www.925-1000.com

The scarcity of authentic ancient silver has given rise to a thriving craft of imitations all over the world, sometimes even of exquisite workmanship.
Italy obviously cannot be an exception, and in fact in every type of market and in the online catalogs of auction houses it is very frequent to find non-authentic Italian silver, sometimes indicated as such, more often presented as genuine.
The purpose of these notes is to draw the attention of buyers or simple enthusiasts to the clues that can help identify non-authentic silver or even just ring a bell that prompts a suspicious object to be looked at more carefully.

ROME AND THE PAPAL STATE IN THE 19TH CENTURY

Let's start with something quite simple: Rome and the Papal State from 1815 to the annexation of the various territories to the Kingdom of Sardinia.
On 7 January 1815, extended in 1817 to the territories of the “seconda recupera”, an edict of Cardinal Pacca prescribes that, throughout the Papal State, silver should be hallmaked with these hallmarks, respectively for large, medium and small objects.

For Rome there will be no letter under the crossed keys, for the other districts of the Papal State, however, there will be an identifying letter.
It also prescribes that the silversmith’s mark must have the shape of a lozenge and contain the master's initials and the workshop number in Rome, the initials and two identifying letters of the “ufficio del bollo” for the other districts.

In practice I have not found pseudomarks that imitate the numbers 171 and 172 and therefore let's focus on 168: below four genuine marks, the first from Rome, the second from Perugia, the third from Bologna and the quarter from Jesi

Let's carefully observe the characteristics to remember of a genuine mark:
1 The shape of the shield: Gothic with a spire head
2 The tiara, which ends with a sphere, sometimes has a tiny cross above the sphere (see the Perugia mark).
3 The infula
4 The keys of St. Peter, crossed at approximately 130° and with the map at the top and the handle at the bottom.
Keys and not pastorals or anything else. For example, the mark below has nothing to do with the Papal State, even if it may remind of it.

Therefore a genuine hallmarking of the Papal State, of this period, must have a hallmark with the characteristics described above, accompanied by a silversmith's lozenge mark, with the characteristics mentioned above.
Let's now take a few examples to see how things are.

Below is a photo of a wick with its marks


Let's now analyze the marks
Does the shape of the shield conform to the genuine one? Not completely, it's more elongated.
Are the infula present? No.
Do the keys have an angle of approximately 130°? No.
Does the lozenge mark comply with the provisions of Cardinal Pacca's edict? No
All this leads to the conclusion that these are pseudo marks.

Below is another wick, which is almost identical to the previous one, probably not a coincidence.


In the lozenge mark no letter is seen, and by comparing the marks on the lid with those on the bottom, it is clear that the imprints are not badly struck, it is precisely the punch that does not contain letters or numbers.
Are there infula in the shield? No
Do the keys look like keys and are they slanted as they should? No
Does the diamond mark contain letters or numbers? No
Again the conclusion is that we are faced with pseudo marks.

A third example: A beautiful hammer-rised basin, with a particular shape, to be noted and kept in mind

Again
Is the shape of the shield compliant? No
Are there any infula? No
Are the keys compliant? No, they are upside down and form an angle of approximately 90°.
Is the silversmith's mark shaped like a lozenge? No
Does it contain letters or numbers according to the provisions of Cardinal Pacca's edict? No
Here too it is clear that these are pseudo marks.

Below are other examples of pseudo marks, some credible, others absolutely ridiculous.

So it all seems pretty easy.
Well, it's not always easy.
Let's see this other example: an important lamp attributed to the master Antonio Giannotti

Let's look at the marks of this lamp (outlined in red).
Does the shield have the prescribed shape? Yes
Does the tiara end with a sphere? No
Are there any infula? Yes, but a little different than usual
Are the keys compliant? Yes
Does the lozenge mark comply with the provisions of Cardinal Pacca's edict? Yes,.. but something suggests a pantograph cutter rather than manual engraving.
Everything seems to be in order, but this stamping is different from that (outlined in green) of a Giannotti's other lamp, certainly genuine.
And then Mercury has a strange stupid face.
One would expect something better from master Giannotti.
Without seeing this object in person it is not possible to make a judgment based only on the photos, but it is legitimate to have some doubts.
A final example: a pair of candlesticks, still together after more than 170 years, attributed to Luigi Cappelletti, of which I only have the image of the hallmarking.


The shape of the shield is slightly different from the standard, it is rounded at the top rather than pointed
The keys are slightly thicker than what is usually found.
Even the infula are a little different than usual
This could be a variant of the real hallmark,… or a pseudomark.
The silversmith's mark complies with the requirements of Cardinal Pacca's edict and is right.
However, by directly comparing this punching (outlined in red) to another punching by Luigi Cappelletti, certainly genuine, (outlined in green) some doubts may arise.


In conclusion, it is very common to encounter pseudo marks that imitate the hallmark of the Papal State of this period, and most are easily recognizable by observing them carefully. Sometimes, however, the anomalies are so slight that it is impossible to decide from the photos alone whether they are pseudo-marks or variations of authentic ones. You need to have the object in your hand, observe the manufacturing technique, the signs of wear on the parts on which it rests, and possibly disassemble it if it is made of several pieces. These searches must always be done, but with more attention if an anomaly is detected in the punching.
Any comments or requests for clarification are welcome.
Amena

Good afternoon,
after having read this interesting post about the Papal State, I've seen, in my opinion, some different marks of the Vatican State in this inkwell. Is it an impression of mine? Another question: is the inkwell a french imported one in Rome? And the GSI mark is of a french silversmith? Or of a roman one? Every part of the object is fully marked wihth this three marks.

Thank you for your response!

J.

Hi
The differences you see in the marks are easily explainable
The largest, which I have spoken about at length, is the one for medium-sized objects, and is the most commonly used.
The smaller one which has the rounded shield at the top is the one for small objects.

As regards the lozenge mark, it is that of the master Giuseppe Spagna, a very well-known Roman silversmith.
According to Bulgari this specific mark was used until 1817.
The Minerva is in the barrel reserve, because the fineness in use in Rome is lower than 950/1000, but for the details of the affixing of this mark it is better to wait for the opinion of someone who knows more.
Regards
Amena

amena wrote: ↑Fri Nov 10, 2023 12:11 pm

this mark could be from Erlau
is there a makers mark?

Hi Theo
I have encountered this mark other times, I have now managed to find three examples. In these the mark is always alone.



The lot descriptions don't help
Sugar bowl 1 is indicated as Venetian (and here we are in full science fiction), sugar bowl 2 is indicated as Roman, in the case of plates the marks are described as Roman pseudo marks.
I hope the photos can help.
Best
Amena

amena wrote: ↑Fri Nov 24, 2023 12:18 pm Hi
The differences you see in the marks are easily explainable
The largest, which I have spoken about at length, is the one for medium-sized objects, and is the most commonly used.
The smaller one which has the rounded shield at the top is the one for small objects.

As regards the lozenge mark, it is that of the master Giuseppe Spagna, a very well-known Roman silversmith.
According to Bulgari this specific mark was used until 1817.
The Minerva is in the barrel reserve, because the fineness in use in Rome is lower than 950/1000, but for the details of the affixing of this mark it is better to wait for the opinion of someone who knows more.
Regards
Amena

Thank you so much for your response. Very interesting! I have'nt realize the silversmith mark was the Giuseppe Spagna one!
I've understood that the Minerva mark with the number 2 is for the fineness 800/1000, finesse in use also in Rome. Is it possible that it was put in the inkwell during the French occupation of Rome (1808-1814)?

Best regards,
Julio

Hi Julio
I do not think so.
the markss in use during the French occupation are of a type preceding the Minerva, which I believe came into force in 1838.

The papal mark with n. 168 guarantees a fineness of 889/1000.
The inkwell is certainly of Roman manufacture, presumably from 1815 or shortly after, according to what Bulgari says.
The Minerva was probably struck for an import in France, but that's not my forte, I'm not sure.
Regards
Amena

Venezia

Venice is certainly the best known, loved and most visited city in the world, and the demand, obviously, increases the prices of anything Venetian: crafts, restaurants, hotels and of course silver, even more so, if it is antique.
High prices make great temptation to make up for the scarcity of ancient objects with an imitation, sometimes indicated as such, sometimes passed off as authentic, sometimes even in good faith.
It is impossible to make a statistic, but it can be said for sure that a large part of the Venetian silver of ancient appearance are in fact imitations.
Below I will try to describe the pseudo punching that are most often found.
By recognizing them you will avoid later disappointment.

-------°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°-----------

In 1812, the decree of Eugene Beauharnais came into force throughout the Napoleonic Kingdom of Italy, regulating the hallmarking of precious metals, which remained unchanged until 1872.
It establishes four symbols for legal finenesses allowed, the same throughout the kingdom.

The one most frequently found, whether genuine or not, is the “starry world”, which, it must be said, is not always as clearly struck as in the examples below.

The decree also establishes a different symbol for each guarantee office, which for Venice is represented by "acrostolio or stern ornament", as stated in the table of hallmark designs. Strictly speaking, the acrostolio would be the bow ornament of ancient Greek and Roman warships, the stern one is named "aplustre" , but we won't argue and we accept the word "acrostolio".



I have highlighted with different colours the three peculiarities that characterize the mark of the Venice guarantee office, whose correspondence will have to be verified in the hallmarks that we observe.
-------°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°-----------

To begin with, we can consider the case of Bruno Zaramella, who was extensively described in the Silvercollection’s article which you can find at this link
https://www.silvercollection.it/dictionaryforgery.html
To what has already been said in that article, it can be added that the production of objects bearing the regular Zaramella’s hallmark "embellished" by the pseudo-nineteenth century hallmark lasted many years, in fact there are also objects which already have the "star-30 -PD” mark in use after 1972.
There are also objects with the official Zaramella marks and with other pseudo marks, always of Venetian inspiration

There is another pseudo mark, which is better to be wary of, which seems to have some connection with the production of Zaramella


This alleged silversmith's mark, which is obviously not listed in any text, even though objects with this mark are found in large quantities, has a symbol that I cannot interpret. For convenience we will call it "grate"
It is always accompanied by pseudo acrostolio and pseudo “starry world”, but I have never found any object with the marks of the Italian Republic also. Below is an example


Many of the products bearing the "grate" mark are truly similar to products pseudo hallmarked by Zaramella.
For example, these two cruets are almost identical but the one on the left bears Zaramella’s pseudo marks and the other those of the "grate"


The same for these two tripod sugar bowls on the right Zaramella, on the left the "grate"



-------°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°-----------

Another silversmith’s pseudo-mark, very widespread, which must require our attention is this one below, which has already been discussed in an old Zilverik post, of which unfortunately the photos have been lost

https://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopi ... ce#p145001



To deepen our knowledge of Mister ZG, it is good to take a look at the previous century.
The hallmark of the Serenissima Republic of Venice throughout the 18th century and until 1812 shows the effigy of the lion of St. Mark in majesty, familiarly known as “moleca” due to its vague resemblance to a crab.


The lion of St. Mark is found, in different variations, both alone in a round reserve, or with initials, believed to be the assayer's, underneath.
Below are some examples of both types



The hallmark can be found alone, struck one or more times or accompanied by other marks, most often assayer’s marks, but also workshop marks or master silversmith’s marks, these also struck one or more times, without a precise rule.
Now let's go back to Mr ZG and look at the stamping of this object


It is a very simple bucket, with a very simple decoration, so much so that it is surprising that such a banal object has been preserved with so much attention that it has survived to this day, after more than two centuries, in perfect condition. There is the ZG mark and a “moleca”.
As we have seen, there are dozens of types of genuine “molecas”, all slightly different and therefore it is not possible to compare this one with a sample and verify its correspondence.
Even regarding the silversmith's mark, nothing precise can be said, silversmith’s mark with the initials ZG were found which were not exactly the same but similar, and in any case there are dozens of genuine marks not listed in the manuals.
Fortunately, Mr. ZG sometimes exaggerates and in this other stamping, in addition to his specific “moleca”, he has also added an acrostolio, which betrays him


Why would the guarantee office have to add its mark in the middle of a stamping made before 1812?
Someone might argue that this is a subsequent repunching.
If this were the case, the office would also have had to stamp the mark of the fineness detected, which is missing here.

And if this were not enough, it is sufficient to compare the acrostolio with the sample to verify that it is a pseudo mark; the planks (in yellow) have a different curvature, the crosspieces (in red) are missing and even the shield (in green) is badly engraved

This is enough to consider all three marks not genuine.
I'm not the only one who thinks this way, below is the stamping of a style coffee pot presented by a well-known auction house. It says in the description
Coffee pot in molten, embossed and chiselled silver. Venice, 20th century. Hallmarks and silversmith's mark ZG. 18th century style Venetian silverware


Unfortunately many other auction houses are not as competent or conscientious
Mr. ZG's production is very plentiful and you can find candlesticks, kettles, coffee pots, tureens, wicks, etc., sometimes even of good workmanship.
Below is an anthology of Mr. ZG’s marks.


To be continued…. it’s a very long story

Thanks for sharing this valuable information about pseudo-marks on Venetian silver. It's eye-opening to see the detailed analysis of various marks and the potential for misrepresentation. Your insights into specific silversmiths like Bruno Zaramella and the cautionary notes on certain pseudo-marks are especially helpful for collectors. Looking forward to the continuation of this informative journey!

VENICE 2
A few days ago, by chance, a bucket exactly like the one discussed above appeared at an online auction house.



This time, however, instead of having Mr. ZG’s marks, it was stamped with marks of the Italian Republic, 30 PD : the Zaramella Company.



This does not necessarily mean that Mr ZG is Zaramella, but certainly that the buckets of this model were manufactured in the 1960s and then marketed under both the Zaramella and the Mr ZG mark.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Let's now talk about Mr A.B.F.
Anyone of a certain age will immediately recognize in the photo below a vodka set, so fashionable in the 1960s in Italy, but will be left speechless by observing the marks which, at first glance, appears to be Venetian from the 18th century. Rather suspicious.


This hallmarking, found quite often, consist of the literal mark A.B.F., supposed silversmith's mark, and a “moleca”, mint mark, of this specific type, struck twice. It is good to underline it, always and only this “moleca” that seems to wear a pirate's eye patch, which is never found with marks of other silversmiths or assayers or shops. This also seems a little suspicious.


If we look carefully at the bottom of this coffee pot it’s clear that the "defects" of the plate are artificial, they look like marks obtained specifically by hammering the plate on a matrix...



Up to this point we have only clues, but when we find objects that bear, in addition to the described marks, also the marks of the Italian Republic, it is clear that those objects do not date back to the 18th century. See example below



It is unthinkable that someone, in the 20th century, affixed the marks of the esteemed Petruzzi & Branca company to an 18th century artefact, and not once, due to an inexplicable mistake, but on several occasions.
There are objects with the A.B.F. mark, accompanied by the two "pirate molecas” also with marks of other silversmiths of the 20th century.


---------------------------------°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°-------------------------------------

Another mark I would like to illustrate is this one below


It seems strange to me that someone could recognize the lion of St. Mark in the figure on the left, but it is clear that these marks suggest belonging to Venice.
It has already been said above that the “acrostolio” without a mark that defines the fineness does not make sense, furthermore it is sufficient to observe that many objects, together with these two marks, bear the republican hallmark 33 PD, corresponding to the Ugo Ghiraldin company of Padua, to be certain that it is a 20th century artefact.
For example, below is a photo of an ice cube bucket, which I don't think existed in the 18th century

This type of bucket has evidently been very successful, in fact it is found in various sizes, with various hallmarks, some referable to Ghiraldin, others to other silversmiths.
It seems that in the 1960s several silversmiths, who had maintained shops in the city centre, had, in fact, greatly reduced or even stopped the production of their workshops and were purchasing finished objects from other producers and stamping them with their personal marks.

---------------------------------°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°-------------------------------------


This coffee pot, of a typically Venetian model, has a suspicious "moleca", which seems to have come out of a comic book. Furthermore, it seems like we can see traces of abrasion on the bottom, as if someone had erased something

It is not possible to decide whether this mark is genuine or not just from this photo, but when we find a “cuccuma” with a stamping which, in addition to the "cartoon moleca", bears the republican marks of the ancient Passoni jewelery of Venice, then all doubt disappears: it is a pseudo-mark.


---------------------------------°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°-------------------------------------

Below is another mark that is found very frequently


Some say it represents a dove, but others interpret it as a genuine or imitation Venetian mark.
I have already expressed my conclusions on this matter in the post at this link
https://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopi ... ed#p210556

Below is another example of artefacts described "in imitation of the 18th" century, which also bear the J of Jacomino

For further information about Jacomino see the silvercollection article already mentioned above.
https://www.silvercollection.it/dictionaryforgery.html

This list of Venetian pseudo marks is far from exhaustive, there are many others about which I have strong suspicions, but the smoking gun is missing, as they say in American films.
I show some of them below, specifying that I have no irrefutable evidence that they are pseudo marks, but many clues lead me to think so



To conclude, when you intend to buy antique silver, it is best to analyze it very carefully, possibly in your hand or at least by examining many clearly focused photos, both of the inside and outside and in case of doubt, ask for information before purchasing. If it is a Venetian silver, these attentions must be multiplied.

Regarding Mr. A.B.F., mentioned above, I have received information from a reliable source that it is the personal mark of the brothers Antonio and Bruno Fornezza (153 VI). This mark has been used both with the mark 153 VI alone, and accompanied by fantasy marks, and with marks of other manufacturers, including that of Petruzzi and Branca (1 BS).