Help to ID mark on plate recovered on 1715 wreck

[amxess]

I recovered a silver plate a few years ago off one of the 1715 Spanish plate fleet wrecks off Florida. Have had no luck Id'ing the makers mark. First photo is of the mark. Second photo shows someone's name (Vitoria) which was inscribed on top of plate rim. Any help appreciated.

[oel]

Hi welcome to the forum,

The 2nd mark in the middle does look like a Crowned letter M between two sticks; Spanish colonial silver hallmark used during the occupation of Mexico.


Oel.

[Francais]

I am not sure exactly how to phrase this. I can tell you what the marks are supposed to be, but not what they are.
The first mark is a partial stamping of the mark Gosa Lez a chief assayers mark of Diego Gonzalez de la Cueva. As Oel says the second mark is the Pillars of Hercules mark. The third mark is an eagle mark.
The problem is these are commonly faked, and I don't know if anyone could tell from the marks on your plate.
Finally these are supposed to be marks used from 1733-1778. So how they could be found on a plate from a 1715 wreck is beyond me.
Maurice

[amxess]

Thanks for the great info all! I recovered this from a well documented 1715 wreck off Sebastian, Florida. I posted same inquiry on a shipwreck forum and someone replied they had recovered a candelabra off one of the 1715 wrecks with the same markings and was identified as Gosa Lez. That item is in a Florida museum with a breakdown of the marks which I'll try and get on Monday (I'll reply here with the info if I get it). So it looks like this was made in Mexico then. As far these marks only used after 1733, that's very interesting.

Thanks again,
Steve

[oel]

Hi Steve,

Another one with same assayer's mark & hallmark for Mexico city under colonial Spanish rules:
Mario Galasso writes:
...I'm working on a group of Mexican silver of the eighteenth century on behalf of a friend of the French archaeologist DRASSM (French Government) who is digging a wreck near Montpellier (Joanne Elisabeth, sunk in 1755).
http://www.ascasonline.org/newsLUGLI74.html

Oel

[Francais]

I got the information from "Spanish Colonial Silver" by Boylan, and of course some experience.
I have no idea the extent of the scholarship of the author. The marks look closest to ones marked "forgery", but most are not identified as modern or antique forgeries. Having said that they also seem to be the same as some of the marks found by Oel, so I personally don't doubt they are legitimate or at least forgeries from the 18th c. It does seem fairly definite about de la Cueva's working dates being 1733-78, which is already a long period of time for an elevated career, and unless they got both the starting date and ending date wrong, we could rule out 1715. Also evidently they did not use a chief assayer's marks before 1733. This causes no trouble for the French 1755 wreck but it certainly does for yours. Unless the silver researchers are completely wrong that leaves only a few possibilities. One the dating of the wreck to 1715 is wrong, two, somehow the plate came from another later wreck mixed with an earlier wreck, or lastly it was salted. I have had experience with salting, as I condemned a large collection of silver "dug up" in front of a dealer, that was later proven to be modern fakes. Still it seems unlikely in this case.
It seems most likely that the wreck was incorrectly dated to 1715. I am not sure we can be any help in this regard, but how was it dated?
Maurice

[amxess]

I recovered this off the 1715 wreck of the "Nuestra Senora de la Regla", also known as the "Cabin Wreck". Six ships of this fleet have been worked since the 50's and are some of the most documented and researched ships in the world as thousands of artifacts have been recovered off these. The wrecks are located from about four miles south of Ft. Pierce Inlet to just south of Sebastian Inlet, though coins from this time frame have been found further north. Some of these wrecks were scattered for over a mile and can only be worked two or three months a year as usually too rough or visability is zero. Only other Spanish wreck found in this vicinity is the SAN MARTIN of 1618 but it's a few miles to the south. There is an 1800's wreck in the area but not Spanish. I've worked these wrecks for years and had a book published on Florida wrecks so I'm confident it's off the Regla as nothing else nearby that would date it otherwise. As to salting the wreck-I can't see any possible explanation why anyone would do that. This was recovered about four feet under sand in a hole in a buried reef (which had been uncovered using a prop wash deflector) where we had found coins from the 1715 wreck, and the plate was heaviliy corroded from almost 300 years under the ocean.

I'm real curious as to the 1733-78 being the time frame for these marks or that they may be a 1700's forgery. Year 1733 also interesting as a Spanish treasure fleet also wrecked that year. I've also worked on those wrecks, but they are way down in the Florida Keys nowhere near this area. I'm following up on the candelabra with the same marks found on another 1715 wreck.

Great info and thanks again!

[oel]

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the information, great story and if you find out more please keep us informed.

Oel.

[Francais]

Well we can rule out salting. I presume everything found has been pre 1715, but I guess I will ask anyway.
I cannot attest to the accuracy of the authors, the book was published in 1974, and there have been a lot of "discoveries" in the silver field since then. Still it is hard to imagine they got the dates wrong. I know of no one who is expert in this field. I have had or handled some Spanish colonial silver, but was never very interested in it.
Presuming the wreck is dated correctly, and considering the circumstances, salting is out. Unless there is some explanation I've missed, that leaves a mixture of wrecks. Were the coins found with the plate above, below, or surrounding the plate?
If there is another 1800's wreck nearby, Spanish or no, is there any reason that the plate couldn't have come from it? It would only demand that one passenger had the money to own a silver plate possibly antique at the time.
If the plate was above the coins, it might be an area to pursue.
I will make a few calls and see if I can find an expert on Spanish colonial silver.
Maurice

[amxess]

Since this same mark was found on another silver item on a different 1715 wreck a few miles to the south, it has to be from these wrecks. I'll post here what I find out about those marks when I hear back from the museum which has the item on display.
Thanks,
Steve

[Francais]

Eureka! You seem so convinced that something impossible was true. So I called one friend and a few dealers, the most knowledgeable is out of the country and didn't respond. So I thought maybe the thing to do was search for info on Google in Spanish, which is not my first language, nor second third or fourth.
But I can read it somewhat. Anyway I found this site pdf file.
http://www.ascasonline.org/gonzales.pdf
I contribute to the site, and they often have translations, but evidently not in this case.
The gist of it is the author does not believe the marks shown (unfortunately not really clear) are those of Diego Gonzalez but that of Nicholas Gonzalez de la Cueva who was assayer between 1701 and 1713.
So unless someone comes up with a better explanation, the Boylan book was wrong. And evidently your dating of the wreck was accurate.
Maurice

[amxess]

Francais, can't thank you enough. You too Oel! I heard back from the museum and they emailed me photos of the marks off the platter/candelabra base which were much better than the ones on mine and had the full Gosa Lez inscription (I'd post them here but off an Iphone and pretty blurry- if they send me better photos I will). It was recovered off the Santo Cristo de San Roman which is the 1715 wreck just south of the one I recovered the plate off of. So looks like it was made in Mexico beteween 1701-1713. The museum says the third mark is a purity stamp.

Great site here! Thanks all,
Steve

[Francais]

I heard back from Giorgio and evidently Oel was very close to the answer. The question showed in the link above was answered in the next issue #75
http://www.ascasonline.org/newsAGOST75.html
Which is the reason the article popped up on a Google search.
Maurice

[amxess]

Got some good photos of the same marks from another silver artifact from the 1715 Fleet but in much better and complete condition from originals posted so attaching them here for anyone interested. Thanks again for all the help.