French Tabatiere

[legrandmogol]

Thank you for the pronunciation, I was way off. and I know its not Puiforcat's mark just that the symbol looks similar

[clapel]

HI,
it's necessary to specify that the French tabatiere shows the official horse's head 2 mark, in use from August 1797 to 7 January 1798.
This mark is contemporary to the plaque d'insculpation an V, preserved at the Tresor Monnaie Museum, unique in its kind and mentioned by Arminjon in the introduction of Dictionnaire 1798-1838.
The marks depicted by Arminjon are instead those on the plaque d'insculpation de la Garantie activated following the Finance Administration Resolution 17 Snowy an VI (8 January 1798).
The two marks may by slightly different but always have a blackbird symbol and HEC letters and belong to an orfevre tabatier.

[blakstone]

Clapel, I am not entirely certain that I understand you correctly, but you seem to be saying that Carpentier had two nearly indentical marks with the same initials and symbol: one on the the insculpation plates of the year V and which is described by Douet, the other on the plates beginning with the law of 19 Brumaire an VI and which is illustrated in Arminjon. This is not correct.

The marks described in Douet’s Tableau des Symboles (Paris: the author, 1806) are the same as those illustrated in Arminjon. The title page of Douet clearly states that his tableau contains marks “insculpés en l’administration du Departement de la Seine, en la Préfecture de Police et en l’adminstration des Monnaies, depuis la Loi du 19 Brumaire an VI, jusqu’au 30 Septembre 1806” and his preface mentions the mandatory lozenge shape. The numbers Douet assigns the marks are taken from the plates at Préfecture de Police, and are cross-referenced in Arminjon. (Unfortunately, there is a conflict regarding the number of Carpentier’s mark: Douet has it as “287” whereas Arminjon has “267”. This is doubtless a printing error, though which is correct cannot be determined without access to the plates themselves.)

However, as Arminjon notes, the marks on the two plates of the year V conserved at the Musée de la Monnaie were not lozenge-shaped (which form was not mandated until 17 Nivôse VI [6 Jan 1798]), but rather followed the form of ancien régime marks. These two plates, with close-ups of all the marks, the names of the silversmiths and the dates of registry are shown in Jacques Helft’s Nouveaux Poinçons (Nancy: Berger-Levrault, 1980), pp. 85-96. Carpentier does not have a mark registered on these plates, nor is the mark on this tabatiere on them. Again: these marks are not lozenge-shaped.

Finally, while new guarantee marks were created with the decree of 19 Brumaire an VI (9 Nov 1797) as stated in Arminjon, the new Paris assay office was not established until 15 Prairial an VI [3 Jun 1798] (see Bulletin des lois 2:205:1862), and the new punches not received and used there until nearly three weeks later, on 1 Messidor an VI [19 Jun 1798] (see Bulletin des lois 2:209:1891.) So it is entirely possible that the lozenge-shaped maker’s marks could have appeared alongside the earlier guarantee marks of the year V for theoretically at least six months.

I have no doubt that a careful, mark-by-mark study of Arminjon would reveal the maker here, but I confess that even the tedium of quarantine has not yet inspired me to undertake the task.

Hope this helps!

[clapel]

Hi Blackstone,

The Monnaie's Museum preserves two plaques d'insculpation dated year V with the inscription "Table des Monnaie conformed a l'Arrete du Directoire executive du 21 brumaire an V" (published on Bull. 90 n ° 853 of 11November 1796). However Goldsmiths' records begin on 1 December 1796 and end on 31 July 1797.
Arminjon reports that these punches maintain the Ancien Regime shape and appearance without the royal insignia (crown and lily).

Again Arminjon, in another Dictionnaire paragraph, reports that the development of the Brumaire Law - probably from August 1797 - was in an advanced state and at that time the new lozenge-shaped mark for the Goldsmiths was decided, "comme temoigne la plaque, unique en son genre, d'insculpation des poinçons des fabricantes conservée dans le Tresor de la Monnaie " as evidenced by the goldsmith punches plaque, unique in its kind, preserved in the Treasury of the Monnaie.
This proof mark was officially and definitively resumed the following year 1798 ( Resolution 17 snowy year VI)

So the plaques that contain lozenge marks are:
1) Plaque an V Tresor Monnaie (August 1797 - January 7, 1798),
2) Plaques Garantie (January 8, 1798 - 1809),
3) Plaques Provinces (January 8, 1798 - 1809) .
The Tableau Douet reports Plaques Provinces Goldsmiths whose deposit times different from that of the Garantie (therefore the registration numbers may be different for the same Goldsmith)
The official punches sanglier 1 and cheval 2 are coeval with the plaque Tresor and therefore with the Goldsmith marks registered between August 1797 and January 7, 1798.
It’s possible that these marks are slightly differentiated from those after January 8 and it’s therefore plausible that Carpentier had an analogous symbol (blackbird) even if larger and in a different position.

[blakstone]

Clapel - Ah, now I follow you; I thought you were referencing the year V marks which are not recorded in Arminjon. The lozenge marks which appear on the single year V plate are duly noted in Arminjon; e.g., #2015, Jean-Michel-Joseph Soroge, #2066, Jean-Pierre- Nicolas Bibron or #2149, Jean Touchard. As Arminjon makes no reference to Carpentier having a mark on this earlier plate, I see no reason to speculate that he did. Occam's razor suggests that the mark on this tabatière is simply not Carpentier's.

[clapel]

Certainly Blakstone, we will continue to look for it both in Arminjon and in other ways. However the presence of the cheval 2’s mark next to a lozenge confirms that the tabatiere’s Orfevre must have deposited his punch in the period August 1797 - January 7, 1798. It’s also possible that the poinçon mentioned may have been deposited on another plaque of year V which has been lost and we will never find it.
I’m currently in quarantine and I don’t have the availability of the Dictionnaire Arminjon, whereas I am interested in Nouveaux Poinçons by J. Helft which is unavailable for me. I ask you, if it’s possible, to send me the pages 85-96 concerning the Orfevres of the plaques relating to Arrete 21 brumaire an V.
Many thanks and to hear from you.

[blakstone]

I am quarantined myself and do not have access to a scanner, but I will get the images to you as soon as I am able. I renew my observation that new guarantee marks did not begin use in Paris until 19 June 1798. I am therefore not as convinced as you that the second standard horse head could not have appeared with a maker's mark registered after 7 January 1798; it seems to me that it could between 8 January and 18 June 1798.

[clapel]

Thank you very much Blakstone, I am waiting, COVID 19 permitting.
As for the rest I am convinced that L. brumaire has activated the census (art.LXXXII) and replaced the official punches in force (sanglier 1 and cheval 2) with other new ones too if provisional (Coq A1 and 85 upside down: S8), as soon as made available by Monnaie. (art. XX). The time elapsed between the preparation of the new punches ( recence and officials) and their actual use is indicated by Resolution 7 January 1798. This extends the lozenge marks throughout France and starts the COQ period.
I have exposed these and other considerations in an article documented with photos from objects I own or from auctions and online sites.
I intend to propose a draft revision of the official marks from 1 December 1796 to 17 June 1798. Can it be interesting to publish it on the site ?.
At the moment the article is in Italian and should be translated into English by a specialist. We could publish it together with your collaboration and critical review of the proposals. Let me know what you think.

[clapel]

Hi Blacstone,

Could the tabatiere's silversmith be Jacques-Joseph EVRARD? Rue Dauphine 20. Symbol: une massue = a club?.

[JayT]

I’m not in this dialogue, but nonetheless decided to take a look at Evrard’s mark in Arminjon v. I, no. 01876, p. 202. I don’t think the mark posted could be his.

For once the mark pictured in Arminjon is quite clear. The massue is not in the same position as the symbol on the mark shown by the OP. The massue has a straight outline, not curved. Furthermore the initials of the mark posted do not resemble two Js. Although there might be a third initial in the example shown, it is not clear to me that a third initial exists.

Perhaps you’re trying to make a shoe fit that really isn’t the right size.

[dognose]

Ah... an excuse to post one of my favourite Sherlock Holmes quotes:

It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.

Source: A Scandal in Bohemia - Arthur Conan Doyle

Trev.

[JayT]

Useful reminder Trev. Thanks!

[clapel]

You're right Trev, in facts Albert Einstein's theory of relativity is not yet fully proven after more than 100 years and Guglielmo Marconi has theorized the radio waves having observed them. I only made a hypothesis and a request for verification on the Dictionnaire Arminjon not having it available due to quarantine.

[dognose]

Hi clapel,

Please do not think I am being dismissive of your research, quite the contrary, your input is very important for it is only because of such input that we have debate here on the forum, and the truth, hopefully with concrete evidence, will finally be revealed.

Trev.

[johi]

...and the truth, hopefully with concrete evidence, will finally be revealed.

Unfortunately I still haven't made any progress with my tabatiere.

Ragards
Jo

[bijoux.expert]

Hello,
I've done a lot of research into the "unofficial or assay hallmarks" of which the horse's head mark is one. Although certain references have claimed they were used between 1795-1798, this is not in fact true. I've found them on articles made a good deal later, in some cases of Restoration style which simply didn't exist in 1798. It is quite possible that this case was made around 1820 and shipped directly to Italy, which would explain why it's one of the very few examples I've seen where the unofficial mark is not accompanied by official French hallmarks. I've included an excerpt of the chapter on these hallmarks from my hallmarks book :

According to some references, following the inevitable abuse of precious metal standards after the Revolution, members of the former Parisian goldsmiths’ guild created hallmarks to certify their production. These hallmarks are even said to have been introduced between 1793 and 1798, however the author of this book has not been able to find a single source for these dates. Although the idea that the Corporation wanted to certify the production of its members while awaiting the introduction of an official hallmarking system in 1798 is attractive, the articles found with these hallmarks are virtually always found marked with official hallmarks from 1798 to 1838 as well. Moreover, some of the pieces marked in this way have been found with maker’s marks that were not registered until after 1798 [18]. Finally, silverware of unquestioned Empire and Restoration style and manufacture (therefore after 1798) and even a pocket watch made by Breguet and shown in their records as having been sold new in 1820 are known to bear these hallmarks. It seems, therefore, that some other explanation must be found for these marks, which do not appear in any official documents.
Before the Revolution, goldsmiths could take their work in rough form, or even in pieces to be assembled, to the assayer of their guild for testing and hallmarking. Once the piece was finished, it was taken back to be struck with a discharge mark after the taxes were paid. After 1798, however, it became obligatory to bring the work to the assay office in its entirety, with a real risk of damage from the assayers taking samples for testing. Moreover, works have been found bearing these unofficial hallmarks in places that would not have been accessible for stamping after assembly18. It has been suggested that these hallmarks may have been stamped by private assayers at the request of goldsmiths who wished to be certain of the standard of their metal before presentation18.
But assays are expensive, and no one likes to pay for them twice.
Some experts have put forward the idea that these hallmarks were simply prestige hallmarks, stamped by members of the old Goldsmiths’ Corporation to distinguish their works from those of other, and perhaps less experienced, manufacturers.
Another hypothesis is that goldsmiths, frustrated by the damage inflicted on their finished works by the assay offices, had the option of presenting their works and their unfinished elements for assay, having them marked with a distinctive hallmark, and then taking them back to the assay office after completion to pay duties and receive the official hallmarks. Examples of these marks were found by the author on a hallmark recognition plate, accompanied by other official hallmarks dating from 1798, which argues for their creation by the official government engraver Augustin Dupré and for an at least semi-official backing of these hallmarks. In the absence of a confirmed explanation concerning the use of these hallmarks, they should best be considered as assay marks, as had already been proposed by Arminjon and Chalabi.
Only the assay marks for Paris are illustrated here, although assay marks have been found for some other cities. The exact dates of use of these marks are unknown.

French Precious Metal Hallmarks, published in English August 2024

[bijoux.expert]

The horse's head hallmark can be found on items stamped with the hallmarks used between 1819-1838; it appears to be an assay mark and while it does not appear on lists of official hallmarks, examples can be found on a hallmark recognition plate in the French National Library.