1939 Iron Cross second class "Round 3"

danpatjoe

Hello All...

As requested by Preusse, here for your perusal are some images of one of my rarer iron crosses. It is a 'round 3' version, so called because of the unusual font used for the 3's in both 1813 and 1939 dates.

This example has a 'stippled' core and a stepped swastika. Like all 'round 3's it is unmarked. It has the distinctive die flaws on the frame common to other examples aswell as the jump ring been soldered on only one side.

Unfortunately, someone at some stage must have used a polish on the frame and some residue is evident between the core and frame.

I hope it meets with your approval!
- Dan





And here, for comparison is a "123" (Beck, Hassinger & Co., Sraßburg) showing the standard lettering on the date - note the 3.

SpitfireIV

Interesting, I have an Iron Cross second class which I suspect is a fake :rolleyes: (that elderly gentleman seemed so genuine!) Anyway, the reverse of the medal has a flaw, part of it is sort of mis-shaped, I believe quality control was pretty high right? So something like this wouldnt have got through. The silver finish appears to be wearing off too, I have this 7 or 8 years now. There are no makers marks or such on it.

danpatjoe

Your cross may not be a fake... that is not a flaw on the frame but damage. It looks like it was hit with something which has flattened the beading. Is the core magnetic (does it hold a magnet?)

Approx. 80% of 1939 iron crosses were unmarked, but by studying the characteristics of marked examples, it is sometimes possible to identify unmarked examples. My first guess judging by the lettering of the 1813 date and the 'hump' at the suspension ring, is that your cross is an unmarked "3" or "L/11" (Wilhelm Deumer, Lüdenscheid).

Can we see some straight-on, close-up pictures of the obverse also?

- Dan

Dr Strange

Hi Dan,

thanks for the round 3 pics! It's great to have collectors with diverse interest on here.

CB1798,
yes, you are correct in that quality control was very high. However, in your case I have to agree with Dan. It rather looks like a dinge or something that hit the cross after it was produced. So it wouldn't be a production flaw.

danpatjoe

CroppyBoy1798 -

Here are the obverse images of 2 Wilhelm Deumer crosses, on the left a marked "3" and on the right, a badly damaged, marked "L/11".
Just out of interest, how do the details on your cross compare with these?

- Dan

SpitfireIV

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the info . The centre is magnetic and I have included an image of the cross, front and back, see what you think:

danpatjoe

Close, but no cigar!
I don't think it's a match for a Deumer cross. At the moment I'm at a loss as to who made it, but I will study up on it. The good news is that, in my opinion at least, I think it is a genuine war-time cross.

- Dan

P.S. - what is the mark on the flange just outside the beading at 4 o'clock on the obverse? A certain known fake ("333" or "666") had a die flaw at, or very near, this area, however the core on your cross does not match the fake and this mark does not appear on the reverse of your cross either.

SpitfireIV

Hi Dan, thanks for the help, appreciated!

I cant see anything out of the ordinary at that point, no flaws, marks, depressions etc, there is like a small stain in that area alright, but thats about it.

EDIT: I remember the same guy that sold me this iron cross showing me a WW1 Iron Cross second class and shaking it, you could hear a little rattle when listening closely, he said that was a way of telling if they were authentic? Any truth to that?

danpatjoe

CroppyBoy1798 -
If only it was that easy!!

There is a certain amount of truth to this theory that hearing a 'rattle' when the cross is shook is a way to show if the cross is authentic...
It is one method of finding out if the cross is of three piece construction (ie. 2 nickel silver frames and a ferrous/iron core) as opposed to a one-piece cast fake.

However, some very early (and rare) pre-LDO crosses were of one piece construction, some were magnetic while others were zinc. This practice was quickly stopped and the traditional 3-piece cross was made the standard. (This was the style of cross first introduced in 1813, continued in 1870 and 1914)

A new, more efficient method for constructing iron crosses was introduced by some companies in 1942 called the 'Gablonzer Press' method which resulted in a much 'tighter' fit which reduced the chances of the core rattling within the frame.

Also, with the fact that the cores were iron, they are very susceptible to rusting over time. Area's under the frames where moisture can be trapped can develop rust which may not be seen when the cross is handled, but yet may cause the core to 'stick' in position which can also result in a lack of rattle when the cross is shaken.

I have heard this theory from quite a few people in the past and find it is usually from people who are trying to sell a cross! While there is a grain of truth in there, it is certainly not the final word. Many fakes are being produced in the same manner and materials as original crosses and these 'rattle' too. Practically all third-reich militaria is being faked now and unfortunately the fakes are getting better all the time.

- Dan

arnhem44

Dan i'm glad you brought this thread up,as many times as i've looked at an Iron cross i've never coped the different numbering,they are for me one of the better medals to collect,i only have three myself,i couldn't for the life of me tell you the makers,must check them actually,ones an ek1 second class and the other two are first and second class from ww2,must say a lovely collection you have though.