Hi -
found this nice set - but can not find the maker MY. Assayer: Dubrovin, Nikolaj L. 1822-1855. Both Moscow.
Any help welcome!
Regards
Goldstein
Spoon & Fork
Re: Spoon & Fork
@Goldstein
Nikolay Dubrovin!? To my knowledge his punch was Н·Д. On the assayer's mark you show I see A·K and he is Andrey Kovalsky 1821(2?)-1856 in Moscow. The maker's mark is not MY but МЧ (Latin MCh) But never mind, maybe you are not familiar with the Cyrillic alphabet or have a broken keyboard. Unfortunately the maker is unknown to name.
Nikolay Dubrovin!? To my knowledge his punch was Н·Д. On the assayer's mark you show I see A·K and he is Andrey Kovalsky 1821(2?)-1856 in Moscow. The maker's mark is not MY but МЧ (Latin MCh) But never mind, maybe you are not familiar with the Cyrillic alphabet or have a broken keyboard. Unfortunately the maker is unknown to name.
Re: Spoon & Fork
Hi Ubaranda -
many thanks for the name of the silversmith! Was longtime searching him - made very nice spoons!
The wrong assayer was my fault - took the wrong line...but you can not edit a mistakeon this forum.
And Qrt.S is always happy when he has something to say...
Regards
Goldstein
many thanks for the name of the silversmith! Was longtime searching him - made very nice spoons!
The wrong assayer was my fault - took the wrong line...but you can not edit a mistakeon this forum.
And Qrt.S is always happy when he has something to say...
Regards
Goldstein
Re: Spoon & Fork
@Goldstein,
I'm not happy at all. On the country very sad when I see incorrect information spread by especially you because I know you know much better. The problem, however, is that incorrect information is easily forwarded on a forum like this and in the long run it suddenly becomes the truth. That is a real problem!
The son Anton was active before 1852 to 1897, maybe a bit later. The father Mihailo is "mentioned" 1852 having in 1860 5 workers. This means that his exact working period is not known. For some for me unknown reason Ivanov mentions very often "....in 1852...". The reason might be that as very well known lots of documents were destroyed around 1874 as "unnecessary and only space taking in the archives...". Maybe something was left i the archive regarding the year 1852? Nonetheless,today we have to live with that deplorable mistake made in the past. We simply don't know it all and that is why I sometimes use the expression "....it might/could be..." hated by Goldstein.
I hope I made myself clear now.
I'm not happy at all. On the country very sad when I see incorrect information spread by especially you because I know you know much better. The problem, however, is that incorrect information is easily forwarded on a forum like this and in the long run it suddenly becomes the truth. That is a real problem!
Those spoons (АЧ) are made by Anton , not Mihailo (МЧ)Goldstein wrote:Hi -
here some more from this maker - the dates vary very much against the Ivanov listing...explanation?
The son Anton was active before 1852 to 1897, maybe a bit later. The father Mihailo is "mentioned" 1852 having in 1860 5 workers. This means that his exact working period is not known. For some for me unknown reason Ivanov mentions very often "....in 1852...". The reason might be that as very well known lots of documents were destroyed around 1874 as "unnecessary and only space taking in the archives...". Maybe something was left i the archive regarding the year 1852? Nonetheless,today we have to live with that deplorable mistake made in the past. We simply don't know it all and that is why I sometimes use the expression "....it might/could be..." hated by Goldstein.
I hope I made myself clear now.
Re: Spoon & Fork
Hi -
in PL # 2216-2218 and # 2257 you can read who is who!
Regards
Goldstein
in PL # 2216-2218 and # 2257 you can read who is who!
Regards
Goldstein
Re: Spoon & Fork
Why? Ubaranda has already told us that in pure English:
Ubaranda wrote:Hi all!
The maker is Michail Tchevarsin (Михаил Чеварзин), the father of wellknown Moscow silversmith Anton Tchevarsin.
Best regards!
Re: Spoon & Fork
Hi -
Why?
Because that is the/a source!
Regards
Goldstein
Why?
Because that is the/a source!
Regards
Goldstein