...I�d like to emphasize that I�m not questioning anyone�s word, opinion, expertise, theory or argument on this interesting topic and I hope that both sides continue this debate. Please, this isn�t a waste of time and it should matter and does.
Speaking for myself, these types of discussions inspire me to collect and present my collection of stuff to the forum. And I�m proud of the fact that we are very fortunate to have passionate and knowledgeable individuals willing to help us, on both sides of the issue. It can only get better.
...As I stated in my other post, it�s been my understanding for many years now that jewelry and other small wares weren�t required to be stamped with the crescent moon and crown. Some companies did and some didn�t and that�s a well known fact. Another fact, companies changed the way they marked their stuff. I can see that Gahr did it as well. My point is, just because we don�t see a crescent moon and crown on an item is no reason to condemn it or another type of marking system that Gahr might have used without researching it first. Thanks to Gaspare for weighing in on this subject as well.
� I do know that companies sent their stuff to the assayer office first before finishing up an item. From the pictures so it seems, we see Gahr bridge links with the hallmarks in the exact same position. Remember we don�t have these in hand, but this is crucial as has been noted by some of our more knowledgeable collectors. Like FP has noted, we need comparisons brought to the show. I also agree with Gaspare and he is correct, marks are stamped/punched, not cast. But if I may add, it�s a fact that each hallmark is stamped/punched �separately�. So it would be a red flag to see two of the same item with each individually punched hallmarks in the exact same position, impossible really.
�.Of course don�t bother with this test if all turn out to be cast. But a simple touchstone or X ray Fluorescence test will confirm silver content. These tests will not harm the items. Test the original if one is present at the show for informational sake.
��If� these marks are real, they have never been questioned or researched, so it seems until now. Cast from an original, maybe, maybe not. But if these bridge links are in fact cast from an original Gahr piece, than the hallmarks are real. And we can still try and research what they mean. What we do is look at known marks that we can then compare to these unknown marks which brings us to a close approximate in hope that this leads us to their true meaning. I think we are fortunate to have all the marks that we have here to research, because quite often you end up with only a silver content mark.
�Like others have noted, but with the idea of stating these two marks are wrong because of comparing them to known crown and moon marks only, in my opinion can not be justified by that comparison alone, unless it�s so close and obvious. Here it�s obvious that�s what their not and not even close. I hope that makes sense. I believe that �possibly� these two marks, the distinctive stylized (Bavarian?) crown, if you wish and the one/two curved lines within a circle, have absolutely nothing to do with �representing� known moon and crown marks. That doesn�t mean it�s wrong! It�s not uncommon to find manufactures that for various reasons stamped/punched their stuff with other marks. I�m not use to seeing this first hand, but it did in fact happen. Very important is the fact that not all, but some companies utilized their own dating system and stamped their wares accordingly. Some more complicated then others. Designers would also sometimes use their own mark. Something to think about, keep an open mind till we find out more at the show.
