Bundesrepublik knight's cross iron cross 1957

[Roeland]

Hello gents,

can anybody give me more information on this knight's cross, I bought it as an original early version made by Deumer.

Someone told me this is clearly a fake one from a later period. Anyone more info?

it is a 3 piece construction and magnetic.

kind regards,

Roeland

Edited March 22, 2009 by Roeland

[DavidM]

Hello

Could you please post some full face on, but closer in photos of the back and front of this - my eyes aren't what they used to be From what I can make out, there are some things I like about this new form RK, and some that I don't, but with these photos I wouldn't like to say for definate one way or the other.

What can be said is that the core is that of the second pattern 57 RK, and as such cannot be an early made new form RK, although with a magnetic core it would be one of the earlier second pattern RKs. Is it an RK from Deumer? That I very much doubt, as to the best of knowledge Deumer didn't make second pattern new form RKs.

[Guest Darrell]

Regardless of what it is supposed to be ... the price was waaaaaaaaaaaaay to high.

[PKeating]

The images aren't clear enough for a detailed comparison but the overall shape and the '1813' remind me very much of Rudolf Souval. So does the riband clip. If it is a 1957 pattern Souval, that would at least make it 'more real' than Souval's 1939 pattern fantasy pieces, an early cased example of which I recently sold for around ?200.00. Mind you, the frame seems to be very new. It could just be an out and out fake.

I would agree that the price was high but, then again, as it was quickly placed on hold, some fool and his money were ready to be parted. Maybe we should all put very high prices on the good stuff offered through the classifieds here instead of trying to price our stuff fairly for our fellow collectors. LOL!

I wonder when we shall see 'rounder' '57s...

PK

[DavidM]

I wonder when we shall see 'rounder' '57s...

PK

Hello

Probably sooner than you think. The fake swastika'd DKs are now reappearing dressed up as 'very early' 57 DKs, complete with LDO numbers etc. I'm sure some enterprising person will shortly be replacing the swastikas on rounders with an oak leaf spray, and selling them on E-Bay as very early new form RKs.

[PAHudson]

Please find attached a copy of the Manufacturing Instructions for the RK 1957. The piece could well be a Deumer. It is most certainly not a Steinhauer & L?ck variant. I would sugest this RK was manufactured in the '60's or '70's.

Regards

Paul H.

Attachment source: Bowen, V.E. The Prussian and German Iron Cross - page 38. Privately Published.

Sorry, the fille attachment was too large. I'll try again later.

Edited March 31, 2009 by PAHudson

[Roeland]

Hello gents,

thank you for the responses.

Sadly enough the attachment is to big, could you send it to my email please(I would really appreciate it, rrm-collection@hotmail.com).

This is the only RK 1957 I ever had, so I was no expert on it nor on the price I paid myself.

I'll make a close up as soon as possible and post it here.

If it is a fake I've been had myself, but the original seller is a German officer and he claims he

once got it from his superior, and the superior bought it in 1960.

If it is any help, more information on the ribbon: the ribbon's white parts are 19 threaded and the ribbon does not light up under blacklight.

Btw, I cancelled the sale already before I asked here, if there are even doubts I won't sell my name as collector for a few bucks.

kind regards,

Roeland

[Roeland]

Hello gents,

took a while, but here is a bigger picture of the cross.

I've checked if the seller really is a german officer as he claimed. I found out he is a high ranking German naval officer.

Furthermore I've received, after asking, more information from the seller about the RK. He says his superior, from whom he got this cross, received it for actions as a submarine captain in WW2. After the war he was still in the Bundesmarin.

He bought the Iron cross in the early 60's (60 or 61).

The seller however told me he promissed to keep the name secret and would not tell me more about the wearer. This is because the son of the RK wearer is a high ranking German diplomat in Hamburg and they don't want to sturr anything up with ''nazi'' stories.

The seller gave me, in writing, a lifetime guarantee on the originality. I can always get my full money back. He will reveil the name in a few years, when the son is no longer on that top position.

I had my doubts, because practically it sounded dubious to say the least and to good to be true that it was from a ww2 submarin officer.

So I went by a list of RK wearers who:

-Kriegsmarin RK wearers (http://www.ritterkreuztraeger-1939-45.de/K...-Startseite.htm)

-submarine captains

-survived the war

-after the war served in the bundesmarin

-have a son with a political career in Hamburg

In the end, only 1 name matched completely, the name of a General(rank after the war in the bundesmarin) with a son who is a high ranking UN nucleair arms diplomat in Hamburg. The RK wearer also had a bundesmarin career that had a match with the seller.

Although I asked the seller if I was correct with the name, he said he could not verify anything, I had to wait untill the time was ripe.

I have been thinking about writing the wearer, but I don't want to poke my nose in something. I also respect the fact that the wearer and family don't wan't to sturr anything up because of the son.

Reading here what I found out may take 2 minutes and sounds simple, but I really spend a few days of archive research(and also checked other wearers that sounded less likely just to be certain). I'm pretty sure I got the name right.

For me, it is ok knowing who it might have been from (and the person I found doesn't show up at RK wearer meetings, so he might not have a RK anymore indeed), I can get the name in a few years and I have got a lifetime guarantee for a full refund of my money.

Sorry for my bad english, but I hope it is understandable.

Here is the picture:

If you think it is a clear fake, I can get my money back from the seller. I'm also thinking aboiut sending it to Detlev Niemann for an expertise. Does anybody knows if he is a 1957 expert?(in other words, would it be wise to get an expertise report from him?)

kind regards,

Roeland

Edited June 5, 2009 by Roeland

[Scott]

Nice RK. Perhaps I'm missing something... How can one have/offer a "fake" new-form/57er cross?

[Guest Darrell]

Nice RK. Perhaps I'm missing something... How can one have/offer a "fake" new-form/57er cross?

When the early types can easily command up and over $1k .... they will be (and are) faked .... the key is to know which are real and which are not ;)

[speedytop]

Hi Scott,

"How can one have/offer a "fake" new-form/57er cross?"

That is a very good question. And one of my questions is, how collectors can pay "up and over $1k" for 57 versions (Darrell, this is not directed against you).

But back to your question. I will try it with a new formulation.

Official fakes do not exist, if the design of the pieces is concordant with the "Muster" in the "Bundesanzeiger" from 1958:

http://www.ordensmuseum.de/Ordensjournal/O...16Jan0857er.pdf

Not in 1958 and not in 2009.

But for collectors there could be "fakes", new made pieces with the appearance, that these are originals from the 50s or early 60s.

"Fake" for the collectors, but not for the German Ministry of Interior!

It is not of interest to the German Ministry of Interior, that there is a mark on the reverse, L/12, 800, 65 or others.

And as an other remark: When decorations don't have the look of the "Muster", than they are stupid (and sometimes expensive) pieces of metal.

They are not 1957 versions, and they are not fakes.

My personal view is, that there is an acceptable high quality; this is more important for me than an early piece with low quality.

Uwe

[Alex K]

Hi Scott,

"How can one have/offer a "fake" new-form/57er cross?"

That is a very good question. And one of my questions is, how collectors can pay "up and over $1k" for 57 versions (Darrell, this is not directed against you).

But back to your question. I will try it with a new formulation.

Official fakes do not exist, if the design of the pieces is concordant with the "Muster" in the "Bundesanzeiger" from 1958:

http://www.ordensmuseum.de/Ordensjournal/O...16Jan0857er.pdf

Not in 1958 and not in 2009.

But for collectors there could be "fakes", new made pieces with the appearance, that these are originals from the 50s or early 60s.

"Fake" for the collectors, but not for the German Ministry of Interior!

It is not of interest to the German Ministry of Interior, that there is a mark on the reverse, L/12, 800, 65 or others.

And as an other remark: When decorations don't have the look of the "Muster", than they are stupid (and sometimes expensive) pieces of metal.

They are not 1957 versions, and they are not fakes.

My personal view is, that there is an acceptable high quality; this is more important for me than an early piece with low quality.

Uwe

Hi Uwe you raise some very good points, 57 versions were merely replacement pieces authorised for use by recipients without the offending symbol, and were not issued or awarded by the government, so as I understand it, they cannot be "Official" but an accepted version in accordance with the statutes issued at the time in terms of appearance, providing the manufacturer followed the guidelines as issued, it didn't really matter if they were produced by a large company or "Oma & opa" in their garage

The "Grey area" has unfortunately manifested itself with regards to collectors, in the sense that during the 50,60, and possibly 70's, certain manufacturers re-struck these awards specifically for veterans who may have wanted to wear them, using tools, methods etc similar or the same as those used prior to 1945, this has, over time,given them "Official" legitimacy.

To add to the confusion, as these early pieces now become more desirable and collectible,as is usual, everyone has decided that there is money to be made by reproducing these purely for the collector and not recipient, so these type of awards are then termed "Fakes",?

You are quite right, made in 1957/2009, neither can be an official or fake, as it follows the guidelines laid down.

I also have one very, very similar to the one which started this post, obtained in the early 80's from a respected medal dealer (Graf Klenau von Klenova). I havn't got a clue if it's a "Genuine" one or not. To me its an example of a RK des EK, sometimes called the second pattern oaks. It doesn't in the end matter to me as it cost me the princely sum of 40 Euros. ($1K? )?

The one posted appears to be a piece which was not created speciically for the collectors market but I could be wrong.

regards

Alex

[Guest Darrell]

I also have one very, very similar to the one which started this post, obtained in the early 80's from a respected medal dealer (Graf Klenau von Klenova). I havn't got a clue if it's a "Genuine" one or not. To me its an example of a RK des EK, sometimes called the second pattern oaks. It doesn't in the end matter to me as it cost me the princely sum of 40 Euros. ($1K )

Alex ... early 80's in this hobby is like the 1920's for others.

Ask some of the older collectors what they paid for original RK's in the early 80's. What are they worth today.

Regardless of what people think or don't think they are worth, the early ones command a premium. If you don't think they are worth it, it doesn't really matter ... they ARE.

Edited June 11, 2009 by Darrell

[speedytop]

Darrell,

"If you don't think they are worth it, it doesn't really matter ... they ARE."

That is absolutely correct, for all dealers and some collectors .

Alex,

it seems for me, that you "jumble" something?

It is absolutely correct, that the 57 versions "were not issued or awarded by the government".

But they are official, based on the legal regulations, the "Ordensgesetz" from 1957, and based on the official publication by the German Ministry of the Interior, see my link in Post 11.

In my opinion we can discuss the originality, but not the official qualification/authorization.

And in my (official) opinion these pieces are originals, in my (personal) opinion they are "originals" .

Because the real originals are the (before May 1945) awarded or official produced decorations.

By the way, the decorations that I bought from Arnhard Graf Klenau von Klenova, long, long ago (Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes, Deutsches Kreuz in Gold [stoff], Spanienkreuz in Gold) are all wartime originals.

Uwe

Edited September 13, 2021 by speedytop

[Alex K]

Hi Darrell, I wasn't trying to be negative. I, like many others who collects EK's etc would love to own a legitimate 39-45 RK for example to a known recipient with full provenance etc etc etc, unfortunately prices are out of this world and to me is now an unrealistic goal, so an acceptable alternative is a 57 version. (That's why I got myself one)

57'ers are now also begining to command prices which to me, personally are becoming unrealistic, in the sense that they were not controlled to the same level as their pre-45 parents and could be made by anyone with the facilities to produce them, how many were made? who knows?. I would agree that early versions produced for the genuine recipient of a pre 45 cross and here we are talking 50's 60's period could be judged to be a "Real" replacement piece (Although not official) which may have been worn by the trager, the same could be argued about the 57 versions of the PLM made by S & L, official or just a nice bauble

The piece I posted was originally purchased as an original, I wouldn't have a clue if it is, the point being from my perspective, I didn't pay a lot for it so I've not lost a lot should it be shown to be a "Fake" but a fake of what?, a never officially sanctioned award.

To my mind, a fake is something which perports to be something else, to decieve, 57'ers are just a de-nazified version of their pre-45 predessesors and available to anyone who wanted to buy one, recipient or not. Doesn't have the same kudos as an offically presented pre-45 version to my mind.

In the end, the value of any item is no more than a person is willing to pay for it. Pay $1K for a 57 RK, and then try to re-sell it and see what happens. I could of course be completely wrong

best regards, sorry for the ramblings

Alex K

[Alex K]

Darrell,

"If you don't think they are worth it, it doesn't really matter ... they ARE."

That is absolutely correct, for all dealers and some collectors .

Alex,

it seems for me, that you "jumble" something?

It is absolutely correct, that the 57 versions "were not issued or awarded by the government".

But they are official, based one the legal regulations, the "Ordensgesetz" from 1957, and based on the official publication by the German Ministry of the Interior, see my link in Post 11.

In my opinion we can discuss the originality, but not the official qualification/authorization.

And in my (official) opinion these pieces are originals, in my (personal) opinion they are "originals" .

Because the real originals are the (before May 1945) awarded or official produced decorations.

By the way, the decorations that I bought from Arnhard Graf Klenau von Klenova, long, long ago (Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes, Deutsches Kreuz in Gold [stoff], Spanienkreuz in Gold) are all wartime originals.

Uwe

Hi Uwe, Darrell, our responses obviously crossed over somewhere before posting. I will freely admit that my comments are my personal views and may not be shared by others.

To me "Official" means sanctioned and awarded by the governent of the day, their manufacture and quality, closely controlled to a given level (57'ers weren't ) Post war versions merely followed guidelines laid down by the ruling authorities at the time, ie it will look something like this, will have this and won't have that. how you do it is left to you. So in the end, a piece made in 1957 or the same piece made in 2009, which looks like it fell out of a Xmas cracker are one and the same, or is the 2009 version a fake of the 1957 version??

best regards

Alex

[Scott]

Excellent discussion - I think it answered my question.

Thank you gentlemen.

[Guest Darrell]

Hi Darrell, I wasn't trying to be negative. I, like many others who collects EK's etc would love to own a legitimate 39-45 RK for example to a known recipient with full provenance etc etc etc, unfortunately prices are out of this world and to me is now an unrealistic goal, so an acceptable alternative is a 57 version. (That's why I got myself one)

57'ers are now also begining to command prices which to me, personally are becoming unrealistic, in the sense that they were not controlled to the same level as their pre-45 parents and could be made by anyone with the facilities to produce them, how many were made? who knows?. I would agree that early versions produced for the genuine recipient of a pre 45 cross and here we are talking 50's 60's period could be judged to be a "Real" replacement piece (Although not official) which may have been worn by the trager, the same could be argued about the 57 versions of the PLM made by S & L, official or just a nice baubleAlex K

I agree with you 100%. What items prices are not crazy these days? Doesn't have to be medals. Look at cars / houses.

Unless I win the lottery, or sell part of my collection, I won't be the owner of a 39-45 RK. The prices of those are not worth the collecting interests to me at this point. To some it is. It comes down to what you like to collect, and how much you value the pieces you buy to build on that collection.

I do however own an very early good quality Cased '57 RK attributed to a German Soldier. It cost me over $1k at the time ... it was worth it in my eyes ...

Why anyone would pay $5k plus for a little piece of cloth (i.e. Sniper's badge) is beyond me. I don't collect them, don't have any desire to collect them, never will. However, that doesn't mean that they are worth that much or should be, To each in the eye of the beholder.

Edited June 11, 2009 by Darrell

[Alex K]

I agree with you 100%. What items prices are not crazy these days? Doesn't have to be medals. Look at cars / houses.

Unless I win the lottery, or sell part of my collection, I won't be the owner of a 39-45 RK. The prices of those are not worth the collecting interests to me at this point. To some it is. It comes down to what you like to collect, and how much you value the pieces you buy to build on that collection.

I do however own an very early good quality Cased '57 RK attributed to a German Soldier. It cost me over $1k at the time ... it was worth it in my eyes ...

Why anyone would pay $5k plus for a little piece of cloth (i.e. Sniper's badge) is beyond me. I don't collect them, don't have any desire to collect them, never will. However, that doesn't mean that they are worth that much or should be, To each in the eye of the beholder.

Hi Darrell, as I said in my first post, comments made were my own and may not reflect the general consensus about 57'ers, and were not meant to unhelpful

To me it becomes a muddy area with regards to exactly how they should be viewed, official, in my opinion no, as they weren't issued by the government unlike the pre 45 ones, tightly controlled and awarded by the PKZ thus being official goverment awards.

Replacement awards, yes as they were authorised pieces, in their de-nazified form they were "Authorised" for wear, but does that then make them "Official"?, IMHO no.

The Pinnacle for 57 collectors IS to obtain an early version, as the chances are they were made by the same manufacturers as their wartime versions, possibly from left over stock, (Hence the growing discussions over MM's and die flaws etc) and as such they gain a certain kudos with collectors, particularly as you state to a known attributable recipient, (Which will inffluence prices) and to be fair if I was still in the market for one, I would go for an early version myself, (How much I would pay, ??)

With regards to price generally you are quite right, it seems anything, particulalry from the wartime period has seen in some cases stupid increases, The one I posted which cost me 40 Euros, I look at it and say to myself, would I pay $1k for it? No, but then I suppose costs are relative. The danger here is if my cross ended up on Ebay or similar for $1k and someone paid that for it, it's sets a precedent in that all of these are now worth that

best regards

Alex

Edited June 12, 2009 by Alex K

[DavidM]

Hello

Alex, there are three flavours of the new form RK. These are commonly described as the 1st pattern, the 2nd pattern and modern 'produced for the collector' market' types. The new form RK that you posted is a 2nd pattern type, and as such is not one of the earliest - although it is still a good, decent item. The earlier made 2nd pattern pieces generally tend to have magnetic cores, and these sell privately at around ?300 - ?450. Although it takes a bit of persistance, you can still buy the new form RKs from S&L for around ?75 for the silver version and ?45 for the non silver type. These are commonly encountered on E-Bay, and for a bit more than the price S&L asks for them.

The really sought after ones are the first pattern. These were made using the original wartime frame dies, (the frames showing the die flaws) and were made and finished in exactly the same way as their wartime counterparts - burnished full silver frames and frosted beading. These are really early, and thought to be made from 1957 to the early part of the 1960's Price wise, the 1st pattern versions are selling privately for anything between ?750 and ?1200. I've attached a photo of one of my 1st pattern new form RKs for comparision.

Hope this helps.

Edited June 15, 2009 by DavidM

[DavidM]

Rear of 1st pattern S&L RK

[Alex K]

Hi David, thanks for the reply, your piece is a very nice example of what is now recognised as be an early piece, core type "A" to borrow a description from another site (Didn't know the difference when I bought mine from Graf Klenau in Germany at the time 1980's, No GMIC, WAF etc. as a reference).

As I mentioned in my earlier response these may well have been made from original wartime stock, die flaws included and as such gain a certain kudos as they were the "Sons" of their original parents, if you get my drift.

The one I posted does have a magnetic core and fits very closely to the one which started this thread, so where it sits chronologically I couldn't say, maybe 70's, no maker mark or stamp.

I think the point I was trying to make was the distinction between "Official" and "Authorised " ones. In my opinion (And it's mine) is that whilst an award can be authorised, it doesn't make it "Official". I say this because if you follow threads on this site and WAF for example, there is the perception that the 57'ers are somehow awarded by the current (then) government, which wasn't the case, all they did was re-authorise their wear without any offending/illegal symbols.

In the end a 1990's "Bling" version has the same legal? validity as an original 1957 one, as it follows the guideline set out in the original 1957 order, it just doesn't look as nice. maybe I'm wrong and would welcome comments

regards

Alex K

[DavidM]

Hello

As you say Alex, there is a vast difference between an awarded medal or order and an official replacement. The 57 new form items are official replacements, and were never awarded or issued by the West German government. Anyone at all could purchase them, even back in 1957, so former WW2 veterans bought them, collectors bought them, dealers and so forth, but my understanding is that if you wanted to wear the piece you had to provide proof of entitlement to the original, awarded medal or order. The only new form pieces that should be considered as the official replacements are those that appeared on the original list from 1957 - but that is what they are, official replacement items sanctioned by the then West German government. Not awarded, just replacment items, which allowed, for example, decorated WW2 veterans then serving in the new Bunderswher to display and wear their decorations in a legitimised format.

As for a modern made piece being legimate, the answer I think is both yes and no. As Uwe points out the current German government doesn't seem to care who makes or sells these today. But, if you wanted to be really pedantic about it, then only those new form items made to the exact specification on the 1957 order should be consider as 'the real deal'. To illustrate this, (although it is also quite clear that all involved in the making of the 57 items soon disregarded the defined specifications) I have attached a photo of a page in Vern Bowens book 'The Prussian and German Iron Cross' for the manufacturing specification for the 57 RK. This clearly states, for example, that the cross insert is to made from iron. So it could be argued (if being really pedantic) that any RK, EK etc with a none ferrous core (magnetic iron) can't be a legitamate 57 item as very clear, precise manufacturing instructions were issued.

Edited June 15, 2009 by DavidM

[Guest Darrell]

Likewise:

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=7117

[Alex K]

Hello

As you say Alex, there is a vast difference between an awarded medal or order and an official replacement. The 57 new form items are official replacements, and were never awarded or issued by the West German government. Anyone at all could purchase them, even back in 1957, so former WW2 veterans bought them, collectors bought them, dealers and so forth, but my understanding is that if you wanted to wear the piece you had to provide proof of entitlement to the original, awarded medal or order. The only new form pieces that should be considered as the official replacements are those that appeared on the original list from 1957 - but that is what they are, official replacement items sanctioned by the then West German government. Not awarded, just replacment items, which allowed, for example, decorated WW2 veterans then serving in the new Bunderswher to display and wear their decorations in a legitimised format.

As for a modern made piece being legimate, the answer I think is both yes and no. As Uwe points out the current German government doesn't seem to care who makes or sells these today. But, if you wanted to be really pedantic about it, then only those new form items made to the exact specification on the 1957 order should be consider as 'the real deal'. To illustrate this, (although it is also quite clear that all involved in the making of the 57 items soon disregarded the defined specifications) I have attached a photo of a page in Vern Bowens book 'The Prussian and German Iron Cross' for the manufacturing specification for the 57 RK. This clearly states, for example, that the cross insert is to made from iron. So it could be argued (if being really pedantic) that any RK, EK etc with a none ferrous core (magnetic iron) can't be a legitamate 57 item as very clear, precise manufacturing instructions were issued.

Very interesting, never seen that before. The Cross in the link you mentioned is a really nice piece.

regards

Alex