Pair of silver cuff bracelets from where, when, by whom?
Pair of silver cuff bracelets from where, when, by whom?
This is one of two identical cuff bracelets. I am interested to find out who the maker was, and when and where they were made. The main markings are on the inner surface, but the reverse R is also on the outside on the ridge and can be seen in the second photo. What does each of these marks mean? These are quite heavy at just over 150g each.
cuff bracelets
It appears to me the first mark is the Tughra marked used in the Ottoman Empire (Turkey pre-1928). Sorry I can't help with the other marks, but I believe you now have a starting point.
rojo531
rojo531
Hi,
I don't thing the far left mark is the Ottoman tughra, unless it is a far more simplistic version than I have ever seen documented. The bracelet is a Bedouin style from western Egypt and beyond and the two circular marks on the right bear some relation to marks from Tunisia. I have never seen Libyan marks and I wonder if these might be examples.
Regards, Tom
I don't thing the far left mark is the Ottoman tughra, unless it is a far more simplistic version than I have ever seen documented. The bracelet is a Bedouin style from western Egypt and beyond and the two circular marks on the right bear some relation to marks from Tunisia. I have never seen Libyan marks and I wonder if these might be examples.
Regards, Tom
I have looked up tughra on Wikipedia which gives a lot of detail about this symbol. There are definite similarities in the overall shape. Also I did think that the bracelets are Egyptian Bedouin. However any I have seen on the internet are much cruder and the engraving a lot coarser. Any ideas about the reverse 'R'?
Hi,
I find this piece and its marks have really intrigued me, so I have spent a lot of time reviewing whatever marks I could find on Saharan Africa.
Rojo is right, I stand corrected on the far left mark, it certainly is a simplified version of the tughra. The two circular far left marks are very similar to examples of city/standard marks used in many North Africa states in the 19th century.
In the image below, I've reoriented the marks to enable better comparison and added in a Turkish tughra.
What I now believe you have is a pre 1906 Egyptian marked piece. Egypt was still, at least nominally, under Ottoman control at the time, so the tughra supports this. I think the reverse R mark is really a B and is probably the maker's stamp.
The bracelet is a finer example than most I have seen, this may be because it is of earlier vintage than most on the market. Please keep in mind that all of the above is theoretical, I have never been able to find documented examples of older Egyptian marks.
Regards, Tom
I find this piece and its marks have really intrigued me, so I have spent a lot of time reviewing whatever marks I could find on Saharan Africa.
Rojo is right, I stand corrected on the far left mark, it certainly is a simplified version of the tughra. The two circular far left marks are very similar to examples of city/standard marks used in many North Africa states in the 19th century.
In the image below, I've reoriented the marks to enable better comparison and added in a Turkish tughra.
What I now believe you have is a pre 1906 Egyptian marked piece. Egypt was still, at least nominally, under Ottoman control at the time, so the tughra supports this. I think the reverse R mark is really a B and is probably the maker's stamp.
The bracelet is a finer example than most I have seen, this may be because it is of earlier vintage than most on the market. Please keep in mind that all of the above is theoretical, I have never been able to find documented examples of older Egyptian marks.
Regards, Tom
Hi,
This is a classic Siwa bracelet which was made for Egyptian Western Desert Bedouins and other Bedouins as far along the North African Coast as Morrocco.
The "B" means it was stamped during 1927-1928 when Egypt was under British Empire rule. Latin Letters were used upto 1939 then Arabic letters were used from 1940 upwards. This Bracelet is a Mohamed Mekkawi style and was probably made by his father or Grand father as the style was handed down from Father to son.
Also, there is no Tara (Tughra) denoting Ottoman rule in there. This is not a Tughra, it is the Silversmiths name written in Arabic Caligraphy. Ottomans simply used Arabic Caligraphy to write their own emblems hence causing non-Arabic people to think that the Tughra is a sign or emblem rather than what it really is: Arabic writing in Caligraphic style.
The stamp Image is upside down and reads as such:
Left to right: A tara-like (Tughra) stamp with the silver smiths name in it: "Ameen" in Arabic Caligraphy.
Then an upside down Latin letter "B" denoting a stamp date of 1927-1928. Then two smaller hallmarks with the silversmiths name "Ameen" written in them again.
It was customary to have so many hallmarks most with the Silversmiths name and this tradition was carried on to Mekkawis time.
Egyptian Silver hallmarks were impossible to obtain or decode until very recently hence the delay in response.
This is a classic Siwa bracelet which was made for Egyptian Western Desert Bedouins and other Bedouins as far along the North African Coast as Morrocco.
The "B" means it was stamped during 1927-1928 when Egypt was under British Empire rule. Latin Letters were used upto 1939 then Arabic letters were used from 1940 upwards. This Bracelet is a Mohamed Mekkawi style and was probably made by his father or Grand father as the style was handed down from Father to son.
Also, there is no Tara (Tughra) denoting Ottoman rule in there. This is not a Tughra, it is the Silversmiths name written in Arabic Caligraphy. Ottomans simply used Arabic Caligraphy to write their own emblems hence causing non-Arabic people to think that the Tughra is a sign or emblem rather than what it really is: Arabic writing in Caligraphic style.
The stamp Image is upside down and reads as such:
Left to right: A tara-like (Tughra) stamp with the silver smiths name in it: "Ameen" in Arabic Caligraphy.
Then an upside down Latin letter "B" denoting a stamp date of 1927-1928. Then two smaller hallmarks with the silversmiths name "Ameen" written in them again.
It was customary to have so many hallmarks most with the Silversmiths name and this tradition was carried on to Mekkawis time.
Egyptian Silver hallmarks were impossible to obtain or decode until very recently hence the delay in response.
Hello hrmlk,
Welcome to the forum and a big thank you for your detailed analysis of the marks.
Your description raises a couple of questions in my mind and I hope you will take the time to answer them.
I am confused by the date letter, as far as I understand it, during this period, it should be part of a group of stamps, including city & standard mark as well as the national mark of a cat. These would have been stamped by the assay office of the region. Even if provincially located, why would this piece have nothing but the date letter and a very crude version, it has the look as if done by the smith himself?
I know that the tughra is calligraphy, but Arabic calligraphy can take an form or shape. I have been under the impression that calligraphies done within this particular form were reserved of the Ottoman sultantate. The various parts that make the basic shape being symbolic of Ottoman attributes. Is this incorrect?
Thanks, Tom
Welcome to the forum and a big thank you for your detailed analysis of the marks.
Your description raises a couple of questions in my mind and I hope you will take the time to answer them.
I am confused by the date letter, as far as I understand it, during this period, it should be part of a group of stamps, including city & standard mark as well as the national mark of a cat. These would have been stamped by the assay office of the region. Even if provincially located, why would this piece have nothing but the date letter and a very crude version, it has the look as if done by the smith himself?
I know that the tughra is calligraphy, but Arabic calligraphy can take an form or shape. I have been under the impression that calligraphies done within this particular form were reserved of the Ottoman sultantate. The various parts that make the basic shape being symbolic of Ottoman attributes. Is this incorrect?
Thanks, Tom