Boxing Day Pix for Mr. Huxley

Thanks Chas. It is an interesting group that spans service from the Franco Prussian war to the beginning of WWI. The Red Eagle 4 w/swords on the non-combatant ribbon is unusual. It is interesting that the rank lists specifically mention the award with swords on the non combatant ribbon. I don't totally understand the combination but the many possible variations of the Red Eagle pretty much keep me in a constant state of confusion about the order. Unfortunately I do not have Meyer's 2nd class Landwehr Dienst Auszeichnung. I do have an example that I keep with the group as a sample of the award.

Reservist1
 
Chas, I agree with you, I to think that the correct award is the Allgemeines Ehrenzeichen. Although I suppose the Dienstauszeichnung could have been the officer cross and not the 12yr Mannschaften piece.

I'm still not sure what the Allgemeines Ehrenzeichen was awarded for, I thought it was more a civil award rather than military. Then again how would that fit with the spange and the rest of the awards. I just love these problems :read2: But as you say it's a nice one.

R1, That is a beauty and like Chas says the first RAO4x on NC ribbon I have ever seen \:D/ The research on Mayer just brings it all to life again.

Let's see some more please R1.
 
Thanks Mike. Medals are sort of a side line for me. I have quite a few singles but not many groups. This Bavarian group is interesting primarily for the Bavarian Landwehr 20 year service cross.

Reservist1
 
Mike Huxley said:
the Dienstauszeichnung could have been the officer cross and not the 12yr Mannschaften piece.
Hi Mike:

I considered that possibility, but ultimately rejected it based on the presence of the Schaumburg-Lippesche Militär-Verdeinstkreuz. I regard your Spange as Preußen, and the RAO4 should immediately follow the EK in precedence.

That being said, there was also a Rote Adler-Orden Medaille, and I share R1's confusion regarding the surfeit of variations for this award. I think both the RAOM and the AE were civil awards.

We must be speaking Greek to our fellow forumites. We appear to be a party of three.

Outstanding Bavarian bar, R1!

Chas.
 
Here are my contributions for today. I purchased the 1870 from Bill Hamelman at the 2006 SOS, where it received a thumb's up from Steve Previtera.

The 1914 W & S was purchased at an antiques mall near Louisville for $95.00 (it pays to check the local dealers en route to the Maker's Mark Distillery in Loretto).

Chas.

PICT0592.jpg


PICT0594.jpg


PICT0593.jpg


PICT0601.jpg


PICT0602.jpg
 
Hi R1:

Nice! It's good to see a Wagner piece with a flat pin. So many with a round pin are suspect (including two in my collection).

The one I purchased from Hamelman is not hallmarked. Steve Previtera believes it to be from the 1880s. I fell in love with the high relief, and think it's the same example Steve photographed for the back cover of The Iron Time.

Chas.
 
reservist1 said:
Chas: Very nice 1870 and 1914 EK1's. Here is an 1870 EK1 marked
"I. Wagner & S. 14 Loth:"
ek1fwy1.jpg

ek1rdz9.jpg


Reservist1

R1,

For some unknown reason your pictures are not downloading for me?? ...Grrrr.

Chas ..now YOU are getting me envious. The one thing that I have longed for and not been able to get my hands on is a true 1870 EK1. That is a beauty. Such a quality strike and the condition is A1. :thumbright:
 
Chas: I would agree that your 1870 EK1 is probably 1880's. One thing is for sure, it is real! As for Wagner marked 1870's, the little elves in eastern Europe have had a field day with markings since Steven's book came out. The one unfortunate downside to good reference material is that it helps the fabricators improve upon their copies.
My Wagner EK1 has the catch located high on the cross which I like very much plus I know where this piece has been since about 1965.

Mike: Sorry you are having a problem loading the images. If you like, send me a PM with your email address and I will send the images directly via e-mail.

Reservist1
 
R1 and Mike:

I'd appreciate hearing your opinions regarding this 1870. It is hallmarked in the same manner as the Prinzengroße on page 117 of The Iron Time; however, this is a full size cross, three piece construction, magnetic core.

Have either of you encountered its like before?

Chas.

PICT0152.jpg


PICT0154.jpg


PICT0156.jpg


PICT0158.jpg
 
Chas: I have never seen an 1870 EK1 marked like this one. I don't like to try and pass judgement on something only from a photograph. However, I do not get a real good feeling about the piece. The very conspicuous and multiple Wagner markings bother me as does the configutation of the hinge and pin. Out of curiosity have you had someone check the frame to see if it is in fact silver?

Reservist1
 
Hi R1, for some reason I can now see your pictures and very nice ones as well.

Chas, Although I'm no expert on 1870 EK's, I like R1, am a little dubious about your "Wagner & S" piece. One reason for this is the quality in the Iron core, the "1870" does seem to be the same casting as others of Wagner that I have seen. Also, I must again agree with R1 in that I have never before seen double MM on the reverse of a cross .... but that does not make it wrong. Last of all, the hinge and pin do not seem to conform to the makers usual one. Just a gut feeling mate.

As I said, I'm no EK expert.
 
reservist1 said:
have you had someone check the frame to see if it is in fact silver?
The answer to that is not yet. However, it certainly appears to be. R1 and Mike, thanks for your input. The EK is unorthodox and downright ugly, and, were it not for the hallmark, one might (in a flight of fancy) regard it as a pre-1918 jeweler piece.

It certainly doesn't resemble any Wagner 1870 I'm acquainted with.

No matter what, I'm stuck with it (as I feel very strongly against allowing questionable items like this to circulate further).

What makes this EK such a curiosity is that whether fraud or genuine, it appears to be one of a kind. I have yet to see another like it.

Chas. :-k
 
Agreed 100% Chas, Until proved right or wrong ... my mind is open. It does have that certain age look about it, but without deeper knowledge I would not like to say one way or the other. Also until held in hand and not through a picture, it's hard to tell.

Have you asked one of the Guru's on EK on WA forum or GMIC forum. Worth posting a pic on either of these.

Regards, Mike
 
I've thought about it, Mike, but I'm fairly certain it would be ripped to shreds at WA. Though I can handle that, it isn't my idea of a good time. All too often, the article and its owner are treated with equal contempt.

Again, without trying to champion the piece, it does look more substantial when held in one's hand under a magnifying lens. There is nothing that betrays casting; everything is die struck and correctly made. It just happens to be bizarre

I'm planning on attending the MAX later this month, and intend to bring it along. Stephen Previtera and Andreas Ising will most likely be there, and can let me down with my dignity intact. :D

Chas.
 
Chas: I would be interested in hearing what Stephen thinks of the piece and also what you think of the MAX show. I had tables at that show all the time it was in Baltimore and Pittsburgh. I finally gave up on it because the show had become nothing but a dealer swap meet with the same shop worn junk year after year. The 2 years in Charlotte were a disaster. Hopefully it will turn itself around but I have little hope.

Reservist1
 
Back
Top