Become our sponsor and display your banner here
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Opinions needed on this unmarked RK...

Article about: Hello everybody! This RK belongs to a good friend collector, he bought it several years ago, said to have been brought from Germany just after the war... In the opinion of a retired dealer i

  1. #1

    Exclamation Opinions needed on this unmarked RK...

    Hello everybody!


    This RK belongs to a good friend collector, he bought it several years ago, said to have been brought from Germany just after the war... In the opinion of a retired dealer in German Militaria it could be a Sedlatzek cross, because of certain details such as the swastika and the "1939" date, etc.

    However it has not the dipping suspension ring as seen in most of the Sedlatzek crosses...

    My friend and I, we would be happy to know the expert opinions of the Forum members on this particular cross. Many thanks in advance!

    All my best!


    Jose

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	RRRKKKRRRKKKRRRKKK 001.jpg 
Views:	102 
Size:	149.9 KB 
ID:	761119

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	KKKKKRRRR 001.jpg 
Views:	68 
Size:	158.2 KB 
ID:	761120
    Last edited by Viriathus; 11-05-2014 at 02:44 AM. Reason: Actual colour of the iron core is black...

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    P
    Many
     

  3. #2

    Default

    P.S. Could it eventually be a variant of the traditional Sedlatzek RK?

  4. #3

    Default

    Interesting cross. However, the 1st photo under magnification does, indeed, show an intrusion of the ring into the frame. Sedlatzen crosses had silver colored cores and have been debated for some time now as either early but rejected RK's made by Souval or else post-war pieces made by him, but in either case, in my opinion, Sedlatzek is too contaminated by Souval. The frames on these so-called Sedlatzek crosses were made by Souval. There is no debate on that. On this particular example you've posted, you state that the color of the core is Black, but the chipping on the swastika and the date seem to look silverish in coloration-another indication that this could well be yet another debatable Sedlatzek. It is well known that I have a considerable distrust of Anything made by the infamous Souval and, unfortunately, this cross is looking to have a strong connection To Souval. It's been argued that Souval made these RK's early on and that they were rejected for their poor quality and some disagree with that and hold that they are purely post-war sold pieces, as Souval would and did sell Anything he could after the war. And then there are the equally disturbing "Hoffman RK's" from the portraits that no one seems to be able to identify and rumors abound concerning. But, in any case, the cross you've shown is, unfortunately, not one that I would ever invest considerable money into. Until the day comes that the controversy is settled one way or the other-and I, personally, lean towards their Not being genuine- I would not want one in my collection. I do not believe that it is an Issued Ritter.
    William

    "Much that once was, is lost. For none now live who remember it."

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote by Wagriff View Post
    Interesting cross. However, the 1st photo under magnification does, indeed, show an intrusion of the ring into the frame. Sedlatzen crosses had silver colored cores and have been debated for some time now as either early but rejected RK's made by Souval or else post-war pieces made by him, but in either case, in my opinion, Sedlatzek is too contaminated by Souval. The frames on these so-called Sedlatzek crosses were made by Souval. There is no debate on that. On this particular example you've posted, you state that the color of the core is Black, but the chipping on the swastika and the date seem to look silverish in coloration-another indication that this could well be yet another debatable Sedlatzek. It is well known that I have a considerable distrust of Anything made by the infamous Souval and, unfortunately, this cross is looking to have a strong connection To Souval. It's been argued that Souval made these RK's early on and that they were rejected for their poor quality and some disagree with that and hold that they are purely post-war sold pieces, as Souval would and did sell Anything he could after the war. And then there are the equally disturbing "Hoffman RK's" from the portraits that no one seems to be able to identify and rumors abound concerning. But, in any case, the cross you've shown is, unfortunately, not one that I would ever invest considerable money into. Until the day comes that the controversy is settled one way or the other-and I, personally, lean towards their Not being genuine- I would not want one in my collection. I do not believe that it is an Issued Ritter.
    Hello.
    I agree with Your opinion. I would say NO to this cross!

    Peter

  6. #5

    Default

    Gentlemen, this thread is running at the moment re Sedlatzek RK's..see Opinions needed on Sedlatzek Ritterkreuz... however as I stated in a pm to the thread starter, this does not match the so called "Sedlatzek RK", so it is NOT a Sedlatzek, it is not a Souval RK either.....sorry, but just another fake RK IMO !
    Prost ! Steve..
    "The German Army is the perfectly adapted, perfectly running Machine. The difference is that the Germans are organised with a view to War...with the cold, hard, practical and business-like purpose of winning victories."
    G.W. Steevens - The Daily Mail (1897)

  7. #6

    Default Another 2 photos for comparision...

    Thank you all for the comments!


    I started this new thread on my friend's RK because no one else responded to the previous, which I started to get the opinions of the Forum members regarding my own Sedlatzek RK.

    Here there are another 2 photos for comparision, at the right is my Sedlatzek cross, at the left my friend's one. There are some obvious similarities between both frames that seem to have been struck by the same die. The swastika is exactly the same in both the crosses, the date style also, except for the last "9". The main difference lies TO the suspension ring!

    Any other opinions are welcome!

    Thank you in advance and all the best,


    Jose

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	duas rk.JPG 
Views:	19 
Size:	143.6 KB 
ID:	761413
    Last edited by Viriathus; 11-06-2014 at 02:59 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. EK2 Unmarked for opinions

    In 1939 Eisernes Kreuz forum
    07-25-2014, 01:21 AM
  2. Help needed whit unmarked EK II's

    In 1939 Eisernes Kreuz forum
    04-29-2014, 08:04 PM
  3. unmarked ek1 opinions

    In 1939 Eisernes Kreuz forum
    12-27-2012, 09:38 PM
  4. Opinions Please - Unmarked GWB?

    In Verwundetenabzeichen forum
    10-26-2011, 10:40 PM
  5. Another EK1 unmarked,help identifying needed

    In 1939 Eisernes Kreuz forum
    12-29-2010, 10:04 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •