posted 10-26-2004 01:45 AM            

This is my first post on this forum, which I only discovered through need today.

I'll be up front. I don't collect silverware as such, although some items that I collect are made from silver. I'm primarily a collector of German militaria.

A typical item arrived today with a possibly unique marking, at least for the item in question. The item is a 1914 Prussian Iron Cross First Class, although it could have been made anywhere in Germany, possibly even Austria. I'd date it somewhere between 1914 and 1930, although there's a reasonable probability that it is wartime. It is a "screwback" variety (hence private purchase and not an issue piece) and has an 800 incuse relief stamping - nothing unusual so far.

The unusual marking is on one of the arms, possibly some sort swan? It is stamped (not incuse relief) or etched. I've made some scans which will hopefully help - sorry, they are a bit blurry. It's the same image rotated in 4 orientations for ease of perspective. For orientation, the black line represents the outer edge of the cross arm. Neither I nor any of my colleagues on a dedicated militaria forum have seen anything like it.

Reading through some other posts, there seem to be some specialists in German silver markings. Does anybody know who used this symbol/marking? Any and all help will be greatly appreciated.

Kind Regards from DownUnder
Mike K

posted 10-31-2004 09:54 PM            

OK, I'm talking to myself. I've been doing some detailed comparisons of 1914 EK1 iron cores. Crosses from the firms of Godet and of Wagner & Sohn (both Berlin based as far as I know) appear to have matching iron cores. Are either of those two firms known to have used a "swan" mark?

Also, I've seen reference to Swan marks in relation to silver imported into France. Although explaining it on a German WW1 item would not be easy, does this mark match any known French swan marking?

Your help will be appreciated.

posted 11-01-2004 09:29 AM            

For that site please try and get a good front as well as reverse photos also.

Good luck ,
G.

posted 11-01-2004 11:03 AM            

Gaspare, thanks for replying. The cross itself is not an issue. No anti-spin post, which is normal for pre-Third Reich EK1s. The cross has a central female post and two piece screw attachment comprising a large diameter vaulted disk which is held in place by a smaller screwdisk with male threaded post. I can pretty much guarantee that the German Daggers forum can't help me with the mark in question. I think some real specialists in European touches/marks are required in this case.

I've attached another composite showing the mark. I guess if you look at it upside down, it could be a jumping fish! I've also attached a pic (sorry, blurry - bad lighting) of the obverse and reverse for anyone who may be interested.

Regards
Mike K

posted 11-01-2004 02:37 PM            

The mark photos are a little better, hopefully a member here will be able to help. , G.

posted 11-01-2004 06:59 PM            

Gaspare, I used to be a member of the other Forum (same username) but did not renew when they changed their login procedure through that third party company - I get enough spam as it is! The marking has been discussed on the Wehrmacht Imperial section in the past with no result.

Scott, images regenerated at a hopefully more appropriate size.

doc, Many Thanks and please take care getting back to your books! I'm certainly looking forward to whatever you can dig up. Dutch EXPORT will take a bit of explaining though!!!

posted 11-01-2004 09:35 PM            

quote:

---

The mark is actually a fish and I am almost positive that it is a Dutch export mark

---

posted 11-02-2004 12:18 AM            

Confusion as to the purpose of this mark sometimes led to its use on old or foreign items. It appeared from 1853-1893 in a conforming outline, and from 1893 to 1905 in a triangle. (As it was no longer used after 1905, it can't be the mark on your medal.) After that it was replaced by a cursive "T" and its use was discontinued entirely in 1953.

But I digress. The mark yours most closely resembles is that used in Romania between 1906 and 1926 for silver items. (See Tardy p. 344) Unfortunately, it looks more like the mark for .950 silver than that for .800 silver and, more problematic still, the mark you have is only the left half; the mark in Tardy has its mirror image on the right! I suppose it is possible that it is only partially struck, but it doesn't look like it in your photographs - there is a definite outline there on the right.

Also, there was a silver manufacturer in Berlin at the time that used a stylized dolphin as his mark: Louis Vausch, who is listed in a 1924 German jeweler, gold & silversmith's trade catalogue I have as a gold & silverware wholesaler. The mark illustrated there is vaguely similar to yours, and the time and place are right, but I will say that the Romanian mark is a much better match, but for the symmetry problem.

posted 11-03-2004 04:18 AM            

doc & swarter, many thanks for raising the Dutch marking as a possibility, even though it's apparently not correct the discussion was useful and interesting.

blakstone, many thanks for your input - I had looked over some other threads and was hoping you could help. No worries that there's no definitive match (yet!). Unfortunately I don't have access to any decent Silver marking reference, although I'll try and head to the local library and a decent local bookshop to see if they are available (are those CD versions of Tardy on ebay illegal??)

Re Vausch, some net searching turned up a bracelet attributed to Vausch with a rouded fish in a square (quadrant) marking - very different to what's on the cross but possibly the bracelet was misidentified - or did Vausch use more than one marking?

The Romanian marking sounds interesting, given the Central Powers (German) occupation of Bucharest in Dec 1916. The cross is almost certainly of German manufacture but I could envisage an enterprising local jeweller ordering some Iron Crosses from one of the big German order/medal manufacturers (both Godet and Wagner would qualify there).

Does Tardy state/specify whether the marking was only for silver items produced in Romania, or whether it was an import/export mark or put on silver items sold in Romania during that period? Would it be possible to see a scan of the .800 and .950 markings from Tardy?

I agree, the mark on the Iron Cross definitely appears to be a single stamp only. Is it possible to tell if the .950 mirrored marking was produced from a single stamp or from two separate stamps? Alternately, could there be a marking variation that Tardy overlooked? Also, I've heard that some .800 marks can represent a minimum silver content rather than an absolute content - could this explain a .950 like mark on an .800 stamped item?

posted 11-04-2004 12:30 PM            

And, for the record, here is Vausch's mark from the directory:

posted 11-05-2004 11:12 PM            

Many thanks again - the images of the marks in Tardy are much appreciated! Seems I'm going to have to find a contact in Romania for further info.

Fyi, attached is an image of the mark on the bracelet attributed to Vausch I mentioned above. Again, I don't know if the bracelet marking has been misidentified.

Regards
Mike K

posted 11-08-2004 08:08 PM            

Now the Austrian connection sounds very interesting and would be a very easy explanation!

If anybody could scan the Austrian markings mentioned above, it would be greatly appreciated. I've checked my local library network and Tardy is not available.

posted 11-09-2004 04:11 PM            

They each depict a fish swimming left in four different outlines for the 4 different silver standards, and should be accompanied by both a letter for the assay office and a number for the standard. Moreover, the fish there is just that - a fish - and not the stylized sinuous dolphin on your mark. (Oddly enough, the gold import mark of the time is a closer match - a seahorse - but your piece is silver and the seahorse really couldn't be mistaken for your dolphin either.)

I'll add one thing here: Tardy (both the gold & silver books) is impossibly muddled on the dating of its Austrian marks. The fish & seahorse marks for imported Austrian gold & silver, respectively, were introduced in 1922 (not in 1866 as Tardy says) after the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and were used until a new series of marks was created in 1954. (This doesn't create a problem date-wise for your medal, of course, but it's a moot point: I'm positive none of these Austrian import marks is the one on your piece.)