Georg Jensen Marks Confusing On Old Pendant

[Buttrflygrl617]

Hello,
I am hoping that there's a person that is very knowledgeable with Jensen that can clear up the actual date of my pendant. I have had several different people state the piece as made 1917-1925 and others as post-1945. I am aware that this design of crucifix/celtic cross was an early creation of Jensen representing the Arts & Crafts era. I have seen it dating back to that time as mine appears all sterling and then some with Garnet & Moonstones replacing the sterling balls. The design is always # 29 and some are 830 and others S925. Were there pieces later hallmarked reflecting the marks shown on my pendant or did Jensen designers re-make some of his earlier designs? Any help would be appreciated in my search for the true date that my piece was made. Thank you so much for your time.
Jamie

[AG2012]

Wrong marks.
On the right not seen on GJ silver.
Dotted oval on the left should be in raised lettering.
Never used together.
29 was design number for the cross with turquoise cabochons, but 29A was assigned much later to Anne Ammitzbøll jewelry. I doubt they would use the same design number again.
Very interested to hear other member of the forum.

[AG2012]

The cross is hollow, meaning marks cannot be struck on finished piece for obvious reason. Struck on back plate and then soldered. Two tiny holes vent heated air when soldering.Much work but extremely lucrative GJ, worth faking.

[Buttrflygrl617]

Thank you for the information. I am the 3rd owner of the Jensen piece and I know the 2nd owner and the original owner and family estate which it came. They are extremely very well known in the US and NC with jewelry and sterling pieces that one could only dream to have. I just don't see a person with an extensive jewelry and sterling collection that wears extravagant Cartier and Tiffany pieces as their everyday casual jewelry buying anything second hand much less fake. Nothing is impossible but it's very doubtful this is a fake. It came in the red Jensen box marked NY and the family kept a home in Manhattan so it's possible that it was purchased in NYC. I'm hoping there's another explanation for the hallmarking and one of the marks looks very much like the mark that was used around the 1930's on non-jewelry. Could it be possible that Anne Ammitzbøll brought the piece back during her time with Jensen?
Thank you again

[AG2012]

The provenance is important. The question is whether the cross was bought in NYC retail store before WWII, which I doubt based on the marks, or after 1945 when GJ disavowed all association with its New York retail store and the New York shop began contracting and selling American-made "Jensen style" works under Lunning's newly formed company, Georg Jensen USA.
The combination of marks and the mark on the right are not seen on GJ. A very reliable reference is needed to prove this set of mark is genuine GJ Denmark piece.

Let`s wait for responses by other members of the forum.
The discussion here (my GJ match case):
viewtopic.php?t=29443
Regards

[MyThoughtsExactly]

I know this has been forever since you asked, but I just now saw it. Your images are no longer available.

On to your "S925" Most people believe that the "S" means it's from China. But, I've read it can also mean Scandinavia, which would imply Jensen. However, I haven't seen anything definitive on it being Scandinavian. Just remarks here & there. I would love to know for sure!!

Does anyone know, 100%, not 92.5% (I had to, LOL), if S925 designates only China. And, if not, what else does it signify?

FYI Jensen actually began with .825, gradually rising to .925 by 1930.

However, prior to the 1970's, when the period was officially dropped in the UK & US* (925 is now being adopted worldwide as a substitute for "sterling"), it was always stamped ".925" That little period says A LOT. Since I can't see your photos, I don't know if there is a period. From what you wrote, there isn't.

Extra 925 info:

"925" has been used in America since the 1850's. *Many people think 925 or .925 is something new. I often hear "since the 1970's." You can see above where this confusion came from. In other countries (though now 925 is being adopted worldwide) & in the US & UK, prior to 1906, "Sterling" was subjective. There was no legal standard. You can find the article here in Resources that has the Act that made "sterling" "ster" etc refer only to the silver standard. Which here & the UK is 925 of 1000 parts silver, or .925 or 92.5% Some say the act also made ".925" a requirement. But, as you see from all the silver pieces only marked with some form of "sterling" that you know is newer than 1906, this isn't true. There's no where in the Act that even refers to "925."

For newbies; pure silver is soft, difficult to work with, and will nick & dent very easily. The remaining 75/1000 is usually nickel, or a combination of hard alloys.

*Nickel allergies, this is why many people, including myself, have allergic reactions to anything below 14 or 18K gold and 925 silver. The lower the gold or silver content, the higher the nickel...

If I have anything wrong here, I'd appreciate kind corrections., I've done extensive research, but would not say I'm an expert.

[MyThoughtsExactly]

Whoops!! So sorry! S925 is China. 925S is Scandinavia!