Jump to content
News Ticker
  • I am now accepting the following payment methods: Card Payments, Apple Pay, Google Pay and PayPal
  • Latest News

    Recommended Posts

    I had this pair briefly...... I sent them back to the seller who was (and still is) one of Germany's pre-emminent Mecklenburg Collectors. He was most insulted by my disbelief that the Meck Kreuz was not so good..... curious if anyone else has an 1870 Meck. FFK2 to show....... It's never sat well that I was never really sure if this was good or bad.... a gut call, some help from a friend in Germany and back they went.....

    user posted image

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    the dates just seemed not crisp enough....... the detail not quite what I liked to see..... but notice the wear pattern on the FFK2.... all worn on the left arm like it was rubbing against something hanging next to it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    • 7 months later...

    AHHHHHHH!!! What a huge photo you posted :o ....I, too, hate to scroll sideways.....(but I had the liberty today to search through the archives and found some good stuff!!)

    Anyway, here is a mounted 1870 FF2 from today's update, no EK on the bar but still nice to see an early Mecklenburger - in for 1866 out before 1897 -- nice 15yr long service that is rarely seen!! :jumping:

    Details on this FF are much better!!!

    Steve

    (Photos courtesy of Detlev Niemann)

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    with the above info in mind - and many thanks!! -

    i would have been quite happy to have that for

    that price.

    someone got an excellent deal!

    to me, finding rarity, beauty and

    an excellent price is the TRIPLE CROWN!

    kind of like finding a garage-kept '64

    Mercedes with 62,000 miles! :D

    beautiful bar!

    joe

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Guest Brian von Etzel

    Rick, I agree with you on this EKII being suspect. I'm sure you'll recognize crispiness will be lacking when the material under the paint has degraded to some extent. I don't see that in this piece but have often in the Franco crosses.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Guest Brian von Etzel

    The '95 reissues I've seen are very nice and crisp. It's the original crosses that I've seen that display degradation under the paint.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    [attachmentid=26038]

    Finally, here is a view of the piece and the non-combat ribbon. It looks much better in hand than in my poor quality scans. The piece was made from a single casting and the edges were ground to finish it.

    I have seen a LOT of copies of these pieces with various dates (and no date) come out of Germany in the past few years. Genuine pieces are not that common as Mecklenberg was a rather small Grand Duchy.

    Thanks,

    Schie?platzmeister

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Schie?platzmeister, the one I returned was the same way. Very heavy & thick and appeared to be cast in one piece and finished as opposed to stamped. If you look at the wear on the one I sent back, you can see the very evident wear from it swinging/rubbing against the medal next to it for a long time. My problem here is two-fold. While it is entirely possible that cast "wearer's copies" were available this far back, the "softness" of the piece and the lack of distinction to the detail and lettering really put me off the piece.

    The same with the EK2, while it is again entirely possible it was an 1895 jubilee piece; it was not the crisp, clean, sharp-edged detail I was looking for in the 2 pieces.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hello Stogieman:

    Thanks for your comments. I agree that you should have returned the pieces that you show as they do not look like period pieces.

    My cross has the suspension ring soldered to the top of the cross. Hessenthal and Schreiber state that the crosses were made from gesch?tzbronze (cannon bronze from captured enemy cannon). They do not however state HOW they were made. In my opinion, the originals were cast in one piece as this would be consistant with the technology of the time, and there are crosses from many other German States from this period to show that this was a common practice for making such crosses out of gesch?tzbronze. Perhaps my piece is a forgery, but I do not think this the case (of course I am not impartial-no one thinks that THEIR stuff is ever fake!).

    Of course, all of the copies (no matter what age) are also made by casting! So, obtaining genuine pieces is difficult to say the least, with most pieces which are encountered being modern counterfeits.

    The mystery continues. Does anyone else have any of these, or any other information?

    Thanks,

    Schie?platzmeister

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hello again:

    By comparison, the 1914 cross that I have is definately genuine and I believe that it is also cast in one piece with the arm edges being ground and polished to finish it. I simply think that this is how these things were made. Die striking would not be necessary to make these and would add many extra and more expensive steps to the manufacturing process. Hessenthal and Schreiber refer to the 1914 pieces as being made from "gilded cannon metal".

    Thanks,

    Schie?platzmeister

    Link to comment
    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
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...

    Important Information

    We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.