Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
One of a pair, hand chased, gilded silver, 4 inches across the bowl. StPetersburg 1855.Assayer A.Mitin.
Cannot tell the maker for sure; it looks like ``HH`` although the second letter is not clearly seen. Even if the mark is upside down it is ``H`` either way.The closest is Henrik Hacklin (1675 #PL),both the period and the mark.
Thanks for looking.
I'm a bit doubtful about these rather smudgy marks. In addition, I wouldn't say it is Hacklin's mark, close but not close enough. Always when a mark is unclear or very worn like this you should ask yourself the question: "Why is this mark so unclear or worn?" and especially when it is on place that cannot be worn by use and/or by time. Somehow I have a memory of seeing that particular HH mark before, ...cannot recall for the moment.
obvious a fake. If you ask how one can recognize fakes - my answer will be:
I've never understood the urge to "learn" about fakes. It's a waste of time. Spend that energy learning about the real thing and you'll know the fakes when you see them because they won't look like the real thing. No matter how much you "learn" about fakes, you'll never know everything about them so it's literally an all-consuming time-suck that has no value since every day new fakes hit the market.
Well, this is going to be fast enough this time; I thought something has changed here - no way. ``Expert`` opinions without holding the item in their hands.Everything is ``obvious`` without telling ``why`` and not having the slightest idea of silversmithing.The salt cellar; yes, it is a fake made by an anonymous faker in his bathroom or a garage. Let me tell you how he did it; He took a rather thick sheet of silver and hand- hammered it on steel or iron template (oh, yes, first he had to pay a lot for the template which was first executed in wood and then cast in iron), then he took two bands of silver (easily made in various profiles on extremely expensive machinery) and hard-soldered one at the bottom, one at the rim of the bowl, which was rather easy having in mind the whole item had to be heated at only over 1500 F and all parts held together with a steel (iron) wire. Not finished yet; he spent the entire day filing silver (the traces are seen in close - up picture), then polished it on a buffing wheel. The worst is yet to come; he used mercury to gild cellars and poisoned several family members. Not finished yet; he had to hand - engrave monogram (please, find hand engraver nowadays).Monogram does not agree with mid-19th century,true,but if done later it makes no difference. When cellars were finished and faked hallmarks struck,it remained only to make it look 150 years old; well, this is what I do not understand - how did he do it ? (one of the pictures).Then he found a fool, i.e. me, and sold cellars for a trivial sum. BTW. Marks at the bottom are not worn, they are very sharp, but marks are often not perfectly and evenly struck, right? And assayers, with silversmiths waiting with bags of silver and losing precious time, had nothing better to do but to take care striking perfect marks for those who will sit drooling over them 150 years later.(Besides, there is another StPetersburg mark on the bowl.The faker did bother to ad many different marks, because steel hallmarking tools are very cheap).
Re-striking cellars made elsewhere with StPetersburg marks is out of question (traces of work on silver and solder spill at the bottom fully matching the rest of work).Besides, this old fashioned silversmithing is never,but never seen in 20th century, unless the faker took two heavy baroque 18th century cellars and struck Russian 19th century marks, but in that case he was more stupid than me.
Now the purse;
Leather replaced later? Yes, sure, there are leather workshops around every corner; For heaven`s sake who could make matching leather interior with the clasp etc? Another possibility; leather was taken from another purse;right, it is well known silver deteriorates much faster than leather.
Chain replaced later? What is this Kokoshnik doing on the chain? Right,chains of this type with Kokoshnik, with every link soldered fly around.
Gimme a break, please, I have more important things to do.
Correct gimme a break AG2012! If you knew it already what the hell are you then asking? I call that bad behavior. Don't expect me to answer any of your questions in the future. In addition, there is a silent agreement not to discuss fakes here, especially not why it is a fake and how it is done.
AG2012 wrote:Now the purse;
Leather replaced later? Yes, sure, there are leather workshops around every corner; For heaven`s sake who could make matching leather interior with the clasp etc? Another possibility; leather was taken from another purse;right, it is well known silver deteriorates much faster than leather.
Chain replaced later? What is this Kokoshnik doing on the chain? Right,chains of this type with Kokoshnik, with every link soldered fly around.
I wrote: your purse is original (even the often renewed chain) - exept of the lining - this must have been renewed later. The standard liner was in textile (silk etc.), only the later Soviet made purses had leather liners. Please have a close look at the cabochons - standard is blue, red or green glass - not saphire. The maker is unfortunately unknown.
Someone who can read has a big advantage! If you do not understand a given answer - ask. But don´t accuse others for your lack of understanding ....
When I write: your purse is original (even the often renewed chain)...than it means that your purse is authentic as well as the chain which often (in many cases)was renewed later when it was broken...but your chain is OK. Got it? If not - ask. If English is the wrong language for you - I know several others.
Hi all from Leiden (Nl).)))
I again say that it is the original (90%). Also it is Henrik Hacklin, you are right. But the assaymaster is called incorrectly. Alexander Mitin in 1855 wasn't in Petersburg. The assaymaster is Alexander Yakovlevich Mor.
The guy admitted it is a fake like Zolotnik and I already stated. Who cares who the assayer or master is on a faked object. Throw it to the dogs. But for your information Hacklin's mark looks different, recheck your sources please.
Whoops! I fear AG2012's comments were lost in translation, as were Zolotnik's comments about the chain. Time for everybody to take a deep breath and read the posts again.
I realize fakes are not to be discussed here, but since both Dad (90%) and the original poster (100%, based on his sarcasm) ) believe that the item is authentic, may I ask what they make out of the extra number 5 that I see to the right the assayer mark? Double strike? Overstrike? Illusion? Something else? It doesn't quite look like the 5 in the assayer 1885 mark to me.
Also, I've turned my head this way and that but cannot for the life of me figure out what the bottom (oval?) mark is supposed to be?
I hope I'm not fanning the flames -- that is not my purpose.
``If you knew it already what the hell are you then asking? I call that bad behavior. Don't expect me to answer any of your questions in the future. In addition, there is a silent agreement not to discuss fakes here, especially not why it is a fake and how it is done.``
Yes,I knew it already - a genuine mid-nineteen century silver and I did not even ask ``fake or no fake`` it is too easy for me to tell because I have it my hands.Therefore I did not start the fake issue, which should not be discussed here upon silent agreement, although I see no pint in this;too many serious books have been published on fakes and forgeries.Is Atelier Bossard for example forbidden to discuss here on ``silent agreement``?
All I wanted was to identify the maker in an authentic silver piece, not valuable at all.
This is just a waste of time if there is no interest in silversmithing and how it`s done.
In my previous reply I have mentioned the fact ORIGINAL HALLMARKING TOOLS FROM MANY OFFICES, INCLUDING RUSSIA, ARE MISSING.
What shall we do about it? Rely on marks only or to know ``how it`s made``? If this does not make sense,what does? There is no sound argument against this fact,probably only emotional response, but it is not a method of sound reasoning.
Well, it looks like this and,believe me,I have done it myself in jewelry and smaller silver items, - not on teapots,though ;two of us sit at the table and the item is on the small anvil in front of us.I hold the piece and the hallmarking tool upright, and ``assayer`` hammers it avoiding my fingers.But I get distracted from time to time - for heaven`s sake it is boring sitting there with the hammer in front of my eyes for hours, then the hammer misses the tool.``Come on!``warns me ``assayer``.In the meantime,we have several double struck pieces.Do you think the piece is discarded for that or marked as ``Dritte Auswahl`` as in Dresden china? No way. Double struck - who cares! Very scientific explanation,but this is it.
Believe me,do not waste time on double - struck issue.
Forgot something about ``double struck`` issue.
Fakers are not stupid; If they can make nearly perfect silver or gold item, are they insane to miss such ``important`` thing and double struck?
Beware of good marks.Fakers would never make such a stupid and easily disclosed mistake.It does not make sense:spend much money making or buying silver intended to be struck with false marks and then not taking care how to punch the marks.
I share your enthusiasm for (Russian) silver and welcome the knowledge you have acquired in the production of silver objects. Both, enthusiasm and knowledge are very important - what you might perhaps need is patience, experience and the ability to listen.
As we do not explicit discuss fakes, how they are detected, where they are from, who made them etc. I can/will not much contribute - only: there is a whole, best equipped (money, technique) industry - in connection with numerous auction houses and dealers producing/selling them. The only and best medicin against this is knowledge.
If you have problems to distinguish instantly a saphire from coloured glass - you are not knowing enough to pretend expertise! Try harder and learn more...
We all started slow, listen to the knowing and until today are willing to learn everyday something new.
please do not try to be the smartass of the forum! All your "novelties" are known since years, many are simply wrong and by repeating them continously make them not more true. My maty advice: stay low, read and learn and stop attacks. So both sides can benefit from your contributions.
Qrt.S wrote:Daaaad read the inputs more carefully!!!!
The guy admitted it is a fake like Zolotnik and I already stated. Who cares who the assayer or master is on a faked object. Throw it to the dogs. But for your information Hacklin's mark looks different, recheck your sources please.
Hi.
English it is not my native language. Therefore it is difficult to me to understand big texts in which there is a lot of irony, sarcasm, hints and etc. I look at the picture and I write that I see.
For an example, punches of Henrik Hacklin (as I believe)))):
Best Reg..
PS. Holland is the fine country. But only very cold. Why???)))))
