Assay and Maker Marks

[alemsche]

Hello

I need help for this Marks ..



thx

alemsche

[AG2012]

Nikolay Nikitin, 1845-1874
(Николай НИКИТИН)
Peterburg

[Qrt.S]

Alternatively Henrik Hacklin 1846-1879, Nikitin was active 1845-1874.The question is which one is it, NIkitin or Hacklin? I don't know. The assayer AM is Aleksandr Mitin in St Petersburg 1852-1877.

[Dad]

The assayer AM is Aleksandr Mitin in St Petersburg 1852-1877.

Dear Qrt.S, you already shall write down somewhere above the desktop that Alexander Nikolaevich Mitin died in 1848. No need to disturb the dead every time.))

[Qrt.S]

OK, sorry Dad, it is noted and written down. I shall not disturb Mitin anymore, but there is always the same problem in many sources with Mitin, how about Moor then? Maybe you could tell us when Mitin assayed and when Moor ? I would appreciate that?
Moreover, can you as well separate Nikitin from Hacklin?
Thank you in advance.

[Dad]

You are Wellcome.

Mitin Worked in the St. Petersburg assay office from 1823 to 1848. During this period, products in St. Petersburg were branded with the initials of the managers: АЯ (Yashinkov), МК (Karpinsky) and ДТ (Tverskoy).
Thus, I have never seen Mitin's marks.

Alexander Mor worked in the St. Petersburg assay office from 1849 to 1866. During this period, all the hallmarks "АМ" belong to him.

[Qrt.S]

Thank you,

I suddenly remembered these old threads that I had forgotten (sorry about that):
https://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopi ... or#p182756
I never got an answer to my question i.e. who is who? The pictures are soot marks from Bäcksbacka's book. I would appreciate some comments with clarifications. Use the search function and you will find that this has been discussed before, unfortunately with a rather poor result and partly "contradictory" opinions.
I am a bit bit busy right now, I try revert to this tomorrow when possible.
I never got an answer to my question i.e. who is who etc.? The pictures are soot marks from Bäcksbacka's book.

[Ubaranda]

Mitin Worked in the St. Petersburg assay office from 1823 to 1848. During this period, products in St. Petersburg were branded with the initials of the managers: АЯ (Yashinkov), МК (Karpinsky) and ДТ (Tverskoy).
Thus, I have never seen Mitin's marks.

Hello!
I have two additions.
1. Assayer Leonty Kaminsky (marked as Л.К) worked in St. Petersburg in 1831-1832.
2. I have the mark of the assayer A.M 1832. Most likely this is the mark of Alexander Mitin.
Regards.

[Qrt.S]

In Bäcksbacka there is an assayer's ordinary soot mark AM 1830 on p. 21. It is named Aleksandr Jakovlitj Mor, but I belive it is Mitin's mark. Anyway, if there is a soot mark, it must have been taken from a genuine mark. This whole Mitin/Mor case is an actual mess. I shall try to summarize what have been written regarding the working periods and who is who in the threads about in the threads mentioned assayers. It might take a while, but then we can evaluate what is correct and what is not.

There is as well two another nameless soot marks in Bäcksbacka showing ДК 1831 and 32. Who is that ???

Moreover,

Alexander Mor worked in the St. Petersburg assay office from 1849 to 1866. During this period, all the hallmarks "АМ" belong to him.

1866?? Bäcksbacka shows AM soot marks to 1877 ??? Note, that if there is a soot mark there must have been an original mark for obvious reasons, so???? I have asked this question before a few years ago , but never got an answer. May I have one now, than you!

[Qrt.S]

Sorry, AM 1831 on p.21.

[Dad]

Hello!
I have two additions.
1. Assayer Leonty Kaminsky (marked as Л.К) worked in St. Petersburg in 1831-1832.
2. I have the mark of the assayer A.M 1832. Most likely this is the mark of Alexander Mitin.
Regards.

I will probably upset you, but this is not 1832, but 1852. You were deceived by the effect of a bad photograph. It happens. If you had the object, it would be clear that this is 1852 and Alexander Mor..

[Dad]

John, I'll probably upset you too.
I don't know who is Bäcksbacka. Maybe you have him in Sweden and an authority on the Russian assay offisers. But in Russia they don't know about it. Therefore, I cannot comment on his fantasies. I don't know where he taken his pictures from. I can draw too.

[Qrt.S]

@Dad
Well, I will upset you too. By the way, I am in Finland not in Sweden. If you don't know Leonard Bäcksbacka and if you don't know how soot marks are made then shame on you. I strongly suggest that you look it up. I know where from he has taken his pictures, i.e. from punches on original objects. Moreover, the marks in famous Postnikova are all soot mark punches. Did she draw them? You, seems to be out like the mailbox regarding soot marks. What a pity. Hereinafter I must deeply consider what you write, it might be fantasies too!

[Dad]

Do not be offended Qrt, for Finland. I was deceived by the surname with dots above the "a".
Accept or not my statements is your right. But, I dare to assure you that I am much closer to the sources of knowledge than your idol.

[Qrt.S]

I'm offended be sure of that. Yes you are physically closer to sources, but in today's life distance in not a problem what so ever. In addition, talking about fantasies was not a particularly smart move especially not from you.

[Ubaranda]

I will probably upset you, but this is not 1832, but 1852. You were deceived by the effect of a bad photograph. It happens. If you had the object, it would be clear that this is 1852 and Alexander Mor..

Hi Dad!
Unfortunately I don't have the item itself. But compare the assay marks on the attached photos. The number "3" looks exactly the same.

[Qrt.S]

@Ubaranda,
Coincidentally, here you have your requested photo (last photo) of my unknown assayer's punch ДК 1832 in the other thread. Who is he?

[Ubaranda]

This is badly punched mark Л.К of Leonty Kaminsky.

[Qrt.S]

@Ubaranda
Really??? The Л looks looks like Д, but if you say it is Kaminsky, so be it. Thank you.

[Dad]

Hi Dad!
Unfortunately I don't have the item itself. But compare the assay marks on the attached photos. The number "3" looks exactly the same.

When I was young, the newspapers would publish blurry pictures of anythink and claim it was the monster of Loch Ness. But, I haven't seen clear pictures yet.((
Your "AM" is, of course, A. Mor. Such a stamp "84" is not typical for the 1830s. Let's Compare. For example, I suggest looking at a set of hallmarks with the same manufacturer, but with a clear year.



On the next set of stamps, we even see the same defect on the punch "84":