Dueppler and Alsen crosses 1864

[IR61]

Hi Gentlemen.

 

Ist here a kind soul who can help me? Are these original? The first Dueppler cross i am 95% sure are original but the other two?

The second dueppeler cross is made of different metal, and the motiv isent the same as the first one…

 

Happy for all answers.

Tommy

Back.

 

[VtwinVince]

Can you post close-ups of the suspension systems? These are now being faked in large numbers, so you should exercise caution.

[IR61]

Hi!

Yes i noticed that you can now find these crosses in large numbers on the ebay. Collecting anything now is a minefield, Hope these pics helps?

Alsen

Duppel nr2.

[VtwinVince]

Judging from these shots they all look good, unless the fakers are now adept at copying the details.

[IR61]

Hi.

Thanks VtwinVince for your replay. Someone with an other opinion? Do somebody know if these was made of several makers or only one?

 

Tommy

[Great Dane]

Well, I'm afraid of stating the obvious, but the middle one is not a Düppel cross, but an Alsen cros (same war, different battle).

 

OK, I see the subject line was changed, so you already know that 

Edited April 8, 2023 by Great Dane

[VtwinVince]

There were many variants, so-called Spangenstuecke, produced. Award pieces have the ribbed suspension loop at the upper cross arm.

[saschaw]

It's quite unsettling how difficult it became to judge such relatively common and not extremely expensive awards from mediocre pictures only! The Alsen cross, I'm sure, is a modern fake as to be found on ebay. I'm not sure regarding the two Düppel onslaught crosses, which means they could or could not be real... sigh!

 

 

[IR61]

Hello!

 

Okay, so the Alsen cross is crap…. Wrong details, wrong material? Please do explain. I think one of the Duppel crosses are fake, i will try to show in a picture tomorrow.

 

Kind regards Tommy

[saschaw]

On 16/04/2023 at 20:33, IR61 said:

Wrong details, wrong material? Please do explain.

Most striking is the unusual patina, which seems artificially applied. The fake ribbon doesn't add to it. I have hardly ever seen such signs of aging on an authentic cross, but then, literally every Alsenkreuz sold by certain infamous ebay sellers addressed here has this odd feature. Check their ebay feedback to see how many they sold just within the past few months!

 

 

[IR61]

Hello!

now i have tried to examin the Duppler crosses. I belive the one to the left is original, it has sharper details and the material its made of seems to be of much higher quality and it has the ”extra soldering” where the ring is conected to the cross itself. I have seen it on the 1866 crosses. But the cross to the right is made of some other metal, its surface is very grainy and the left arm has som pitts in it and the upper arm is not straight its oblique. I hope somebody understands what iam trying to say….

 

Tommy

[saschaw]

I do understand what you're saying, and I tend to agree. Sorry, man! Two fakes out of three crosses is disappointing. One thing though, regarding the "sharp details": Please keep in mind these were struck from a relatively soft alloy with a high rate of tin, and when heavily polished, lose much of that sharpness. Still, their surface should never look grainy, of course...

 

[VtwinVince]

I agree, and it's very disappointing that the fakery has so convincingly seeped into what used to be relatively 'stable ground' in the collecting community.

[IR61]

Hi.

 

Yes its not fun that two of three are crap, BUT i have to se it in a positiv way one of three was original, could have been worse! And yes i realy hate this fakers that ruins a nice hobby.

Now i need to find an original Alsenkreuz!

 

Tommy