[/list].
Sterling Vodka Goblet
-
Silvernut37
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:12 pm
- Location: Virginia
Sterling Vodka Goblet
I searched the website and can't find the marks. I think this is Russian. Can anyone tell me who the maker is, what the age might be, and where it was made?
[/list]
.
[/list].
Not Russian but Soviet (hehehe). A mark for a silver factory i Moscow I would say. It is silver in 875/1000 quality and made in about 1969. To be more specific the first mark with the star and M is the assaying office for Moscow and the second one is the factory 9KXK. Seems to be niello decorated.
Hate to say but I am not absolutely sure because I don't have access to my books right now.
.
Hate to say but I am not absolutely sure because I don't have access to my books right now.
.
I remember coming across this particular Soviet-era mark before in another forum discussion, and it was condemned as a fake due to the peculiar "stencil" look of it. I don't know one way or another - but 1960's Soviet silver seems to me a not particularly profitable thing to counterfeit. Does anyone know about this odd mark which seems to be one continuous line? (Note how each numeral is attached to the outline by a vertical line, and how the city code "M" is attached to the star.)
I have a hard time imagining what the actual punch that made this mark would look like, or what the advantage there would be in designing it this way. Was it perhaps machine engraved? Thoughts?
.
I have a hard time imagining what the actual punch that made this mark would look like, or what the advantage there would be in designing it this way. Was it perhaps machine engraved? Thoughts?
.
Hi!
I remember the case, in that case we had two marks on the item, one fake from the russian period and then the fake remarking from the sovjet period. As you mentioned it was condemned a fake and I would agree on the outcome. The case was clearer as the russian period mark was clearly a fake so the sovjet period mark was easier to condemn a fake.
One can not rule out that this one would be also be a fake. In addition to the control mark also the factory mark seems a question, the number and what the odd symbol before it? On the other hand there were a factory with these initials but is the beaker their product. The gilded beaker itself and the quality seems typical to the sovjet time.
I could see the advantage if the mark is machine engraved or the stamp with which the mark has been made was made in a industrial process with no need for carving. Cheaper and faster possibly, maybe even calculated as sovjet industrial progress.
Whether the beaker is genuine I can not say with 100% sureness but it would seem little sense to fake such sovjet industrial products as also indicated by blakstone. Possibly we find more information on faking sovjet time products (if there are such), I believe the other item was from chinese origin.
Regards,
Juke
.
I remember the case, in that case we had two marks on the item, one fake from the russian period and then the fake remarking from the sovjet period. As you mentioned it was condemned a fake and I would agree on the outcome. The case was clearer as the russian period mark was clearly a fake so the sovjet period mark was easier to condemn a fake.
One can not rule out that this one would be also be a fake. In addition to the control mark also the factory mark seems a question, the number and what the odd symbol before it? On the other hand there were a factory with these initials but is the beaker their product. The gilded beaker itself and the quality seems typical to the sovjet time.
I could see the advantage if the mark is machine engraved or the stamp with which the mark has been made was made in a industrial process with no need for carving. Cheaper and faster possibly, maybe even calculated as sovjet industrial progress.
Whether the beaker is genuine I can not say with 100% sureness but it would seem little sense to fake such sovjet industrial products as also indicated by blakstone. Possibly we find more information on faking sovjet time products (if there are such), I believe the other item was from chinese origin.
Regards,
Juke
.
The tabs that connect each character to the outside frame are strange, don't believe I have ever noted them on another mark. Certainly an incuse punch could be made this way, but I don't see the sense of it. From an engineering standpoint, only two possibilities come to mind:
1. As blakstone suggests, it is a machine engraved mark, the tabs would allow the mark to be incised in one pass without necessitating the lifting of the graver from the piece.
2. For acid etching, it could have been a type of appliqued fretwork stencil, the tabs holding the elements in place.
Sure there are other possible explanations.
Regards, Tom
ps. have searched for the mentioned earlier post on the fake mark, can't find a trace of it.
.
1. As blakstone suggests, it is a machine engraved mark, the tabs would allow the mark to be incised in one pass without necessitating the lifting of the graver from the piece.
2. For acid etching, it could have been a type of appliqued fretwork stencil, the tabs holding the elements in place.
Sure there are other possible explanations.
Regards, Tom
ps. have searched for the mentioned earlier post on the fake mark, can't find a trace of it.
.
Interesting discussion, anyway, I'm now temporarily back to my books. However, I'm not so sure anymore that it is made i Moscow. This kombinat 9KXK seems to be located i Dagestan and the letter M might indicate something else than Moscow. I'll revert to this matter later (it might take some time, it's summer you see!). I'm also a bit suspicious regarding the mark, it looks spurious, it's strange!
.
.
re: silver goblet
I was just wondering, does the ".9" in ".9xkx" stand for 90% or .900 silver?
.
.
Soviet "Stencil" Mark
The design of this hallmark is authentic. It is necessitated by the process used to imprint the mark. The process is referred to as electrospark method of marking metal. It is based on the technological process of a electroerosive treatment to the metal. Essentially it is a release of electromagnetic energy (electric spark) that vaporizes the surface at the designated point. The method though not instant (3-15 seconds) was favored as it could be used on curved surfaces with no distortion, did not apply pressure, no clean up was necessary, and would not effect enameling or stones set in the mount. It is my understanding that there are some assay offices still using this method in Russia and Ukraine but laser offers more versatility and there is more movement to use laser as it is afforded.
Hope that clears up the mystery of the "Stencil" style mark.
References: «ВолÑ» published «Assay control. An expert estimation of jewels from precious metals» (authors N. Nazumok, Ð. Shlykov, Т. Ðrtukh). Ukraine
.
Hope that clears up the mystery of the "Stencil" style mark.
References: «ВолÑ» published «Assay control. An expert estimation of jewels from precious metals» (authors N. Nazumok, Ð. Shlykov, Т. Ðrtukh). Ukraine
.
Hi dnl,
Well done, great research, love having a mystery solved!
Beyond vaguely postwar, any clue as to when this application was first used in Russian marking? Also, we are (at least I am) still in the dark as to the purpose of the tabs. Was the device used something in form like a miniature cattle brand, or was there an actual electro-chemical stencil applied to the piece in order to attract/guide the electrospark?
Thanks, Tom
.
Well done, great research, love having a mystery solved!
Beyond vaguely postwar, any clue as to when this application was first used in Russian marking? Also, we are (at least I am) still in the dark as to the purpose of the tabs. Was the device used something in form like a miniature cattle brand, or was there an actual electro-chemical stencil applied to the piece in order to attract/guide the electrospark?
Thanks, Tom
.
Well, to my mind we still have a minor mystery here. If you search in internet for кубачинÑкий художетвенный комбинат (9KXK), you will find interesting information of this factory located in Dagestan in the city of Mahazkala.
On the sites you can read that originally an "artel" was founded in the village of Kubanski in Dagestan in 1924. It became very famous. It also had (has even today) a subsidiary in Moscow.
The problem is that in PL #6262 in page 308 is stated that this "artel" was located in both Moscow and Baku. Baku is in Azerbaijan. There is no mentioning of any office or activity in Baku whatsoever??? Any clues?
.
On the sites you can read that originally an "artel" was founded in the village of Kubanski in Dagestan in 1924. It became very famous. It also had (has even today) a subsidiary in Moscow.
The problem is that in PL #6262 in page 308 is stated that this "artel" was located in both Moscow and Baku. Baku is in Azerbaijan. There is no mentioning of any office or activity in Baku whatsoever??? Any clues?
.
Dear Admin,
I am working on getting a definitive answer for you for the time of use for the electrospark method of hallmarking but do not have one at this moment. Will post as soon as I do. (Going through translators in foreign timezones makes for slow responses)
Dear Qrt.S,
I may not have an answer for you, either, but I would like to add artels came out of the Soviet period when an individual could not work as a private enterprise. Thus groups formed much like a local production communes or cooperatives would work together, thus 'artels' were formed. What I can offer you if you are not already aware of is that Russia had/has quite a few assay office that were used by the regional artels. Currently, Russia has 18 assay offices each with their own symbol. Baku also had an assay office under Russian rule opened in 1927 and continued on until 1994 or so when the region became independent (Azerbaijan). That may not be an answer to your query but may offer another piece to your puzzle.
I do want to add (which will throw a real wrench in the works here) is that it is very important to include the punctuation on the artel mark. The one in question is .9KXK This .9 is for the year 1989. I could throw a monkey in the works as well but think I will stop here for now.
Hope that helps.
.
I am working on getting a definitive answer for you for the time of use for the electrospark method of hallmarking but do not have one at this moment. Will post as soon as I do. (Going through translators in foreign timezones makes for slow responses)
Dear Qrt.S,
I may not have an answer for you, either, but I would like to add artels came out of the Soviet period when an individual could not work as a private enterprise. Thus groups formed much like a local production communes or cooperatives would work together, thus 'artels' were formed. What I can offer you if you are not already aware of is that Russia had/has quite a few assay office that were used by the regional artels. Currently, Russia has 18 assay offices each with their own symbol. Baku also had an assay office under Russian rule opened in 1927 and continued on until 1994 or so when the region became independent (Azerbaijan). That may not be an answer to your query but may offer another piece to your puzzle.
I do want to add (which will throw a real wrench in the works here) is that it is very important to include the punctuation on the artel mark. The one in question is .9KXK This .9 is for the year 1989. I could throw a monkey in the works as well but think I will stop here for now.
Hope that helps.
.
Thank you for your addition dnl, however, hopefully we don't have a language problem here regarding the artels. They are not a Soviet "product". The first artel was founded 1900 in former Russia. That was the 1st Jewelry and Engraving artel in Kiev. The number of Russian artels was all in all 32 probably 34. About 1916-17 every artel was closed down due to the revolution.
What then happened after the revolution during the Soviet period is another story. Kindly do not not mix former Russian artels with Soviet cooperatives or similar "intitutions", they have very little to do with each other if anything at all.
Yes, there was an assay office in Baku as from 1927 to 1953 (and earlier too, i.e. 1895-1916). It cipher was the Greek letter Z. As from 7.1.1954 the "cipher" changed. What I meant was that no "artel" existed in Baku. By the way, there is no Russia 1927 it is the Soviet union :-)))
No, the 9 is neither 1979 nor 1989, it is the establishing year 1969. See PL #6262
.
What then happened after the revolution during the Soviet period is another story. Kindly do not not mix former Russian artels with Soviet cooperatives or similar "intitutions", they have very little to do with each other if anything at all.
Yes, there was an assay office in Baku as from 1927 to 1953 (and earlier too, i.e. 1895-1916). It cipher was the Greek letter Z. As from 7.1.1954 the "cipher" changed. What I meant was that no "artel" existed in Baku. By the way, there is no Russia 1927 it is the Soviet union :-)))
No, the 9 is neither 1979 nor 1989, it is the establishing year 1969. See PL #6262
.
I see now the problem. You are looking in the dated Postnikova-Losseva. Catalog of Hallmarks on Items in Precious Metals, 1917-2000 (USSR and Russia) by Troepol'skaya, N., Moscow: 2006 is more current and instead of PL #6262, look to T#4336 263 that lists the .9KXK as 1979.
As for the artels, you have me now confused. Please explain what you meant earlier "On the sites you can read that originally an "artel" was founded in the village of Kubanski in Dagestan in 1924. It became very famous. It also had (has even today) a subsidiary in Moscow. " While I know you are speaking specifics, you use the term artel but then say " The number of Russian artels was all in all 32 probably 34. About 1916-17 every artel was closed down due to the revolution. What then happened after the revolution during the Soviet period is another story. Kindly do not not mix former Russian artels with Soviet cooperatives or similar "intitutions", they have very little to do with each other if anything at all. " Does that mean that "artel" is not used as a term for the Soviet (;-)) Russia cooperatives? If not, what is the correct term? I really do want to know. :-)
Thanks
.
As for the artels, you have me now confused. Please explain what you meant earlier "On the sites you can read that originally an "artel" was founded in the village of Kubanski in Dagestan in 1924. It became very famous. It also had (has even today) a subsidiary in Moscow. " While I know you are speaking specifics, you use the term artel but then say " The number of Russian artels was all in all 32 probably 34. About 1916-17 every artel was closed down due to the revolution. What then happened after the revolution during the Soviet period is another story. Kindly do not not mix former Russian artels with Soviet cooperatives or similar "intitutions", they have very little to do with each other if anything at all. " Does that mean that "artel" is not used as a term for the Soviet (;-)) Russia cooperatives? If not, what is the correct term? I really do want to know. :-)
Thanks
.
Interesting but unfortunately I don't have this new catalog, haven't even heard of such new book. I have to find it. Its quiet possible that you are right. New investigations gives new answers. Strange anyway that Postnikova/... would have made such a mistake, she did live at that time???
Anyway, about the artels. There is very little written and/or investigated about those. However, they belong to the imperial Russia and definitely not to the Soviet period. It means, as you mentioned, that the expression "artel" should not be used after 1918. You can use, cooperative, silver factory or similar expressions but not artel if we are talking about the Soviet era.
With the sites I meant internet sites. Search for the Kubanski Hudoshetvennij Kombinat and you can read for your self.
What is an artel? An artel is undoubtedly a factory but it is the opposite to mass production (= Soviet cooperatives= mass production=low quality...). They produced unique pieces and things in usually silver some times enameled. Another artel made jewelry a 3rd was specialized in engravings.
As some examples: The 8th artel i St Petersburg (8 CA) made silver pieces of very high quality Fabergé used it as a sub provider. The head master was Matejev Nikolai Martijovitsh.
The 1st artel i Moscow (1ÑA/1ÑMA 1915-17) was also specialized in silver. It was in the beginning Julius Rappoports work shop (1Ю). The 11th artel (11M.A.) in Moscow was specialized in cloisonné and guilloche enameling techniques etc.
Everything the artels produced was of very high quality indeed.
But as I already mentioned there is a whole lot left to investigate about the artels in former Russia.
.
Anyway, about the artels. There is very little written and/or investigated about those. However, they belong to the imperial Russia and definitely not to the Soviet period. It means, as you mentioned, that the expression "artel" should not be used after 1918. You can use, cooperative, silver factory or similar expressions but not artel if we are talking about the Soviet era.
With the sites I meant internet sites. Search for the Kubanski Hudoshetvennij Kombinat and you can read for your self.
What is an artel? An artel is undoubtedly a factory but it is the opposite to mass production (= Soviet cooperatives= mass production=low quality...). They produced unique pieces and things in usually silver some times enameled. Another artel made jewelry a 3rd was specialized in engravings.
As some examples: The 8th artel i St Petersburg (8 CA) made silver pieces of very high quality Fabergé used it as a sub provider. The head master was Matejev Nikolai Martijovitsh.
The 1st artel i Moscow (1ÑA/1ÑMA 1915-17) was also specialized in silver. It was in the beginning Julius Rappoports work shop (1Ю). The 11th artel (11M.A.) in Moscow was specialized in cloisonné and guilloche enameling techniques etc.
Everything the artels produced was of very high quality indeed.
But as I already mentioned there is a whole lot left to investigate about the artels in former Russia.
.
Thank you for furthering the understanding of Artels. Indeed there is far too little, I have found, that explains them well.
As for Postnikova-Losseva, there is no error. The publication I have is dated 1995 but the dates listed with the maker's marks extend only to 1977. The other publication by Troepol'skaya takes the marks up to the year 2000. (see below)
While the use of a year code within the reserve along with the maker's mark started in 1953, the use of the punctuation with the number code for the year began in 1979. In that year the period appears in front of a 9 ( .9). Thie period appears each year through a whole cycle of numbers 9,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. In 1990, the date code 0 sported a : in front of the number code ( :0 ) for a whole cycle of numbers up until 1999. In 1987, the assay office letter was added after the year code and in front of the maker's mark. So the line up is extended to be :Y?MMM (y=year, ?=assay office, MMM=maker's mark). For only one year, in the year 2000, the AO mark was moved in front of the year code - 0 (?0MMM). In 2001, the year codes reverted back to the Cyrillic alphabet and the original line up as before.
Once the methodology is understood, it becomes quite handy in dating more recent Russian pieces. Again not easily found or explained but it will be in a new publication that is just getting released, World Hallmarks - Vol. I - Europe, 19th - 21st Centuries.
As for the book I referenced, its proper name in Cyrillic is..
СПРÐВОЧÐИК
КЛЕЙМРÐРИЗДЕЛИЯX
из драгоценных металлах,
1917-2000 rr
(СССРи РоÑÑии)
by TроеполъÑкаÑ
If you are a collector of books, this is indeed one for your resource library. It is in Russian, but it sounds like that is not an issue for you. Hope this helped.
dnl
.
As for Postnikova-Losseva, there is no error. The publication I have is dated 1995 but the dates listed with the maker's marks extend only to 1977. The other publication by Troepol'skaya takes the marks up to the year 2000. (see below)
While the use of a year code within the reserve along with the maker's mark started in 1953, the use of the punctuation with the number code for the year began in 1979. In that year the period appears in front of a 9 ( .9). Thie period appears each year through a whole cycle of numbers 9,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. In 1990, the date code 0 sported a : in front of the number code ( :0 ) for a whole cycle of numbers up until 1999. In 1987, the assay office letter was added after the year code and in front of the maker's mark. So the line up is extended to be :Y?MMM (y=year, ?=assay office, MMM=maker's mark). For only one year, in the year 2000, the AO mark was moved in front of the year code - 0 (?0MMM). In 2001, the year codes reverted back to the Cyrillic alphabet and the original line up as before.
Once the methodology is understood, it becomes quite handy in dating more recent Russian pieces. Again not easily found or explained but it will be in a new publication that is just getting released, World Hallmarks - Vol. I - Europe, 19th - 21st Centuries.
As for the book I referenced, its proper name in Cyrillic is..
СПРÐВОЧÐИК
КЛЕЙМРÐРИЗДЕЛИЯX
из драгоценных металлах,
1917-2000 rr
(СССРи РоÑÑии)
by TроеполъÑкаÑ
If you are a collector of books, this is indeed one for your resource library. It is in Russian, but it sounds like that is not an issue for you. Hope this helped.
dnl
.