www.925-1000.com

AG2012 wrote:How do you explain CG (Kuzma Grigorjev) initials in Latin ? Not even KG, but C for Cuzma.

Here is an example of CG assayer mark. This beaker was made the same year as mine (1745). The only difference is a maker mark. Take a look, there is no Aldemans mark:

Also, take a look at this beautiful beaker that was sold in UK. Made same year (1745). Compare the work of it to mine beaker. In my opinion, it is just a higher quality work than ordinary beakers with eagles.



(admin edit - see Posting Requirements )

AG2012 wrote:How do you explain CG (Kuzma Grigorjev) initials in Latin ? Not even KG, but C for Cuzma.

Кузьма=Cosmas=Cosmo=Côme......

The last shown beaker is marked AK and not CG. Now we have CG for Grigoriev Kuzma and now suddenly also ГС ??? Who is who and where from is the information that CG would be Grigoriev Kuzma (except for Postnikova #2078) Interesting that the beaker in the link also shoves ГК. Moreover year 1745 on all????. Can anybody make any sense in this? I am completely out like the mail box (not the first time :-)))).

More....
In my papers I managed to find the following:
Kuzma Grigoryev in Moscow 1738-1749 (mark CG)
but also
Kuzmin Anisim Grigoryev in Moscow 1741-1749(52) (mark AK)

Kindly tell me what is correct, who is who....or not?

Qrt.S wrote:The last shown beaker is marked AK and not CG. Now we have CG for Grigoriev Kuzma and now suddenly also ГС ??? Who is who and where from is the information that CG would be Grigoriev Kuzma (except for Postnikova #2078) Interesting that the beaker in the link also shoves ГК. Moreover year 1745 on all????. Can anybody make any sense in this? I am completely out like the mail box (not the first time :-)))).

If you were reading everything that we were talking about you would see that we were not only talking about marks but also about the style of work of that period. The last post that I have posted is about the style of work to be compared to my beaker. The beaker that I've posted with maker ГС is not mine, it is an example for everyone to compare the mark of Grigoriev Kuzma (CG) - assayer.

About the brands. This topic shows two products. Assay master Kuzma Grigoriev "CG". There is a lot of information about him in these years.
The brands of the masters are "AEЛ" and "ГС". I don't understand what the discussion is about.

#Kirils
If you read everything you would understand that this is a silver mark forum. Moreover. I haven't claimed that beaker is yours. Read more carefully the text.
What I want to know is this:
Kuzma Grigoriev in Moscow 1738-1749 (mark CG)
but also
Kuzmin Anisim Grigoriev in Moscow 1741-1749(52) (mark AK)

Kindly tell me what is correct, who is who....or not? Are they the same or different persons?

I also like AG2012 would like to read an explanation of where from is the information telling that CG is Grigoriev Kuzma. (Postnikova is not an acceptable source) In addition, what is the connection between the beaker on the auction site and the mark CG?

All of a sudden, 1745 funny beakers started to fly around.

Once upon a time we were not that naive (do not misunderstand me, I do not pretened to claim we were smarter or whatever).
Reminds me of two Augsburg beakers at the same table with the same dealer, the same 17th century year; what are the odds?
Qrt.S has the point, always 1745!
Fakers are laughing at experts out there and spend hard earned money.
Good luck with 1745. As far as I am concerned, the issue is closed; not interested in caricature like embossing Russian beakers marked with Latin initials.
Just do not support fakers, please.
Regarding reputable auction houses remember this: a friend of mine had 18th century Russian church box /cross missing. I made the missing cross using a .500 coin and it was easily sold; did they bother to notice the cross was not marked, and let alone it was. 500 standard ? No way.

Regards

Hello Kirils

Interesting discussion about your beaker,This is not my area of knowledge,although in my opinion the last beakers you posted ,do not have anything in common with your beaker .The workmanship on your beaker to me looks like a later style as mentioned by others.
As AG102 says "there are now 1745 beakers everywhere"
we always hope our items are original and early,unless all the info adds up,and all the opinions are the same (which they should be if the item is correct)
This is a great forum for discovering information,sometimes we get info that we do not agree with.
good luck with you beaker (still an interesting piece)
as members know marks are not the only thing to take into account when judging the age.

Regards Guido.

Hello Kirrils
Some images of some Russian beakers ,you may find interesting,most of these are much later than your beaker,as you can see the decoration is a much flatter design,even at this date.

Ref Russian Gold and Silver ,Alexander von Solodkoff,1981. (Trefoil)
Regards Guido.