons for this I think I may be along the lines of, but can't present it as factual evidence as such at this moment in time. As for alot if not most boxes being green at some time, date oreintated by logo's and box make up and comparing it generaly to other examples of the same style box there's a vague picture to be built up and it does appear to date at some time the green boxes dominate in the boxes for what ever reason. This all green manufacture is post sometime after 1941 I think, not 1939 as a benchmark date in regard to retail Ldo boxes. Of course the reason for the blue Ldo box could be for another reason, but I'd suspect it's intention was for the silver cross perhaps. Just my thoughts to add to the confusion. Kr Marcus

I bought a 50 Year Faithful Service Box, it was very cheap for the box and rare in the fact it had the seldom encountered Deschler 'sticker' on the lid liner, I've encountered this twice before on other boxes, one I own already an Honour Roll case. I was very lucky and fortunate. There weren't any bids on it either.

Jacques this case you show below is from around 1941 to a time in 1943. although 'cheap & nasty' looking this wouldn't be a late war case with that designation. This is still early Ldo and mid war in terms of the duration of the war, but not late. The same can be said in the series of the KVK, EK boxes like these, with this style of logo, even the outer covering suggests not late war...and there difference's. Later boxes would be devoid of a logo or have the logo on the inside of the lid in this style. They may have been used with later badges and awards, certainly. This can be observed in say the wound badge boxes. The mistake not to make here is it being devoid of catch and the 'hinge' which portrays it as being a later box. I'll have to expalin better when we meet up again next year I'll try and put together a series of pic's to show you what I mean. 1944 was a bad year in terms of boxes, shall we say, to keep it short and simple whats deemed as late war in many instances is very incorrect on the forums Kr Marcus

Reminds me of an EK1 set up that there is. Not that I know about these at all, but I've not seen to my recollection this two part construction either ???? There's no mint mark and the number is off to the side to accomadate the hook ???

The cases with the Ldo on the lid are I susopect earlier cases to those with the Ldo on the inside of the lid in the more Latin fraktur with the rectangular border. This also coincides 98% of the time with the catches, and outer covering and other material used when compared in a biger picture with other Ldo boxes. In regards to the Ldo motif, I think I may have enough 'uniformed' evidence to establish this earlier v later theory. I think we acceopt this notion and trait, but I'd like to confirm it as such. Please note however the 'criteria' above is not set in stone as such, as there is a transition and cross over in parts and suplus materials etc etc (pre and post incipient Ldo boxes), there is however a pattern that can be clearly (Getting there) seen. Consider also, that surplus boxes where used too, with newer or older stock awards. The best examples for this are Luft cases (Non Ldo confined of course in this respect), to follow a chronlogical course of a box, very generaly speaking here ! A broad general uniformed statement really, but I think it does hold some water. Kr Marcus

I see a nice screw back box there wiothout a catch, nice one ! Kr Marcus

Here's another, I think this one was thought of as maybe an 'brat' school cap badge or cadet type ??? Any idea's Jim. Thanks for your valuable help anyway mate

Hi Jim, Wickstead Park do you know it !! Thats where I live, I walk the dog there each day The Northants Cadet one, was one Dad got post war sometime either when he was in RAF or before he joined ? He can't remember bless him but he's knocking onto 80 now. He's from up North & and Mums from Bucks, so no relation to anything/one down here in the family. The Kettering Volunteers badge, I bought that along with some WW2 Home Guard shoulder titles NN what ever they are, again up the loft some where I thought maybe he was in the first war, at home or oversea's perhaps and then joined a Kettering Dads Army lot, I bet they did train at Wickies The MFP reminds me of the Royals (Royal Dragoon cap badge) ????? Here's the reverse out of interest Kr Marcus

I seem to have the more common one on the market, larger & lower date and by all accounts it looks like the swas it bigger on mine too. That is comparing to the 'normal' schinkel type not the pointy nine example. I've seen several of these for sale and seldom the smaller date/swas one. Kr Marcus

Nice L/12 EK2 there Gordon ! Arh so this is the Ubergrosse up close, I can see why it's mentioned in passing as a 'prototype' for the RK as such. And these have an all silver frame too. This thread has been a big help, back to basic's for old Marcus. Kr Marcus

Phew, thank god for that then ! Thanks George. Marcus

Don't worry, I just got an e mail 'it was sold about 5 mins ago'.........uuumm !!!

Does this look like an Ubergrosse cross to you ? I've asked for better pictures of the cross and this is the best one availbale at the moment I thought the date looked a tad to big from a couple of examples in a book , but also read that perhaps there is a link to several makers of these. Would 70 quid for an EK in this condition be ok to pay as well, if an Ubergrosse ? I have to ask I'm afraid, because I'm out of touch with prices on these things Kr Marcus

And last two for now, Durham Light Infantry and for the Foot Guards the Grenadier Guards, Guardsmans cap badge, I think the Royal cypher goes on the ball of the grenade for sergants, warrant officers and musicians.

Chesire and Berkshire Regiments

Two of several RA cap badges, one here has the revolviing wheel

Royal Signals, Royal Pioneer Corps and Royal Engineers