EK1 Picture mix-up in the Classifieds?

[Danny70]

I mean no offence to the seller, and I believe it just to be an unintentional mix-up, but there is an ad in the classifieds for an L/11 marked EK1, however, I think there must have been some confusion when the seller was uploading his pictures. Either that or it's a VERY unusual Deumer cross.

Iron Cross 1st class, EKI (Eisernes Kreuz I Klasse mit Etui) by Wilhelm Deumer (L/11 maker mark - Militaria Collectibles buy - sell at War Relics

The obverse picture shows (IMO) a Klein & Quenzer cross, but the reverse pictures look to be a typical L/11 Deumer.

Any other opinions, or have I been looking at EK's for too long?!

Regards - Danny

[ObKrieger]

Good eye Danny, let's hope the seller just mixed up some photos.

[rbminis]

This was already pointed out to him when he posted for opinions.
Eisernes Kreuz 1. Klasse - i need your help
Ralph.

[tempelhof]

Danny you have more experience looking at these crosses than i do and i do agree that looks 65-like from the obverse. for sure.

but looking at it, there is a ding to the upper 9 0'clock arm. when flipped, this would correspond with a defect to the upper 3 o'clock arm.

and on the reverse view you do see that imperfection at the upper 3 o'clock arm as you'd expect were it the same badge both obverse and reverse.

i did read the thread where members pointed out they were "two different crosses", but i'm a little baffled by this coincidence i point out.

it would be pretty weird were it the same cross in all photos, but still...

not proof of anything, but i guess we will have to hear from the seller!

[tempelhof]

in that thread you reference, Ingrid Patrouille seems to be saying the very last of the several shots of the reverse is a different cross than the previous shots of the reverse. this does seem to be the case. one of the shots of the reverse is different. but the straight on shots of the reverse (which are different in that thread than the last shot of a reverse) show that ding.
maybe it's a strange cross but it does look like he's got two different reverse views of two different crosses mixed in there. that last one is marked L/11. the other reverse views do not appear to be marked.
sorry... a light bulb is going off. i think i get it now. some of the reverse views are the correct cross which correspond to the obverse view. the LAST image in that thread is an L/11 which does not.
i think i need some sleep.

[tempelhof]

yes. the middle picture in the bottom row in the ad is the back of an L/11 and is not the same cross as any of the other shots in the ad. that pic is bad. different cross. it's a 65.

call me slow.

[Adrian]

Thanks for pointing it out Danny. I'll look into it when I get home and contact the seller. From what I can see he is selling a K&Q. There is just one photo of a Deumer amongst the others. Hopefully just a mistake.

[Wagriff]

Hopefully, simply a mistake, as Adrian said, but this particular cross was vetted on the forum here earlier and the fact that 2 different crosses are pictured was clearly pointed out to the owner, however, he never responded but rather simply posted it for Sale instead. Very unusual..

[Danny70]

Thanks for the replies guys, I wasn't aware that the seller had previously posted it/them on the forum.
Must have missed that thread.
Looking at all of the pictures now, I agree with Adrian, it's a K&Q with a Deumer picture added.

He also mentions 'mit etui' in the ad description... no other mention of a case or pictures of same. Odd.

[Adrian]

I think the L/11 pic has gone now so the advert should be for an unmarked K&Q.