An original Gahr necklace. Is this mine? If only
..................
..................
-
-
I remember - either this shown example or another identical piece - from an auction in the USA a few years ago.
It was offered for 12,5K but nobody took the chance back then if I am not mistaken. -
Here are the pics of the piece I am refering to - probably identical with the one on top of this thread.
A weird looking stamp, though...Comment
-
And the chain is definitely not the authentic one as well...Comment
-
Furthermore the original Gahr necklace is simply more massive in all details of it´s construction and outward appearance.
And the visable stamp with a silver content of "830" is wrong as well - original Gahr pieces NEVER had a silver content of 830.
Bottom line: The shown "Gahr necklace" at the top of this thread is a fake.
Comment
-
that silversmith book is the biggest piece of **** out there...I am not saying 100% the piece is good or not, only that there were others made and in different variations.
. Gahr produced pieces in all different silver contents depending on what kind of hardness of silver was needed.
There is a similar piece from a collector/dealer in the US that has had it for many years before the book even came out.
Since there isn't a catalog of Gahrs work who knows what is what anyway...Comment
-
]Originally posted by Gaspare View Post
The pieces are rare enough that there is very littlle to compare it to, but your right and the piece could have a chain difference and the marking is similar to another known piece which is not all that massive either. Difficult material but could be legit but being that its jewelry can vary to end user personal taste. Not aware of a definitive referance other than Schild but i doubt that covers the possibilities.Comment
-
As everyone can see the Gahr necklace we are talking about here is pictured in a period article about the Gahr firm - and the differences in quality and detail to the necklace starting this thread are huge!Originally posted by Gaspare View Post
Do you have any pics of an original Gahr piece with a silver content of 830 and could you share them here?
I would love to see that.
Comment
-
yes,the necklace is different than whats in the book. There could have been a 10 , 15 year difference from when the 2 pieces were made. Could be a wartime piece? Gahr was already dead a while by the time the war started so who knows what was coming out of there for the public to buy...
Small pieces did not have to be content marked. So unless you hve a jeweler that can tell you the difference between 800, 830, and even 850. good luck with that.
I have seen and know the owner of a pair of 800 silver marked cufflinks [S shaped with black enamel] that are in a 900 Gahr marked silver case...
Most of the unmarked small tactile silver pieces , clasps, pins, rings etc. were 800,830,etc.Comment
-
So you agree that is not a good sign?As everyone can see the Gahr necklace we are talking about here is pictured in a period article about the Gahr firm - and the differences in quality and detail to the necklace starting this thread are huge!Comment
-
Gahr was not dead during the war.Originally posted by Gaspare View Post
And please feel free to show me one single original Gahr piece with a silver content of 830 - just one, please.Comment
-
oh, I'm sorry, hate to put a man in his grave before his time! I thought he was dead by 1937. I stand corrected then..
One thing I can tell you for sure is,,small pieces didn't have to be marked. Many pieces out there that are unmarked are in fact 800, 830, 835 etc.
That you haven't seen a Gahr piece marked in that fashion means nothing,,you haven't seen one,,thats that.. Anyone could rattle off 5 German jewelers of the period and you haven't seen a piece marked 830,,doesn't mean there isn't any with the marks out there...Comment
-
Necklace
The picture in the thread was sent to me by Don Boyle, and is an actual photograph of the item. It's not from a publication. I took a dig. photo of that photo. I'm not saying the piece is authentic. I assumed it probably was, considering the source.Comment
-
well there is no real way of knowing 100%. Only way would be to debase the hallamark which is possible...Comment
-
Comment