Dear people . Own this silver cup for many years now but have never found when and by who it's been made . Some people suggested it's American silver . Weight is 192 grams . Is there anybody who knows more or where to look ? Thanks in advance from The Netherlands .
Ger Spee
http://s1135.photobucket.com/albums/m64 ... ercup3.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://s1135.photobucket.com/albums/m64 ... ercup1.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Unknown mark on silver cup
-
silverport
- contributor
- Posts: 870
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:18 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Unknown mark on silver cup
It's a »Convention« mark.
Hello Ger
Welcome to the Forum.
Please visit the »CCM« official website of the »Convention's Common Control Mark«, settled in Geneve, Switzerland:
http://www.hallmarkingconvention.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Actually there you could find much sounded basic information on the markings of yours cup.
They offer also some pdf-files for download.
Kind regards silverport
Hello Ger
Welcome to the Forum.
Please visit the »CCM« official website of the »Convention's Common Control Mark«, settled in Geneve, Switzerland:
http://www.hallmarkingconvention.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Actually there you could find much sounded basic information on the markings of yours cup.
They offer also some pdf-files for download.
Kind regards silverport
Re: Unknown mark on silver cup
Mind my asking but what convention mark would that be? The shape differs and there is no purity indications etc????. The only thing which is common with the convention mark is the scale. Sorry I'm out like the mailbox....
Re: Unknown mark on silver cup
Thanks for the responses but I don't think it's going to easy to find the maker and age . So is there maybe a clue in how it;s been made ? greetings Ger
Re: Unknown mark on silver cup
Hi,
Can you provide a clear image of the small square mark that's underneath the 'MNO' mark?
Trev.
Can you provide a clear image of the small square mark that's underneath the 'MNO' mark?
Trev.
-
silverport
- contributor
- Posts: 870
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:18 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Unknown mark on silver cup
Maybe bad news — indeed it seems that the marks possibly »Pseudo marks«?
Hello Ger
»Qrt.S« has had some doubts on the regularity of the marks on yours item — and he has then already specified e.g. the not conformity, and the missing indication of fineness in this ‘Convention’ like mark.
When first I saw the blurry images of yours question, without knowing details from the allowance the national Assay Offices of the »Convention« members are having freedom, I had the impression, that yours marks are correct.
After »Qrt.S« had placed his well important remarks, I’ve studied more in detail some available documents. Without being a lawyer, I’ve read, that some details of the »Convention« remain not be changed from any national Assay Office!
Now it seems that the punches are a not authorized copy of an early published paper of the future »Convention« marks?
In details:
Yours mark never seem to be the official »Common Control Mark«; e.g. the form of the cartouche, in this case in an unknown horizontal “barrel” form. The numeric indication of fineness, normally placed below the horizontal scale beam, and between the scales is missing as well.
In other words: It isn’t a »Common Control Mark«!
The »Responsibility Mark«, here a follow up of the letters »MNO« could to be an example only, a kind of 'placeholder'?
The square, »dognose« requested you already to add a clear image of that mark, could maybe not the official Czech »Assay Office Mark«?
The »CCC — Common Control Mark« system was agreed by the Czech Republic; and came in function in the area of the Czech Assay Office organism on 2 November 1994.
I couldn’t understand the Czech language — so I couldn’t study in detail their Assay Office rules.
It seems to me, that the best way to get it cleared would be a direct contact to the head office of the Czech Assay:
Assay Office Praha
Central Inspectorate Department 210
Kozà 4
CZ-110 00 Praha 1
info@puncovniurad.cz
Sorry for my first misinterpretation!
Kind regards silverport
Hello Ger
»Qrt.S« has had some doubts on the regularity of the marks on yours item — and he has then already specified e.g. the not conformity, and the missing indication of fineness in this ‘Convention’ like mark.
When first I saw the blurry images of yours question, without knowing details from the allowance the national Assay Offices of the »Convention« members are having freedom, I had the impression, that yours marks are correct.
After »Qrt.S« had placed his well important remarks, I’ve studied more in detail some available documents. Without being a lawyer, I’ve read, that some details of the »Convention« remain not be changed from any national Assay Office!
Now it seems that the punches are a not authorized copy of an early published paper of the future »Convention« marks?
In details:
Yours mark never seem to be the official »Common Control Mark«; e.g. the form of the cartouche, in this case in an unknown horizontal “barrel” form. The numeric indication of fineness, normally placed below the horizontal scale beam, and between the scales is missing as well.
In other words: It isn’t a »Common Control Mark«!
The »Responsibility Mark«, here a follow up of the letters »MNO« could to be an example only, a kind of 'placeholder'?
The square, »dognose« requested you already to add a clear image of that mark, could maybe not the official Czech »Assay Office Mark«?
The »CCC — Common Control Mark« system was agreed by the Czech Republic; and came in function in the area of the Czech Assay Office organism on 2 November 1994.
I couldn’t understand the Czech language — so I couldn’t study in detail their Assay Office rules.
It seems to me, that the best way to get it cleared would be a direct contact to the head office of the Czech Assay:
Assay Office Praha
Central Inspectorate Department 210
Kozà 4
CZ-110 00 Praha 1
info@puncovniurad.cz
Sorry for my first misinterpretation!
Kind regards silverport
Re: Unknown mark on silver cup
Thanks for this information but if it's a very early piece are these convention marks in use or are the from later date ? So when is this official marking dated . The small square mark is the number 4 . But can't make a proper photo off it because it's to small .
Greetings Ger
Greetings Ger
-
silverport
- contributor
- Posts: 870
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:18 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Unknown mark on silver cup
The Vienna Convention of the »CCM — Common Control Mark«
Hello Ger
The Vienna Convention of the »CCM — Common Control Mark« was signed in Vienna, Austria in 1973 by Austria, Denmark, Finland and Sweden — and came in force worldwide on 27 June 1975.
1976 became new members the United Kingdom and Switzerland; in 1980 new members are Ireland, Norway and Portugal.
In 2010 there were in totally 19 Member States — e.g. France and Germany isn’t member, even so not having another status.
But now let’s look to my assumptions:
The discussion on the need of a »CCM — Common Control Mark« has already started end of the ‘Sixties’ begin ‘Seventies’ of the last century.
A proposal on the then suggested first form of the marks on gold and on silver I haven’t find in the internet. But by my experience as a professional Industrial and Graphic Designer, I know that the development of a worldwide known mark need detailed studies; well it don't happen very often that the final version is only slightly different from the first suggested proposal. Because there are many factors influencing the appearence - like e.g. already registered marks.
I e.g. have designed now nearly a half century ago a mark for a local organisation some where in Europe; well with global connections. It was promised to me, that my design is to abstract and strong, that it wouldn’t be accepted totally. Now is this mark the only one, and in between used worldwide — and I haven’t met until yet any body who know or remember that original, then a century old sign of the worldwide conglomeration.
What I like to explain with these discourses is that an international mark has to have some basic elements, which are also immediately recognised by a very cursory visual perception. That’s today also the basic of a judgement of plagiarism: »Immediately recognised from the average human by a very cursory visual perception«.
The »CCM« for silver is placed in a kind of an individualized barrel shape — a much more individualized barrel by ‘notches’ on the basic line. I personally have the impression that it is a bold letter W, a kind of kowtow to »Wien« - the Conventions first place (Vienna Assay Office indication letter is since centuries the same letter W too — well interrupted a long while by the letter A).
The second basic element of all »CCM« marks is the scale; but for reason of their tiny graphic lines only recognised on a lower level of the visual perception.
And it is a pity that the numerical for finenesses must be “read” — not the shape of the cartouche is sufficient indication for the individual fineness.
Let’s make here a sub-summary:
The on yours cup used “fineness” mark is an absolutely »free loader« plagiarism! Remember: »Immediately recognised from the average human by a very cursory visual perception«.
Let’s look now to the other struck elements:
The MNO is, as I assume, not an official »Responsibility Mark« - but should suggest being that.
The number 4, in a square cartouche, is as I assume too, should suggest being the official letter P and the square, the cartouche of the Czech Assay Office organism — which was fully active integrated in the Convention from 2 November 1994 on.
Summary:
I assume that the struck marks on yours cup are »Pseudo marks« - used to cheat!
Time span of »Pseudo marks« being struck: End of last Millenniums, begin of this one.
So it seems to be not »… a very early piece are these convention marks in use …«
Yes » I don't think it's going to easy to find the maker « - because it looks like that the maker liked to remain known only by some commercial insiders, e.g. trophy wholesalers.
»… and age …« - well, End of last Millenniums, begin of this one. The design looks like too, to be in the style of trophy’s, usual in the last quarter of the XX century.
»… So is there maybe a clue in how it;s been made ? « - it has happen in an industrial spinning processing, on lathes. Then after the individual parts of the corpus (base, stem parts, cuppa) are soldered together; and plated with maybe 4 gram silver.
Résumé: I assume that yours trophy is plated; and as such one, made from non precious metal.
Ciphers in a square are e.g. the indication of used weight of silver in the plating processing, as e.g. it’s stipulated by law in France.
I advise you also to take notice of this sounded information: http://www.925-1000.com/a_platenumbers.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sorry for the time lap between yours last questions and now — I’ve need some time to find out several »points of view«, and getting for me a sufficient sounded impression too.
Kind regards silverport
Hello Ger
The Vienna Convention of the »CCM — Common Control Mark« was signed in Vienna, Austria in 1973 by Austria, Denmark, Finland and Sweden — and came in force worldwide on 27 June 1975.
1976 became new members the United Kingdom and Switzerland; in 1980 new members are Ireland, Norway and Portugal.
In 2010 there were in totally 19 Member States — e.g. France and Germany isn’t member, even so not having another status.
But now let’s look to my assumptions:
The discussion on the need of a »CCM — Common Control Mark« has already started end of the ‘Sixties’ begin ‘Seventies’ of the last century.
A proposal on the then suggested first form of the marks on gold and on silver I haven’t find in the internet. But by my experience as a professional Industrial and Graphic Designer, I know that the development of a worldwide known mark need detailed studies; well it don't happen very often that the final version is only slightly different from the first suggested proposal. Because there are many factors influencing the appearence - like e.g. already registered marks.
I e.g. have designed now nearly a half century ago a mark for a local organisation some where in Europe; well with global connections. It was promised to me, that my design is to abstract and strong, that it wouldn’t be accepted totally. Now is this mark the only one, and in between used worldwide — and I haven’t met until yet any body who know or remember that original, then a century old sign of the worldwide conglomeration.
What I like to explain with these discourses is that an international mark has to have some basic elements, which are also immediately recognised by a very cursory visual perception. That’s today also the basic of a judgement of plagiarism: »Immediately recognised from the average human by a very cursory visual perception«.
The »CCM« for silver is placed in a kind of an individualized barrel shape — a much more individualized barrel by ‘notches’ on the basic line. I personally have the impression that it is a bold letter W, a kind of kowtow to »Wien« - the Conventions first place (Vienna Assay Office indication letter is since centuries the same letter W too — well interrupted a long while by the letter A).
The second basic element of all »CCM« marks is the scale; but for reason of their tiny graphic lines only recognised on a lower level of the visual perception.
And it is a pity that the numerical for finenesses must be “read” — not the shape of the cartouche is sufficient indication for the individual fineness.
Let’s make here a sub-summary:
The on yours cup used “fineness” mark is an absolutely »free loader« plagiarism! Remember: »Immediately recognised from the average human by a very cursory visual perception«.
Let’s look now to the other struck elements:
The MNO is, as I assume, not an official »Responsibility Mark« - but should suggest being that.
The number 4, in a square cartouche, is as I assume too, should suggest being the official letter P and the square, the cartouche of the Czech Assay Office organism — which was fully active integrated in the Convention from 2 November 1994 on.
Summary:
I assume that the struck marks on yours cup are »Pseudo marks« - used to cheat!
Time span of »Pseudo marks« being struck: End of last Millenniums, begin of this one.
So it seems to be not »… a very early piece are these convention marks in use …«
Yes » I don't think it's going to easy to find the maker « - because it looks like that the maker liked to remain known only by some commercial insiders, e.g. trophy wholesalers.
»… and age …« - well, End of last Millenniums, begin of this one. The design looks like too, to be in the style of trophy’s, usual in the last quarter of the XX century.
»… So is there maybe a clue in how it;s been made ? « - it has happen in an industrial spinning processing, on lathes. Then after the individual parts of the corpus (base, stem parts, cuppa) are soldered together; and plated with maybe 4 gram silver.
Résumé: I assume that yours trophy is plated; and as such one, made from non precious metal.
Ciphers in a square are e.g. the indication of used weight of silver in the plating processing, as e.g. it’s stipulated by law in France.
I advise you also to take notice of this sounded information: http://www.925-1000.com/a_platenumbers.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sorry for the time lap between yours last questions and now — I’ve need some time to find out several »points of view«, and getting for me a sufficient sounded impression too.
Kind regards silverport