German tray with french text? Souvenir 1848. It is marked with 13, this means 13 loth as far as I know?
Can anybody also determine the other marks? The letter A en the other one? I am curious for the maker and the time. Thanks in advance!
Silver tray, German silver?
Re: Silver tray, German silver?
Hardly German made...
Picture 2 Dutch import and duty mark (Gothic E), no guarantee for precious metal, silver, gold...
Picture 3 Oriental maker's marks (Chinese?)
Picture 4 Capital I. Also a duty mark for unguaranteed standard for gold and silver. Likely 13 loth as you assume, but?
In other words, your tray is imported "silver" and if so likely below legal standard and made abroad probably between 1906-1953
Picture 2 Dutch import and duty mark (Gothic E), no guarantee for precious metal, silver, gold...
Picture 3 Oriental maker's marks (Chinese?)
Picture 4 Capital I. Also a duty mark for unguaranteed standard for gold and silver. Likely 13 loth as you assume, but?
In other words, your tray is imported "silver" and if so likely below legal standard and made abroad probably between 1906-1953
Re: Silver tray, German silver?
Strong statement without proof and without citing your source, merely your amateur opinion. You write below legal standard, which legal standard are we talking about?Qrt.S wrote: ↑Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:49 am
Picture 2 Dutch import and duty mark (Gothic E), no guarantee for precious metal, silver, gold...
Picture 4 Capital I. Also a duty mark for unguaranteed standard for gold and silver. Likely 13 loth as you assume, but?
In other words, your tray is imported "silver" and if so likely below legal standard and made abroad probably between 1906-1953
Correction picture 2, not a Dutch import and duty mark but a Belgian import and duty mark, the Belgian Gothic E for Étranger = foreign, used 1832-1869
Correction picture 4, the script- capital letter I used 1906-1953; Dutch duty mark for unguaranteed standard of fineness new silver objects of national origin. This mark was used on all new Netherlands silver objects below legal standard of fineness, those with non-precious metal additions, and new heavily silver plated objects, as long as the average precious metal content after melting with the base metal was at least 250/1000. It was also struck on rejected objects which had been submitted at lowest legal standard of fineness. In that case the maker had to choose between destruction or unguaranteed marking. This mark was sometimes mistakenly used on old and foreign objects and in 1927 also used on objects of old national origin. Valid from 1906 till 1953.
The marks 13 struck partly twice or 13,3 Lot?, 2nd mark capital letter A with serifs
If minimum 13 Lot = 812/1000, it is below the 2nd (lowest) Dutch minimum standard of 833/1000, as indicated by the Dutch duty mark the script-capital letter I
This silver tray, I believe to be German, with perhaps pseudo marks?
Peter.
Source; Waarborgholland, ˜Netherlands' Responsibility Marks since 1797, 2009
Van Dievoet, Walter, Répertoire général des orfèvres et des marques d'orfèvrerie en Belgique /.
Other title: Algemeen repertorium van de edelsmeden en van de merken van edelsmeedwerk in België General index of Belgian goldsmith silversmiths and hallmarks, Allgemeines Verzeichnis der belgischen Gold- und Silberschmiede und der Merkzeichen part II 1798-1942. WaarborgHolland, Gouda 2009, Waarborgholland, ˜Netherlands' Responsibility Marks since 1797.
Re: Silver tray, German silver?
Comment
The text is copied from Netherlands' Responsibility marks from 1797. Guess where from I got this source? Check for yourself. One headline states: IMPORT EN BELASTNINGSTEKENS/ IMPORT AND DUTY MARKS. If the source is outdated, sorry for that.
Generally speaking, if the fineness is unknown it is reason to assume that it is below legal standard. That is the most common matter for leaving an object unmarked but there are undoubtedly also some few other reasons e.g certain instruments, folk jewelry... etc.
Moreover, to reveal the sources is in my opinion not advisable for the simple reason that fakers also read these sites. Why teach them? This matter has been discussed in the past. A question is usually made because the questioner doesn't know and/or is unable to look it up. It is up to each person to believe the given answer or not. If he likes to know the source, he can ask it with a private message. I will not on open sites reveal my sources in the future.
As for me case closed.
The text is copied from Netherlands' Responsibility marks from 1797. Guess where from I got this source? Check for yourself. One headline states: IMPORT EN BELASTNINGSTEKENS/ IMPORT AND DUTY MARKS. If the source is outdated, sorry for that.
Generally speaking, if the fineness is unknown it is reason to assume that it is below legal standard. That is the most common matter for leaving an object unmarked but there are undoubtedly also some few other reasons e.g certain instruments, folk jewelry... etc.
Moreover, to reveal the sources is in my opinion not advisable for the simple reason that fakers also read these sites. Why teach them? This matter has been discussed in the past. A question is usually made because the questioner doesn't know and/or is unable to look it up. It is up to each person to believe the given answer or not. If he likes to know the source, he can ask it with a private message. I will not on open sites reveal my sources in the future.
As for me case closed.
Re: Silver tray, German silver?
Comment
As usual your standard nonsense and bablahs!
Case closed.
Peter.
As usual your standard nonsense and bablahs!
Case closed.
Peter.
-
- contributor
- Posts: 1855
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:54 am
Re: Silver tray, German silver?
I have seen some other < 13 > marks like this with Letters [V] [T] [R] [AF]
It could from Rhineland but I am not sure.
It could from Rhineland but I am not sure.