Strange comment on maker's marks, by Waltraud Neuwirth.

[gsmoggy]

Hello
I have just read this comment by Waltraud Neuwirth ( a very respected author on Viennese silver marks) In the book Wiener Silber 1780-1866 vol 1.
If her comment is correct, what does this mean ,when we are reading makers hallmarks ?according to her we do not really know who made the item.(or the whole item) So what does her comment mean ? when reading hallmarks?
Does this comment throw everything in the air re Hallmarking,and what we have always assumed that the hallmark was the maker of the object.

I found her comment confusing.

Regards Guido.

[oel]

Hi Guido,

Why call it a strange comment? If you read the story about silver factories with a line of products actual many people were involved in the proces. Financiers, designers, sub contractors, silver workers (servants), tool operators and machine operators, all were involved to make the silver or silver plated items. At the end someone had to take responsibility for these products for the quality and use of the correct legal silver standard(s). These products were marked with a responsibility mark of the factory's owner(s) and we think of it being a maker's mark. Maker's mark = responsibility mark.

Peter.

[AG2012]

Hi,
Sponsor`s mark is better term:it indicates either the manufacturer or person who sent the article for hallmarking.
The point was responsibility for taxation.
Regards

[oel]

Sponsor mark sounds good and indeed a responsibility mark.
https://theassayoffice.com/register-online

Cheers.


Peter

[JayT]

Agree completely with Peter’s remarks, and would add that even before industrialization of silver manufacture, large workshops existed where dozens of workers or subcontractors produced items, but only the master assumed responsibility by stamping his mark, even if he never touched the object during production.

[gsmoggy]

Hello
Many thanks for all the comments ," We do not know who or how many people were involved in the manufacture of the Hallmarked item"
I do understand all the replies . As we always seem to focus so much on the maker (as if he was the only one that worked on the piece)
it would probably come as a surprise to most (who do not have the knowledge) re maker or sponsors mark. That he may have not made the item.

This may be one reason why I tend to by unmarked pieces (if the quality is there) buying the item not the mark.
like in all things signed (hallmarked) things are not always top quality.

The main purpose I suppose of the hallmark is to give us a time frame of when it WAS made.

Regards Guido.

[gsmoggy]

Hello
If I make another point, "A makers mark is no indication that the object was in fact PRODUCED by the maker in question"

This to me reads a Faberge hallmarked piece, may have been made by Fred Smith, if made by Fred Smith why would he not mark it Fred Smith ?
To me this above comment by Neuwirth opens up all sorts of possibilities ,not withstanding all the previous comments re sponsors marks etc.

According to Neuwirth's comments the way I am reading them ,we do not really know who made the Faberge items (may have been Fred Smith ,with sponsors mark of Faberge.

Fred Smith ,made up name for the exercise.

I am not sure if you are understanding where I am coming from.
How do we know ,exactly who made (company) the article? If the makers mark is NO indication of maker.
Regards Guido.

[JayT]

“Fred” would have had to go through an apprenticeship and then worked as a journeyman under the direction of a master for many years before he was entitled to apply to become a master. The time varied by country, but as an example, in pre-Revolutionary France, this would have been 8-10 years. Many did not take this step: lack of funds to establish a workshop of their own, could not meet qualifications, could not find a sponsor, etc. Acquisition of a maker’s mark was rigorously controlled in most European countries.There were examinations to pass, character references required, and a “masterpiece” to produce. Silversmiths were a protected profession. Not just any Fred or Jacques could affix a maker’s mark to an object. So no, in France you never know exactly who made your object, just that it is from the workshop of a registered, qualified silversmith, prestigious or ordinary. In general terms as an analogy, the same applies to an Old Master painting: produced in a workshop and signed by the master, but worked on by many.

[silvermakersmarks]

The comment in the book (presumably a translation of the original German) should probably be read as "made" rather than "produced" by the maker in question. The line after your highlight clarifies the point that pieces would have been produced in a workshop by employees of the master. This is common practice and, on British silver at least, the maker's / sponsor's mark is often accompanied by a journeyman's mark or tally mark indicating the actual maker. I see no confusion about provenance as long as this point is borne in mind as we can probably assume that some form of quality control was carried out before pieces were passed as fit for sale.

Phil

[gsmoggy]

Many thanks
Jay T and Phil ,for your comments,as you say Phil the translation from German ,may have confused my understanding of the comment,I remember when I first read this just after I received the book ,this line seemed to jump out at me(for some reason)
As you all have explained the production of hallmarked items is very complicated ,and not always easy to understand what exactly went on in the past.

Regards Guido.