Silver cup

[solo]

Please help identify silver hallmark, maker's mark.

[oel]

Hi Solo,

Hanging overblown tulip.
To me it appears the bottom of your cup has been replaced or tampered with. The town mark, to me looks OK for Amsterdam, 17th century, year letter L for 1663, the maker's mark unclear, could be R(?) perhaps tampered with, and unidentified.
What can you tell us about its provenance, and the letters/text around the rim of the cup?


Peter.

[AG2012]

Hi,
Not authentic. The foot was soldered at later date.
Marks seem to be struck on the cup itself,which is difficult to explain; inscription in Russian with Amsterdam marks.
Four issues betraying it`s not authentic:
1.Asymmetry of the cup (flat,low position on the foot).
2.Poorly cut circumference of the foot
3.Too much unnecessary filing
4.Poor soldering
Regards

[solo]

Good day
maybe this cup a little later
soldered a new bottom
and in a circle put commemorative inscriptions.
Maybe someone has a photo of such cups without a leg?

[oel]

Good day to you too,

Perhaps a reminder of the Dutch Tulip Mania;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania



Yes, the foot could be a later attachment. What are the sizes of this cup, without the foot ?

Another small beaker on three feet made in Middelburg, 3rd quarter 17 century;

sizes; height 4 cm, diam. 3.5 cm.
Beaker Gorinchem year 1648

Height 10.5 cm

Peter

Source; Beeling Nederlands zilver 1600-1813

[solo]

Yes, the foot could be a later attachment. What are the sizes of this cup, without the foot ?

Good day
height 7.5 cm, diameter 7 cm

[oel]

Thanks and the weight?


Peter.

[solo]

The weight of the cup is 137.7 grams
It seems big to me for such a size,
what is your opinion?

[AG2012]

That`s what call unsolved mystery; Russian inscription on a beaker with Amsterdam marks, foot added later, and not even well done,either.
There is nothing to help us to solve the mystery.
Regards

[oel]

Indeed a mystery. It is a nice beaker with good engravings. I believe the beaker to be 17th century and made in Amsterdam. Perhaps the foot has been added later. The Russian inscription, what does it say, has it any meaning, can it be translated into English?
The maker's mark is unknown to me.


Peter.

[Aguest]

::: Whoever soldered on the base did a poor job of soldering, but they did a good job of gilding & decoration such that the base of the cup matches the gilding & engraving on the body of the cup ::: I think I see decoration and gilding on the base of the cup that matches the body, at least to my eyes. :::: If an XRF could be done of the cup & the edge of the foot I wonder what the results would be? ::: If the results show identical percentages of elements, wouldn't the cup & the base be assumed to be original? :::::

:::: Maybe an XRF analysis would help. ::::

[AG2012]

wouldn't the cup & the base be assumed to be original?

I am not a fully qualified silversmith, but I did some repairs that were not disclosed by reputable auction houses; meaning, I can tell this base (foot) could not have left any workshop in this condition.
Regards

[Aguest]

:::: If an XRF analysis finds that the elemental percentages of the foot and the cup are extremely similar, if not identical, then it might support a theory that they were made to match. :::: I don't see a good picture of the details on the top of the base, but I do see engraved lines and gilding that appear to match the cup. :::: If it is a later addition to the cup, some effort was taken to match the details of the original cup, I believe that is incontrovertible but ? ::::

:::: If XRF analysis finds that the elemental percentages of the foot and the cup are extremely dissimilar, then it would support the hypothesis that the base is a later addition to the cup. ::::::

:::: Another thought is that cups sometimes have "zig-zag" marks from where silver was removed and assayed for purity. I don't know if all cups from Amsterdam are supposed to have this "zig-zag" mark from this time period? Maybe the soldering is covering the "zig-zag" mark that was done by the assay master? ::::::

[AG2012]

Trimming the base and filing before soldering is so unptofessionally made, that no further expertise is needed.

[Aguest]

:::: Still interested in the translation of the inscription if possible :::::

[AG2012]

Me ,too: we need full inscription,i.e. the entire circumference.

[solo]

here are the same in the museum
I see it was common. All made by a master (Rulof Peter van Emden van Vries)
in the Netherlands in the late 17th century.

[oel]

As a model, the cup differs from what was customary for silver drinking cups in the 16th and 17th centuries. This new shape with a separate foot is a development from the last quarter of the 17th century and was introduced under the influence of the court.
https://www.verenigingrembrandt.nl/nl/k ... er-op-voet


What is written in the book Goud en zilvermerken van Voet - L.B. Gans and Premsela & Hamburger; Authenticity questions. First look at the object itself and ask yourself the following questions: are there strange wear marks, do the marks belong to the object or have they been cast off and are we therefore dealing with a counterfeit? In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries there were no Monday morning products in silversmithing. The blobs of solder we find around the bottom of a cup argue for authenticity rather than counterfeiting




Maker's mark RP for; Roelof Pieter de Vries, 1655-1664, born 1632 in the city of Emden (Oost Vriesland), reformed, son of Eilhart and Gretje Albertz, silversmith in 1655 and married in 1655 to Mayke van Sittert. Died in 1664. Crockery worker: hammered candlesticks, pitchers and dishes.

I see a few clear differences when I compare the master's mark on the bottom of your cup with the master's mark of Roelof Pieter de Vries as shown in the book; Amsterdamse Zilversmeden en hun Merken K.A. Citroen. I can't attribute the maker's mark on your cup to Roelof Pieter de Vries.
If I do a Google search to find any work of this silversmith nothing pops up. Could you please mention the name and place of the museum. Also an image of the marks on both beakers in de museum should be very helpful. Also please tell us about it provenance and some images of the complete inscription. Thanks for your cooperation.
For further research into the silver content of the cup and foot and the soldering used on cup and foot, a reliable essayist should be consulted.


Source; Amsterdamse Zilversmeden en hun Merken K.A. Citroen


Peter