www.925-1000.com

I own a sterling silver Frederick Elkington centerpiece that is appropriately hallmarked for Birmingham 1871 (FE maker mark, W date mark, Birmingham anchor city Mark, Lion silver mark, and Queen Victoria duty Mark). There are multiple pieces such as a cornucopia and kneeling female figure, and the nuts for attaching them.

I have never previously noticed the markings on the smaller pieces contained only two hallmarks--the identical 1871 "W" date mark and the Queen Victoria duty mark. I have some other London pieces where the separate pieces have the Lion Sterling mark and date mark.

Would it be common on Birmingham silver to have only the Duty mark and the date mark, and not include the Lion Sterling mark? I guess it would not be necessary to have the silver standard mark since it would be more important to identify that the tax on the silver was paid.

I have had a few teapots and the body of the teapot was fully marked, but other pieces such as the lid or the handle were incompletely hallmarked.
I would like to see the Cornucopia, and the smaller pieces that accompany it just to make sure, but I think it is similar to the teapots.
Adjoining pieces of a large silver object, especially pieces that were made separately, often carry two hallmarks instead of the complete set of four.

There is an explanation for this practice that I have read here in a thread somewhere, and I am trying to remember the details. There are experts on this website with far more knowledge than myself, and it could take a day or two for them to respond, but I just thought I would tell you that you are not alone, and that larger pieces often have smaller pieces attached with only two hallmarks instead of the four.

Just as an aside, I once had a pair of salt spoons with all 4 hallmarks on a shaft that was no larger than a toothpick. Imagine a sterling silver toothpick and how hard it would be to impress all 4 hallmarks on there. That was a cased set of salt cellars, in a picnic basket form, and the accompanying salt spoons. So, it's not like they did not have the ability to impress all 4 hallmarks on those adjoining pieces. And I know there is a reason for this practice that I read in a thread here, but again, I simply cannot recall it at this point in time and my eyesight is quite dim as well.

Thank you, Aguest. I am posting a link to the centerpiece and the hallmarks. As shown, there is a full set of hallmarks on the main silver piece. The female figure and the cornucopia have only the W date mark and the Queen Victoria mark--in fact, even the wing nuts have the same Victoria and date marks punched on the top--very small marks just like your toothpick. I have a Victorian teapot where the lid is marked separately with just two hallmarks...the lion for silver and the date mark.

Sorry I could not include the link in the pictures. I have tried about 20 times and have not been successful. The tutorial obviously did not help...I am missing something.

http://s20.postimg.org/kurvzzin1/image.jpg
http://s20.postimg.org/natpdu0pp/image.jpg
http://s20.postimg.org/yynr8dpul/image.jpg
http://s20.postimg.org/436kh8ie5/image.jpg

Regards and thank you. Ken

It is indeed a nice piece from Birmingham

This piece reminds me of a type of candlestick I had, called a "Wax Jack," with a solid silver base and then it had a stem that led up to a platform where the candle wax was stored. The base was hallmarked 4 times, while the upper platform was marked 2 times. They obviously had been created from two separate pieces, as appears to be the case with this cornucopia. The base appears to have been made from one solid piece, and then then upper part and the stem are separate pieces. The base has 4 hallmarks, while the upper part has 2 hallmarks. Same general design.

There were laws about these separate pieces being hallmarked with 2 hallmarks, as the English assay offices were quite strict. Violations were a serious offense indeed.

Thank you again. You are correct in that the base and the bottom stem are one piece. The upper stem is attached using a threaded bolt that screws into the lower stem. It is also marked with the same two hallmarks.

It is the nicest English Victorian piece I own, standing almost 17 inches tall, with the base diameter of 10 inches and weighing about 75 troy ounces. Elkington did a very good job with the casting of the base and stem, as well as the female figurine and the cornucopia.

Also, thank you for extracting the pictures and directly posting them on the post. KJ

Hello KJ,
Back to your original question as to why the duty mark and date letter were marked when you quite rightlly state that it is more usual to have the part mark of lion passant ant date letter. Due to the heavily textured nature of your piece the usual punch (which would have been in the form of a stub- with both marks on the same punch) this would have been tricky to mark without the risk of damaging the piece. In the Birmingham Punch register for this year (1871-2) both the year and duty separate punches are in a convenient oval outline and would have had less of a risk of damaging the item when marked.
I hope this answers your question and may I congratulate you on a glorious piece of Birmingham made silver!
Kind regards
Craig

Thank you, Craig. You have provided an excellent explanation. KJ