I did a little research on your coat of arms. It is apparently the arms of the family de VOISINS de BRUGAIROLLES (BRUGUEIROLLES) d'ALZAU. Although you could maybe drop the last family name. You might get the people on Heraldik site to verify this. The de VOISINS family is evidently an old family of the Noblesse of Languedoc stretching back to at least the 13th century. The coat of arms seems to have a ducal crown, but that may or may not be warranted, perhaps someone on Heraldik can help with that, but I warn you the site is in German. When I posted questions I did it in German, although the most helpful person was either comfortable in English, or was friendly enough to use a translator program. I don't think you are going to be able to identify the actual owner, unless there are some initials somewhere. I'll give the subject a rest, until we see if anyone can get a copy of those books. If nothing else comes up within a week, I will give you my guess on those other marks, and give you one more source for information.
Maurice
Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
Guido — Happy New Year! Have you contacted the auction house (Meyzen in Narbonne) that sold you this object? The expert for the sale is obligated to give you their written expertise on your cruet. If there was no expert — a caveat emptor situation - then you should consider hiring one. There are 4-5 well-known firms in France who do this. The cost is 10% of the purchase price, which might be money well spent. I respectfully suggest you explore this route as a first step; it is open to anyone buying from a licensed auctioneer in France. The members who have given extraordinary amounts of their time and effort to your question are to be commended, but maybe you should follow the options open to you as a purchaser at auction before asking the kind people here to go running off in all directions.
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
The only way to tell if silver alloy is 18th century or earlier is plasma mass spectrometry because of different alloy composition. Forgeries of antique silver objects can be identified by their fingerprints of impurities.
A silver alloy composition consists essentially of silver, gold, copper, lead, bismuth, cadmium, antimony, tin, silicon, boron, zinc, and indium (not in this order regarding the percentage). Eighteen century silver had more fire scale (copper oxide), more porosity and grain size due to imperfect casting and more gold. When soldered, even if well pickled fire scale may not be removed by pickling, buffing and polishing because fire scale is not limited to the surface of the cast article, as in ``conventional tarnish``, but may penetrate the article to some depth. This is what I noticed when soldering very old silver but, of course, it’s subjective; mass spectrometry can be done in various institutions — e.g. those evaluating dental alloys (extremely small amount of silver sample is needed) and prove if it’s 18th century. The rest depends on books and references where it was made.
A silver alloy composition consists essentially of silver, gold, copper, lead, bismuth, cadmium, antimony, tin, silicon, boron, zinc, and indium (not in this order regarding the percentage). Eighteen century silver had more fire scale (copper oxide), more porosity and grain size due to imperfect casting and more gold. When soldered, even if well pickled fire scale may not be removed by pickling, buffing and polishing because fire scale is not limited to the surface of the cast article, as in ``conventional tarnish``, but may penetrate the article to some depth. This is what I noticed when soldering very old silver but, of course, it’s subjective; mass spectrometry can be done in various institutions — e.g. those evaluating dental alloys (extremely small amount of silver sample is needed) and prove if it’s 18th century. The rest depends on books and references where it was made.
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
Hi,
After consulting one of my contacts with some knowledge about French hallmarks she wrote me;
Close ups of all the marks would really be much better, looking at it; the construction seems OK; made between Louis XV/XVI …if French province work then it should be Louis XVI period before the reform of 1789. Very good Quality! There are different repairs. About the history of the ‘Cibory mark’; I am not sure about the idea, it does not correspond to the ‘worn out’ mark on the item.
Important it appears all detachable parts have been stamped with those ‘18th century mark’! So if it were a copy/fake…they would have worked on it (too complicated to be a fake) and those marks seem deep and profound. The C form mark which might be a serpent or special animal or a C? has appeared on fakes. All marks seem deep and correctly worn out, smooth forms around the central mark. It is not a German copy in the Hanau style and does not correspond to the marks used at the time in Hanau.
Maker’s mark; two initials I.I with 2 grains de remède and the C below might or could be a date letter.
- Engraving: still in Louis XV style. But we never can date an object on the engraving... there are genius in England to fake this kind of work. Could it be a fabulous copy? Could be interesting to ask to: the Head of Sotheby’s in Paris silver department; Thierry.de.Lachaise@SOTHEBYS.com
Regards,
Martine D'Haeseleer
Oel.
After consulting one of my contacts with some knowledge about French hallmarks she wrote me;
Close ups of all the marks would really be much better, looking at it; the construction seems OK; made between Louis XV/XVI …if French province work then it should be Louis XVI period before the reform of 1789. Very good Quality! There are different repairs. About the history of the ‘Cibory mark’; I am not sure about the idea, it does not correspond to the ‘worn out’ mark on the item.
Important it appears all detachable parts have been stamped with those ‘18th century mark’! So if it were a copy/fake…they would have worked on it (too complicated to be a fake) and those marks seem deep and profound. The C form mark which might be a serpent or special animal or a C? has appeared on fakes. All marks seem deep and correctly worn out, smooth forms around the central mark. It is not a German copy in the Hanau style and does not correspond to the marks used at the time in Hanau.
Maker’s mark; two initials I.I with 2 grains de remède and the C below might or could be a date letter.
- Engraving: still in Louis XV style. But we never can date an object on the engraving... there are genius in England to fake this kind of work. Could it be a fabulous copy? Could be interesting to ask to: the Head of Sotheby’s in Paris silver department; Thierry.de.Lachaise@SOTHEBYS.com
Regards,
Martine D'Haeseleer
Oel.
-
Francais
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
I was going to leave this subject alone for a week, but I guess I will make a few comments, although Guido doesn't seem to visit very often, as he hasn't responded on his candlesticks.
I still think the best way of finding a solution is to get copies of the two books mentioned, but so far no volunteers. If I owned it and had the money, I would rather spend it on a book than an expert. Not that authors are necessarily more reliable than experts, but because they may have photos, that would answer some questions.
Ag2012 obviously knows more about the physics than I do, I have done some reading and of course have had some experience. I have two comments. Once I was asked by a museum to look at least a hundred small "antique" silver pieces. The were spread out on a table. I looked at a few, and said they were all fake. The curator asked if I was sure they were "all" fake. I looked again, and right in the center was one I said was antique. Evidently they had put it in as a test, and it had been in their collection for well over 100 years. They then sent the entire collection off to the major American decorative arts museum. They said (and I don't know the test) that all but a few had modern metal, and in their opinion there was no reason to think those few were old old either.
So my question is: if you take old silver scrap, to make your fake, I presume no physical test would prove it to be new.
Second I had read that all old silver had the trace elements mentioned. But evidently Xray florescence is not accurate enough, or all old silver doesn't. I took some 18th c. silver to a smelt, and had a friend test it, he found no trace gold.
As for the last posting. I realize it is obviously translated (unfortunately), so I don't know if what was said was what was intended. Some I agree with, but if I understand correctly: the C mark has been seen on fakes. If that is the case, and I must admit I don't remember having seen it, then I would think that would mean this is a fake. Why would someone add a fake mark to real marks?
Then I don't understand this comment at all: "Maker’s mark; two initials I.I with 2 grains de remède and the C below might or could be a date letter."
first of all, there are 5 not 2 pellets or grains, I have seen some maker's mark with 4 pellets, so I guess someone could argue that the four pellets are 2 times the 2 grains of remedy and the other is just a place saver, but it sounds like a stretch to me. And if the C below is a date mark, that would be really rare, I might say unique. I can't say it is impossible, as there are almost exceptions to every comment about silver, but even someone who knows nothing about French silver would realize that this would be highly unlikely. It would require the silversmith to change his mark every year, and who would know what year the maker meant by "C". I know Russian silver does this, as do some town marks in France but my understanding is they are assayer's marks. If that was the meaning of what was said I would like to see other examples, if possible.
I really am loathe to make more comments, before I give up on getting a copy of those books. But I will make some points about those two extra marks.
First, I don't think they are shown anywhere in any of the regular books on French silver. The orb mark only looks vaguely similar to the Ciborium mark, and completely lacks the 84 .. 88 that is quite prominent on the ciborium mark. The other thing I would like to point out, the other date marks in this area have a crowned date letters as is most common in France in general. One final thing to notice: the maker's maker's mark has at least one to many pellets, and what is in the center of the C mark but another pellet, suspicious to me. Maybe the mark maker was using it instead of Car for Carcassonne, but that also seems like a stretch.
As for, is the piece old? I don't know but even if I had it in hand and said "it is old", it doesn't mean the marks are correct. I know at least two dealer who are at present taking old unmarked silver, or marked silver with the marks removed, and improving them by adding desirable marks. I can think of at least one other possibility, but I would really like to hear from someone who could check those books.
Maurice
I still think the best way of finding a solution is to get copies of the two books mentioned, but so far no volunteers. If I owned it and had the money, I would rather spend it on a book than an expert. Not that authors are necessarily more reliable than experts, but because they may have photos, that would answer some questions.
Ag2012 obviously knows more about the physics than I do, I have done some reading and of course have had some experience. I have two comments. Once I was asked by a museum to look at least a hundred small "antique" silver pieces. The were spread out on a table. I looked at a few, and said they were all fake. The curator asked if I was sure they were "all" fake. I looked again, and right in the center was one I said was antique. Evidently they had put it in as a test, and it had been in their collection for well over 100 years. They then sent the entire collection off to the major American decorative arts museum. They said (and I don't know the test) that all but a few had modern metal, and in their opinion there was no reason to think those few were old old either.
So my question is: if you take old silver scrap, to make your fake, I presume no physical test would prove it to be new.
Second I had read that all old silver had the trace elements mentioned. But evidently Xray florescence is not accurate enough, or all old silver doesn't. I took some 18th c. silver to a smelt, and had a friend test it, he found no trace gold.
As for the last posting. I realize it is obviously translated (unfortunately), so I don't know if what was said was what was intended. Some I agree with, but if I understand correctly: the C mark has been seen on fakes. If that is the case, and I must admit I don't remember having seen it, then I would think that would mean this is a fake. Why would someone add a fake mark to real marks?
Then I don't understand this comment at all: "Maker’s mark; two initials I.I with 2 grains de remède and the C below might or could be a date letter."
first of all, there are 5 not 2 pellets or grains, I have seen some maker's mark with 4 pellets, so I guess someone could argue that the four pellets are 2 times the 2 grains of remedy and the other is just a place saver, but it sounds like a stretch to me. And if the C below is a date mark, that would be really rare, I might say unique. I can't say it is impossible, as there are almost exceptions to every comment about silver, but even someone who knows nothing about French silver would realize that this would be highly unlikely. It would require the silversmith to change his mark every year, and who would know what year the maker meant by "C". I know Russian silver does this, as do some town marks in France but my understanding is they are assayer's marks. If that was the meaning of what was said I would like to see other examples, if possible.
I really am loathe to make more comments, before I give up on getting a copy of those books. But I will make some points about those two extra marks.
First, I don't think they are shown anywhere in any of the regular books on French silver. The orb mark only looks vaguely similar to the Ciborium mark, and completely lacks the 84 .. 88 that is quite prominent on the ciborium mark. The other thing I would like to point out, the other date marks in this area have a crowned date letters as is most common in France in general. One final thing to notice: the maker's maker's mark has at least one to many pellets, and what is in the center of the C mark but another pellet, suspicious to me. Maybe the mark maker was using it instead of Car for Carcassonne, but that also seems like a stretch.
As for, is the piece old? I don't know but even if I had it in hand and said "it is old", it doesn't mean the marks are correct. I know at least two dealer who are at present taking old unmarked silver, or marked silver with the marks removed, and improving them by adding desirable marks. I can think of at least one other possibility, but I would really like to hear from someone who could check those books.
Maurice
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
Maurice, you are right about evaluating authenticity (the event at the museum you mentioned); years of handling silver and learning are more valuable than any chemical or physical tests being the last resort, unless fakers are extremely clever and knowledgeable but fortunately they are NOT.
So my question is: if you take old silver scrap, to make your fake, I presume no physical test would prove it to be new.[quote][/quote]
Right, unless hard solder is tested (modern solders have different composition and old solders are impossible to find).But this is far beyond common practice even in museums - sometimes they stubbornly persist on authenticity.
Let me mention another issue; screws (also seen here).
Standardization of screws started around 1800, but, of course, one can easily find old taps and dies to make ``antique`` screws with leads and pitches per inch length fully consistent with old screws. But both curators and auctioneers do not care at all; I have made a finial of an 18th. Century item and used metric ISO tap and die and both the finial and the missing screw were made of 0.800 silver (the item was sterling). The repair was done for a collector but then the item emerged at the auction with a major auction house and easily sold.
Btw. there are only traces of gold in antique silver and impossible to detect by conventional chemical tests (the mass spectrometry curve would show more gold, though).
Suggested an excellent book still available at about $20; in German but every page is illustrated.
Silber. Imitation - Kopie - Fälschung - Verfälschung - Ernst-Ludwig Richter - ISBN-10: 392181118X - ISBN-13: 978-3921811184
If you type the title in German there are other book dealers, too.
Good luck.
So my question is: if you take old silver scrap, to make your fake, I presume no physical test would prove it to be new.[quote][/quote]
Right, unless hard solder is tested (modern solders have different composition and old solders are impossible to find).But this is far beyond common practice even in museums - sometimes they stubbornly persist on authenticity.
Let me mention another issue; screws (also seen here).
Standardization of screws started around 1800, but, of course, one can easily find old taps and dies to make ``antique`` screws with leads and pitches per inch length fully consistent with old screws. But both curators and auctioneers do not care at all; I have made a finial of an 18th. Century item and used metric ISO tap and die and both the finial and the missing screw were made of 0.800 silver (the item was sterling). The repair was done for a collector but then the item emerged at the auction with a major auction house and easily sold.
Btw. there are only traces of gold in antique silver and impossible to detect by conventional chemical tests (the mass spectrometry curve would show more gold, though).
Suggested an excellent book still available at about $20; in German but every page is illustrated.
Silber. Imitation - Kopie - Fälschung - Verfälschung - Ernst-Ludwig Richter - ISBN-10: 392181118X - ISBN-13: 978-3921811184
If you type the title in German there are other book dealers, too.
Good luck.
-
Francais
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
I had trouble understanding exactly what you were referring to when you said "beyond common practice", but from the tone I think we are on the same track as far as museums and auction houses. The silver I was talking about was Dutch and British flatware so no solder. I was a little reticent about pointing it out, but like you said most fakers are probably stupider than the people who buy their productions. I learned about solder, because a friend was buying old gold to do castings, and it was pointed out that it had to be something without solder. I knew about screws, a furniture dealer taught me about that. It is odd you mention the finial. I had purchased some silver pieces with a major dealer, now dead, who was to sell them. One piece he had a finial made for, I couldn't believe anyone wouldn't realize it, but I doubt he announced the repair, as I found out subsequently, it was not his practice. He wanted to sell another piece for me, his repair person could somehow fill in later engraving, I refused as I didn't want to get involved. Of course documented pieces are how people who make "adjustments" get caught.
I have that book, thanks, but quite honestly haven't looked at it in years.
Maurice
I have that book, thanks, but quite honestly haven't looked at it in years.
Maurice
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
You worked with museums and you are aware they do not bother much to examine silver in details unless it`s very important piece. Even then, if an identical item is kept elsewhere they refuse to compare them side by side and undertake serious tests claiming stubbornly the particular item in their collection is authentic and the other one is a later fake."beyond common practice"
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
Hi,
unfortunately I have not been good for that reason are not addressed before but I think as Maurice says it is better to wait for someone to give us notitie taken from those books.
I think it is correct to attribute the origin of the family Voisins Brugoirolles (see attachments).
Also I have over forty years experience in the silverware but limited to that of Sicily from the fourteenth century until the abolition of the consulates.
I understand how you use the google translator and then I do not express it properly.
About candlesticks, for which I have some doubts, I would be pleased if Maurice Rosenberg publicasse page where it says the punch by Jean van Campenhoudt.
Thank you and greet you cordially wishing everyone a happy 2014,
Guido Mazzola
unfortunately I have not been good for that reason are not addressed before but I think as Maurice says it is better to wait for someone to give us notitie taken from those books.
I think it is correct to attribute the origin of the family Voisins Brugoirolles (see attachments).
Also I have over forty years experience in the silverware but limited to that of Sicily from the fourteenth century until the abolition of the consulates.
I understand how you use the google translator and then I do not express it properly.
About candlesticks, for which I have some doubts, I would be pleased if Maurice Rosenberg publicasse page where it says the punch by Jean van Campenhoudt.
Thank you and greet you cordially wishing everyone a happy 2014,
Guido Mazzola
-
Francais
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
Ag2012, if you think it is hard to convince a curator that what they have is not good, you should try to convince them that what you have is good.
Unfortunately too few collectors learn about what they are collecting, and rely on curators and auctioneers for advice, although I suppose from their point of view I guess a dealer has a worse reputation.
Guido, as a point of etiquette in France you have to put the "de" in front of the family name, it denotes nobility, and they often get offended if it is left out.
The story of Simon de Monfort, is a sad one in the history of France, not our finest day.
Unfortunately too few collectors learn about what they are collecting, and rely on curators and auctioneers for advice, although I suppose from their point of view I guess a dealer has a worse reputation.
Guido, as a point of etiquette in France you have to put the "de" in front of the family name, it denotes nobility, and they often get offended if it is left out.
The story of Simon de Monfort, is a sad one in the history of France, not our finest day.
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
I Maurice,
I apologize for the lack of "de" but it certainly made ​​in good faith.
Best regards, Guido
I apologize for the lack of "de" but it certainly made ​​in good faith.
Best regards, Guido
-
Francais
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
No problem, I assure you I have no "de" before my name, and am not noble.
Maurice
Maurice
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
Good morning, I may have found the author of cruet is Jean Jacques Cailhot active in Carcassonne around 1787 see the photograph from "Les 6000 poinçons de l'orfrèvrerie française sous Luis XVI" p. 225
Re: Help me identify these silver hallmarks of cruet.
Hi Guido,
Many thanks for updating the topic, it is appreciated.
Trev.
Many thanks for updating the topic, it is appreciated.
Trev.