Helmut Weitze/Hamburg has an interesting German Cross in Silver in his current update. The cross was shown in Germany in a forum and was pretty much "talked down" by experts (who he'd never seen one before). So it ended up at Weitze.
The interesting think is the 11 o'clock flaw and the "20" marking, which is complete. Students of the hobby know that the biggest point of critique regarding the "dotted" cross is that the gold content of one investigated example did not reach the level of another tested model from the same manufacturer. When the test was made, the issue was very much in doubt since there was no "dotted" with the 11 o'clock flaw, there was no "dotted" with the full "20" marking but rather only those with the cut-off top. And there was no provenance.
Meanwhile several "dotted" in Gold are known with the 11 o'clock flaw, with the full and correct "20" and one Klessheim find (which is of course dismissed as fabricated and a lie by the critics ... - so let's leave that out).
It would be interesting to have known the development of the history of the "dotted" if this cross would have been the one tested under SEM. Would a "lower" silver content (if at all true) overrule the presence of the 11 o'clock flaw and the "20"?
Fact is this: only the wreath with the dotted date is different to all the other parts, which are 100% genuine Zimmermann. In shape, form, material, flaws and workmanship!
I was skeptical in my book and everybody can read it. But being skeptical means exactly that: "A methodology based on an assumption of doubt with the aim of acquiring approximate or relative certainty."
I have reached a very high level of certainty with the "dotted" cross and this one makes me feel even better. However, if somebody doesn't like it, well - don't buy it. It is a free country!
The interesting think is the 11 o'clock flaw and the "20" marking, which is complete. Students of the hobby know that the biggest point of critique regarding the "dotted" cross is that the gold content of one investigated example did not reach the level of another tested model from the same manufacturer. When the test was made, the issue was very much in doubt since there was no "dotted" with the 11 o'clock flaw, there was no "dotted" with the full "20" marking but rather only those with the cut-off top. And there was no provenance.
Meanwhile several "dotted" in Gold are known with the 11 o'clock flaw, with the full and correct "20" and one Klessheim find (which is of course dismissed as fabricated and a lie by the critics ... - so let's leave that out).
It would be interesting to have known the development of the history of the "dotted" if this cross would have been the one tested under SEM. Would a "lower" silver content (if at all true) overrule the presence of the 11 o'clock flaw and the "20"?
Fact is this: only the wreath with the dotted date is different to all the other parts, which are 100% genuine Zimmermann. In shape, form, material, flaws and workmanship!
I was skeptical in my book and everybody can read it. But being skeptical means exactly that: "A methodology based on an assumption of doubt with the aim of acquiring approximate or relative certainty."
I have reached a very high level of certainty with the "dotted" cross and this one makes me feel even better. However, if somebody doesn't like it, well - don't buy it. It is a free country!
Comment