Spanish Cross Question

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

Wanted to ask if there is anyone out there who knows why or how a documented awardee of the Spanish Cross in Gold, would end up with a Spanish Cross in Silver? Reason: I have acquired a CEJ silver with swords (800 marked) that exhibits what I feel is a period engraving on the reverse, documenting the piece to a Spanish Cross in Gold winner. The engraving seems period to me, but the fact that the award does not "match" the records I have found on the recipient, make me wonder. The recipient is Karl heinz Krahl (later awarded the Knights Cross). Please excuse the lack of photos - I just purchased a Macbook, and am having trouble with Photoshop. I will forward photos to Stan, and maybe he would be kind enough to post them here. Thanks!

Edited September 26, 2011 by Craig Gottlieb

[Scott]

A long shot, but perhaps it's a gold cross that's been heavily cleaned or polished down to the sliver base?

[Stan]

Here are the photos which Craig has asked me to post for him. It seems like a very nice silver CEJ.

Stan

Edited May 30, 2009 by Stan

[Stan]

One more.

Stan

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

Thank you, Stan. Scott: I do see a hint of gold behind the wings on the eagles, and in a couple other places, but I had assumed that was some type of tarnish. Honestly, it had never occured to me that your hypothesis might be a good explanation, but it does make sense. I may have been thinking too legalistically - hoping for some neat "regulatory" explanation for this. If it is cleaned, someone did a great job of it. Has anyone ever seen a gold example with this much finish gone?

[dond]

Lets see a pic of the front.

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

I'll be glad to take one. It's a rainy day here in Southern California, and I am on the way into the office. I will post shortly. Wait, I just found one, but seem only to be able to publish 70k photos, so I emailed the photo to Stan again. Thanks, Stan!

Edited May 30, 2009 by Craig Gottlieb

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

Stan will post the photo soon. What I can't figure out is whether or not this piece is a) an elaborate forgery on a real piece, or b) a very interesting piece of history with a couple of mysteries thrown in. The dates on the reverse commemorate the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939), Krahl's birthday (in 1914) and then his 24th birthday in 1938! The weird thing is that the Spanish Cross wasn't instituted until April 14, 1939. One might tend to dismiss the piece out of hand because the engraving doesn't make sense. However, anyone who would go to the trouble of getting a really nice silver cross, and then engraving it so nicely . . . I would expect them to make an engraving that would make more sense and therefore draw fewer questions. It's a strange piece that has befuddled me since I got it. At any rate, I am just thinking out loud here. Looking forward to some good (and if need be very critical) analysis of this piece.

Edited May 30, 2009 by Craig Gottlieb

[Ulsterman]

Well, I for one would be very grateful as to why you think that is a pre-1945 engraving style.

The block letter style I have seen on 1960s era vets pieces and indeed, on sports medals.

Can you provide details as to:

1. where this piece came from and

2. other similar engraving styles from accepted pieces?

KARL HEINZ KRAHL BADGE (for future google reference).

Thanks-

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

Unfortunately, the piece has no reputable provenance. I bought it from a collector who usually supplies me with good material. So while I wish I could give a bullet-proof "out of the woodwork" answer, such an answer is not forthcoming. As for the engraving, I was happy with its style, but would welcome criticism of it. I did send it off to a couple of dealers/collectors that I respect, but I would rather let the piece stand on its own (or fall on its own) than name-drop. Under magnification, the engraving is done entirely by hand, and the script exhibits multiple grooves inside the engraving strokes (I think I count two within the valleys of the lettering).

Edited May 30, 2009 by Craig Gottlieb

[922F]

Engraving characters for birth date do not match style of other dates [figures "9", "1", and others]. Whether this means anything may be moot.

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

You are right - I just noticed that the "9" does not always show a serif. The magnification does show it was executed using the same hand - that "double" engraving line in the depth of each stroke. Also, the letters were executed using "dashes" almost - I can see where the tool started and stopped - 8 or 9 times in a character.

[Guest Rick Research]

"anyone who would go to the trouble of getting a really nice silver cross, and then engraving it so nicely..."

People ARE stupid. Criminals are even MORE stupid, because they think they are smarter than the stupid people. That unfortunately is often true.

"rather let the piece stand on its own (or fall on its own) than name-drop."

A VERY good idea.

This is the sort of overly "elaborate" (in details) and yet woefully clumsily done amateurish work that unless provenance was iron clad I would regard as DAMAGE rather than "attribution" and deduct significantly. Nice for a uniform where the back doesn't show.

Though I'm sure someone will quite happily buy it anyway.

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

Then I will not sell it with any value added for the attribution. I guess it's a nice uniform piece, and that's all.

[Naxos]

... This is the sort of overly "elaborate" (in details) and yet woefully clumsily done amateurish work that unless provenance was iron clad I would regard as DAMAGE ..

I second that.

... besides, what's with the crosses between the dates in addition to the dots, 25.+9.+1914? The dots are sufficient. Crosses in dates (at the beginning) are used to indicate KIA.

[Guest Rick Research]

Hey-- why "practice" on something first when Monkey Paws can rush right in and ruin an original with previous actual value?

People are ..............

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

Yes, good observation on the dates and use of "crosses" rather than "periods."

[Tom Y]

Even if I collected TR I wouldn't touch it. I can't believe it's ever seen any gold. The gold color is definitely toning as you can see from the backs of the eagles. I've seen the same thing in silver coins. It would take dental tools to remove gilding from the stamps on the back. The toning on the engraving doesn't match that on the rest of the piece. All in all, if it is an original some greedy buffoon has ruined it.

[Guest Rick Research]

I don't usually pay attention to such things, but what would the general opinion be on something that had been deliberately damaged like this--

deduct 50% of the value of an unmolested piece? It's that, at least, with Soviet awards that have been retro-fitted or otherwise "improved." At least it still looks OK from the front, which isn't always the case with Soviet alterations.

In many ways, this is actually WORSE than say an Order with badly chipped enamel, because that would be accidental, age, neglect... but with this sort of deliberately deceptive "enhancement" that cannot be undone--forever....

I'd think at least 50% off the top, since it is only good now as a so-called "display" piece. A "filler." One LESS Out There of original as-issued pieces. A piece that will forevermore need to be warned against for every new generation of owners as even more living memory of what was and was not typical period German work fades away.

Reminds me of a long ago and far away "debate" over Spanish Crosses which were having the swords chopped off by a particular seller to "improve" them into the more expensive versions without. So many busy little monkey fingers whittling away at what is LEFT.

Always sad to see something rare and beautiful (the silver craftsmanship not the Nazi symbols) ruined.

The GOOD thing is, with the internet and the instant global community of collectors, with these scans, if somebody down the road decides to chisel out the excessive, over the top all over the place engraving and pass it off as "POW camp de-personalized," we'll all have these images in our files to compare as it is now--thanks. Collectors who have to watch their money have VERY long memories.

We've seen that happen many times on eBay with German medal bars being torn apart and reassembled, so it is always good for people all over the world to have visual records of Befores and Afters.

[Scott]

This is the sort of overly "elaborate" (in details) and yet woefully clumsily done amateurish work that unless provenance was iron clad I would regard as DAMAGE rather than "attribution" and deduct significantly. Nice for a uniform where the back doesn't show.

I'd tend to agree with Rick here. And also agree that it appears the cross is silver with a bit of tarnish. Would still like to see the front to see if it matches the markings on the back.

Jacques might be invited to comment on this one as well - he has a keen eye for Spanish Crosses.

Edited June 1, 2009 by Scott

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

I sent some photos of to Stan to post for me. They should be posted sometime tomorrow. Sorry for the delay!

[Guest WAR LORD]

There are a number of things that would cause me concerns. The engraving, for all the very good points allready raised. This would be enough to devalue the piece if original. However, I have concerns over the cross its self. I would want to see the front to be more reasured. The reverse shows singns of pimpling, this is not a good sign, also the silver grade 900, the silver CJ piece I have is 835. Very good copies of these were made in the mid 80's and this could be just such a piece with some GREAT INHANCEMENTS.

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

Chris, thank you for the comments. I will get a close-up photo of the front sent off to Stan for posting this AM (I meant to do it yesterday). In your experience, have you ever seen a reproduction with the "convex" runic button? I have never seen one before - they are always flat in my experience. However, I would be totally open to learning about a "convex" button repro. That has always been my "quick" ID point when evaluating a Spanish Cross. As a funny side-note, about 5 years ago, I bought a HUGE collection that was littered with a lot of fake medals, and in evaluating the collection, I astonished my helper (a guy I'd flown down with me to help me sort through all of the crates) by going through the 20 or so Spanish Crosses in about 1 minute flat. I just tossed those with a "flat" swastika button, and picked only those with convex buttons as real. I had always thought it was a sure-fire way to tell, but now I may have to reconsider.

[Stan]

Craig has now sent me the photo of the obverse to post for him but not as an attachment so I cannot post it.

What I would say is that in my opinion this is a 100% genuine Silver version CEJ "900" Spanish Cross. I will post the photo when I receive it in a better form.

Stan

Edited June 2, 2009 by Stan

[Guest Craig Gottlieb]

As an aside, is there any advice for posting larger than 70mb photos? I hate to run up my beer tab with Stanley.

Edited June 1, 2009 by Craig Gottlieb