Bill Garvy
-
Posts
1,328 -
Joined
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Store
Posts posted by Bill Garvy
-
-
I'd like to thank fellow Iron Cross collector and dear friend Joe Campbell for the following Imperial Iron Cross in 2nd Class, maker marked "M" with a non-combatant ribbon. Please note the cloth tape on the reverse joining the ribbon ends together. . .
obverse:
reverse:
maker mark:
0 -
Bob,
That is a really beautiful Iron Cross especially with provenance. I am going to hazard a guess at a maker. Either it's an unmarked Otto Schickle (L/15) or an Alois Rettenmaier (16 or L/59), and I'm more inclined to think the latter rather than the former. Both makers utilized a similar "r" shaped catch, hingle and pin configuration, but I don't think I have every seen a non-magnetic Schickle. Either way, it's a very nice cross. Thank you for posting!
0 -
Thanks, Glen. I had strongly suspected either Juncker or, less so, a Klein & Quenzer. . . Any one else?0
-
Finally, here is a scan of the clasp and underside of the hinge. Please let me know if you would like me to provide any additional scans, and I will do so. Thank you for interest!0
-
Here is a scan of the reverse. . . The initials "H W" are scratched under the pin. . .0
-
I was wondering if I might call upon the collective wisdom of this group to enable me to identify the manufacturer of this Iron Cross in 1st Class? It is lightly vaulted, and the core rattles a bit inside the frame. Please take a moment to note the cross hatching by the inner corners. . .0
-
Thank you, Gentlemen, for taking the time to examine this cross and provide us with your valuable feedback!0
-
And finally, the maker mark stamped into the reverse of the pin. I'd be curious to hear what the other Iron Cross collectors here think of this particular cross, with its unusual hinge, pin, and clasp configuration. Is it a post-war manufactured piece, or simply a variant, perhaps a late war variant at that? I anxiously await your thoughtful replies and feedback. . .
maker mark:
[attachmentid=7806]
0 -
Here is the typical Steinhauer and L?ck clasp. . . (please pardon the hair of the dog, ahem. . .)
clasp:
[attachmentid=7804]
0 -
Here is a close-up of the hinge. It has been suggested by some collectors that this is, perhaps, a post-war manufactured cross, albeit you can clearly see the build quality of this particular cross is, in fact, quite good.
hinge:
[attachmentid=7803]
0 -
Here is a scan of the reverse, and if you've been paying attention, I think you are seeing what makes this particular Steinhauer and L?ck so controversial. . .
reverse:
[attachmentid=7802]
0 -
It's been quiet over here, so I thought to throw this unusual Steinhauer and L?ck into the mix to perhaps stimulate some thoughtful discussion.
obverse:
[attachmentid=7801]
0 -
Please reference the attached copy of your photograph where I have circled what appears to be the split in the ring that was soldered shut. I am simply wondering if you think it might have been replaced or repaired.0
-
unmarked reverse. . .0
-
Or unmarked, if you're unlucky, round 3 notwithstanding. . .0
-
Dave B,
That is, indeed, a very unusual Schinkel! So far there are two identified manufacturers of Schinkels, K.A.G. & Meybauer. Are you concerned about the split in the ribbon ring, which might suggest replacement? Just asking. . .
0 -
A most unusual cross, Richard; reminds me of my 1939 in 1st Class with Imperial features, inclusive of an "N" maker mark, an unknown manufacturer of 1914 issue crosses. . .
obverse:
reverse:
hinge:
clasp:
0 -
Marshall, that's absolutely stunning!0
-
And finally, here's a close-up of the hinge. . . Do you need anymore?0
-
The clasp. . .0
-
Here is the reverse with hinge, pin and clasp configuration. . .0
-
Here's an early, unmarked Meybauer in 1st Class. . .0
-
And last, but not least, the "23" maker mark on the underside of the pin. . .0
-
Here is the clasp. I have another unmarked cross exactly like this one. I wonder. . .0
2 cased EK1
in Germany: All Eras: The Iron Cross
Posted · Edited by Bill Garvy