EK 1914 1914 EK1 with screwback marked L/12

[speedytop]

hagahr,

are you able to to give factual comments?

What is your problem with me?

Uwe

[hagahr]

hagahr,

are you able to to give factual comments?

What is your problem with me?

Uwe

no problem at all

.

[Graf]

Dear Speedytop,

Wnen I started the Topic and asked the question Original or Reproduction, I did not have any idea that will create such reaction.

i have seen, and i checked agin, few of those 1914 EK WW2 made in diferent books, Refference Sites, Sales sites and Auction sites as well

No whre and no body has mentioned the word Wearer Copy. For some reosons this word is not used.by anyone and nowhere. Most of the tme the words Rare Variant are used instead.

My believe was if the EK1 was made by Registerd and well known German Maker, even in WW2 era, that the EK could be considered "Original"

The other reason, which could lead to this believe, is that the EK1 was made Juncker firm with association with AWS using originals parts

AWS Core and WW2 Juncker Frames with his early WW2 two parts screwback

I went back and read all the postings, yours and the ones by other members, very carefully.

I agrre with you that, if the Decoration is not made within certain time/ rewarding frame, although it is made by a Registered maker, it is considered as WearerCopy.

As it was mentioned that there is adifference between copy and copy

The one I presented is considered as relativley rare and not common Wearer copy for the Veterans from WW1, who lost or damaged their Rewarded EK1s Because it is made by the famuos Carl Eduard Juncker and it is a two parts screwback variation it demands higher price than some more common EK1s, including Originals made during 1914-1924 period.

If I knew all this information, perhaps my Question will be :

Is this One Real EK1 made by Juncker during WW2 eara or is more recent production i.e. fake or forgery.

We all know that the collector's world is spiled with many fakes and forgeries, some of the are so convicigly good that can even trick the Best Experts in the field. The reoson the Fakers are geetting more knowledgeble and the interest in EKs is increasing. I also believe that the fakers get a good help from Books like "How to avoid fakes" The authors give very good descriptions of good and bad EKs The result -the next Fake EK1 is made with all the problems rectified The same things happenes with any Decoration.

As i mentioned, although I did not get a direct answer to my revised Question, from the information i gathered i believe that I have in my hands A Real Wearer Copy of 1914 EK1 made by C.E.Juncker in WW2 era for the Veterans from WW1, and marked with his LDO Mark -L/12.

Believe my, we dont nave any problems with you or have any bad feelings towards you.

The only thing that could be better, and perhaps will not create some tension, if you as Moderater in a very expert and calm way explained some of the facts to us.

Do not forget the fact, although we have Common Interests, we are different people in many other ways.

Thank you

Kind Regards

Graf

[speedytop]

Dear Graf,

I think, that you don't know, how often I had such discussions in 3 German and in 3 English-speaking forums.

With the same problems in German and in English (often with the same people ).

My comments are based on knowledge and experience in more than 50 years of collecting and research.

The use of special terms are based on mutually agreed terms, formulated by international well known and recognized societies for orders, medals and decorations.

Societies like OMSA (Orders and Medals Society of America), DGO (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ordenskunde) and ÖGO (Österreichische Gesellschaft für Ordenskunde).

It is not my invention or only my personal opinion!

OMSA: "Original" - means medals authorized by, or produced under contract to, the issuing entity during the period for which the award was authorized or awarded to the recipients of the medal.

DGO/ÖGO: "All awarded pieces are originals.

Other specimens are also originals, which had been made in the award period by authorized makers ..."

There are some nuances, but the agreed base for originals is always the award period (Verleihungszeitraum) resp. during the period for which the award was authorized or awarded.

Uwe

Edited April 17, 2012 by speedytop

[hagahr]

Thanks for the nice words, Graf. You're welcome! I thought I was pretty clear in answering your question on the cross, and others were, too. As clear as one can get without picking a quarrel.

Kai, you have probably read of "probemäßig" and "Probemäßigkeit" on the German forums you're visiting, or you've read it in the magazines or books. You know and we know which types were definitely awarded. And that we don't need a 100% wearer proof to know it's original. These are facts you are aware of. I wonder. I really do, honestly.

theres nothing to wonder about

it was not me who doubted the ek 1914/39 marked L12 not to be original .

Edited April 17, 2012 by hagahr

[saschaw]

I know this wasn't you, Kai. But this was, and I might have misunderstood it, but it sounds strange in regards to the fact knowledge we do have on awarded vs. private purchase crosses.

"1 category is = the ORIGINAL DECORATION ONLY IF OBTAINED DIRECTLY FROM THE RECIPIENT OR HIS FAMILY WITH ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION WITH A VERY STRONg PROVENANCE> in short the 100% original rewarded worn soldiers property

well 99.9999 % off the collectors wil not have such a cross"

Stopping here might be a really good idea.

Edited April 17, 2012 by saschaw

[hagahr]

I know this wasn't you, Kai. But this was, and I might have misunderstood it, but it sounds strange in regards to the fact knowledge we do have on awarded vs. private purchase crosses.

"1 category is = the ORIGINAL DECORATION ONLY IF OBTAINED DIRECTLY FROM THE RECIPIENT OR HIS FAMILY WITH ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION WITH A VERY STRONg PROVENANCE> in short the 100% original rewarded worn soldiers property

well 99.9999 % off the collectors wil not have such a cross"

Stopping here might be a really good idea.

I agree Sascha ,,,,

with respect ,,

kay

Holland verzamelt.nl - about the makers off the stie

Edited April 17, 2012 by hagahr

[Graf]

Dear Uwe,

Thank you for the information and the Definitions re: Original.

As you noticed I had already accepted your and saschaw categorisation of the EK1 by L/12

i believe that I have in my hands A Real Wearer Copy of 1914 EK1 made by C.E.Juncker in WW2 era for the Veterans from WW1, and marked with his LDO Mark -L/12.

I respect your knowlledge and experience in the field

I have been collecting only for the past 4-5 years, therfore I am not in position to claim that I am more knowledgeble than you

Till very recently I was collecting on my own with only contacts with few iduvidual collectors.

Not long ago I felt a need to join a Club and share my interests

I am learning from experiences like this one

Case Closed

Kind Regards

Graf

[Streptile]

Hi Graf,

Your L/12 EK1 is an authentic C.E. Juncker EK1 from after 1941, however else you want to classify it.

In fact, I used to own that cross (before it was cleaned) til I upgraded with one from Sascha's shop in better condition.

The discussion of the terms (original, copy, fake) has been happening for a long time (and usually with Uwe). Most English-language collectors use "copy" and "fake" interchangeably, but the precise definitions do have real meaning and importance, so hopefully this will change in the future.

[Streptile]

This cross does not use AWS's frame, but Juncker's own frame. It has the later-war thin screwpost, which AWS never used. I would say it's probably from around 1942 or 43 judging by the components.

Edited April 19, 2012 by Streptile

[speedytop]

Streptile, thank you:

"... the precise definitions do have real meaning and importance, so hopefully this will change in the future."

Uwe

[hagahr]

there you are,,,,,,,even a juncker frame .

mistake from my side ,,(about the frame .) sorry fore that .

kay

[Graf]

Hi Streptile,

Thank you for the information and the pictures

It is of big help to me ...and also the fact that your EK is from Saschaw shop

I agree with you, no mather how you clasify the EK the most important is to clear the Question whether it is Authentic or not

Kiind regards

Graf

[Eric Stahlhut]

depends on how you use the word, "authentic"

just kidding! :cheeky:

[marrauder]

I think it is always better to conserve the crosses than the ideas.

Regards

[christerd]

As an amateur I find this discussion very interesting, and one thing strikes me .... I tend to agree with Uwe that only a EK produced during 1914-1924 would be a original 1914 cross . But how can anyone be sure that is wasn´t produced in 1925, 1926, or into the thirtiees ?

How long did the manufacturers used the 1914 tools before tthey started with new ones ??

Interesting

Christer

[hagahr]

As an amateur I find this discussion very interesting, and one thing strikes me .... I tend to agree with Uwe that only a EK produced during 1914-1924 would be a original 1914 cross . But how can anyone be sure that is wasn´t produced in 1925, 1926, or into the thirtiees ?

How long did the manufacturers used the 1914 tools before tthey started with new ones ??

Interesting

Christer

hy Crister ,,there are many assumptions,opinions, about that as well

in this EK1 case the L12 mark is the tell tell tale

as the LDO numbers started to appear 1941/1942 ( don't have the exact date )

the overall shape and design off these crosses

can be found back on period photographs ,,,some off these are even dated .

also advertisement off the medal makers

have being found that show in some cases the particular crosses and dated in many cases as well

and the period books that have being written about these crosses do show some leads to dating these crosses ..

as fore the tools

these could not be used endlessly.

as far as my own research reveals until today

the pressing form fore the frame wood last around 30/40 years before they had to be renewed

the mother model fore the sanded caste core

they could be used almost endlessly

got some presented about that on my site Holland verzamelt.nl - 1870/1813 OBSERVATIONS

but that is fore the 1840/1880 period .

as fore the WW1 and WW2 tools it may be the same .

but could be different as the industrial material choice wood be better and off better quality

and it is quit possible that the so called maybauer schinkel (and others) crosses with swastika

made with the same frame tools as the crosses produced at 1914/1924 .

until LDO came

(as the general believes go's ,, and the Moore straiter look and design was generalized )

hope this helps

be aware there are many opinions about this to ...

regards kay

Edited April 23, 2012 by hagahr

[christerd]

Thanks hagahr ,

I really love your site

And the discussion between "original" and "copy" will keep going on I´m sure

Christer

[hagahr]

thanks Christer ,,,,glad you like it .

Edited April 24, 2012 by hagahr

[Graf]

Hi Guys,

I am glad that my listing created a very nice and productive disussion

Hi Christer,

It is a very nice point ..how we can draw a definitive line we do not know how long these EK1 were produced after WW1

This line will be strached and dragged in both directions, depending of one's believes and intrepratations of the existing knowledge.

We can only gess, from the existing knowledge, about the exact time of making of the EKs

In my opinion it does not mather too much the exact period of making ..the most important is not to be made last week in China and "aged".and presented as a contemporary piece

Hi Hagahr,

Thank you for sharing your knowledge with the other memebers.

The LDO, according to some sourses, was introduced on 1-st of March 1941.

Yes, Schinkel EK1 is quite interesting piece, and could be a topic for another hot discussion

Regards

Graf

[hagahr]

so much detailed info lost .

I found evidence off ek collecting going back 130 years ,,,,

but somehow the detailed info about producing these is lost .

ek collectors failed to be interested in preserving the most important insider info part off collecting over 130 years .

and INTERNET came to late

all there is left is,,,,,, shallowly history with huge holes in it to have discussions about .

only light in that is ,

sometimes old secondary period info allows us to make careful assumptions about how things done but,,,,,

by far not enough to fill the smallest hole in history.

and sure even this is disputable ,,,,

as there are enough EK grabboids who don''t feel that way,as fore them there are no holes left and the world is perfect

regards kay

Edited April 25, 2012 by hagahr

[Graf]

Hi Kay,

Do not worry,

People like you will fill the holes one at the time,,however it can take another 130 years....but no rush

Regards

Graf