Spanish Cross - Unknown Maker(s)

[Scott C.]

I think Leroy's "textbook" comment may have been a bit tongue-in-cheek. I don't think he or Jacques put much faith in textbook anything.

[Leroy]

Actually, here's the direct quote from that particular thread:

"Textbook Deumer cross, it could be an early LDO production (1941).

jacques"

[cej]

Deumer why the difference???

Scott C

Could it be different because of the alloy being used between actual silver being used and bronze? But then again it doesn't explain why there are silver ones with 3 legs cut out nor who made them !! Only a theory !

It was said that the one on Screamn Eagle maybe an Original with fake diamonds [ this maybe true ] but then it would only be up to the diamonds to make that claim !

[Brian S]

I'll go out on a limb and say that I'm leaning towards the conclusion that this type is made by W&L.

• I think the L55 mark looks good on the one Scott posted;
• I think the L55 SKIB looks to me to be the same type *
• I think the pin on these crosses is vintage W&L;
• and I think the crosses themselves look to be period from what I can see in the photos.

Any other thoughts on this theory?

* If this turns out to be untrue then the entire theory falls apart.

Back to the point of the thread...

From the fuzzy photo with nothing else to work from I think the one with the L55 stamp is the same cross. But one has to ask, "Why only one?"

W&L was not shy about marking their items. But! Demand had to be very limited. It is entirely possible they sold crosses to other sales outlets.

And, contrary to expert opinion, fact is, the Spain Cross was not available to "collectors" or anyone else who wanted one.

Pin comparison with very accurate equipment would be the one and only next step. Unless an L55 appears.

[Brian S]

and then we have a maker mark like this

Another one with the same 900 mark.

[wayne gosley]

Hi Guys,
I am just curious where this discussion has ended up, are there still 2 camps? one of believers and non believers, I ask this question, as recently a cased 900 was sold on estand,(quickly) and a loose one is also on offer for sale on estand at present, One thing I noticed in this thread based on the pictures supplied, I seem to see some differences on a couple of the cross pictured, in that the pins shaping(similar but different) and lengths,(could be just the angle of the pics though). Any thoughts on my observations?
I don't own any Spanish crosses, at sometime, I would like one to place on a prewar lw tunic, that I have, and I am assuming that the old adage comes to into play, buy known unquestionable acceptable types. Hence I ask the question on these type of crosses.
Just my thoughts, from a non Spanish cross collector, but I find the pin assembly and detail very convincing on this type of cross. If I had seen this for sale elsewhere, and there were no discussions on it, I would have comfortably brought it believing it original.

Cheers
Wayne

[Brian S]

I 'think' the unknown maker is real wartime. Attribute to a maker to prop up extra value is not intellectually honest to say the least.

[wayne gosley]

Brian,
Thanks for the reply, appreciated,
I think some of the comments, think that they are part of the early issue, would you concur with that line of thought?
Cheers
Wayne

[Legion Condor]

Hi,

are not stamped pieces are 100% original and in groups!
Very often the pieces come in bronze without swords in groups. Even with swords they are found in groups.

The Silver and Golden not so much.
I have a Golden from a group with 900 stamp and all records and all other badges. I doubt not that does not belong to a little piece to the group.

Whether it is Godet, you really can not say. But one must believe it.

Personally, I think it is good. One important reason is for me. The not so many companies in 1939 were allowed to deliver to the OKW. Godet allowed. Whether W & L could provide, I do not know!

I think that with L / 55 stamped piece of original, but not the stamp.

Greeting LC

Hans Günter

[wayne gosley]

Thank you also Hans for your input.
Cheers
Wayne

[Brian S]

Brian,
Thanks for the reply, appreciated,
I think some of the comments, think that they are part of the early issue, would you concur with that line of thought?
Cheers
Wayne

Probably. But I do not "have to believe" they are Godet when so many other manufacturers were indeed permitted to produce goods directly to the OKW.

If I were Godet I would have been thrilled that "our" crosses were the diamonds issued pieces. And that would have taken some time and effort to get those extra special correct. And WHY NOT USE THE SAME EAGLE??? It IS smaller look at the diamonds examples. Hans does not want to respond to that...

I won't argue incessantly in a thread. But I will repeat it whenever I see it so advertised in other threads.

[Legion Condor]

Hi Brian,

why must the eagle be?

The diamonds piece was something very special. It must not be made the eagle on the same tool!

You look only in one direction with the eagles.
The tool for normal pieces had to produce for every 5 variants to the eagle.
The tool may be true claimed for a perfect quality for brilliant eagle.

And the eagle for the diamonds pieces should be better in the details. I mean.
Even the hinge and everything was done fine.

It really is not easy to form an opinion, you can currently only speculate.

We will know one day, I'm sure!
I examine the time stamp of the two silver pieces. I compare it to what I can find all of Godet. Who knows, maybe I'll find something.

Best regards from the old Germany!

Greeting LC

Hans Günter

[Brian S]

Yes, Godet was very SHY about marking their pieces. So why mark the "unknown" with their name. Leave it a mystery like the Diamonds awards?

[Brian S]

And I don't know what you are talking about separate tools??? The eagles were applied independantly from the cross. And the eagles obviously a bit small for the oversized diamonds awards.

[Brian S]

Other than you want to believe it is Godet you have made no conclusive or substantive argument that is Godet.