Hallmarks on silver tea pot - quasi hallmarks meant to fool?

[hetlamm]

All,

I have a silver teapot that I foolishly bought a couple of years ago without a picture of the Hallmarks. It was sold as Scottish sterling tea pot.

The hallmarks don't attest to that but they do seem to be some sort of quasi hallmarks with date letters and a makers mark. The pot actually does appear to be sterling based on examinationg from a couple of silversmiths. (Obviously no certainty...)

Can anyone shed light on these marks or are they just complete nonesense?

Thanks
Sam



[/URL][/img]

[kerangoumar]

Aird & Thomson was an Edinburgh jeweller - they also made several chains of office for mayors up there. One would expect to see the proper hallmarks on this teapot - which are not there - and one would not expect to see the mismatch of the row of decoration below the punched numeral 1, which may be a size number

[kerangoumar]

I should add that the marks are not likely meant to fool anyone into thinking that they are hallmarks. They most likely are various internal production marks. Given the stranglehold that the silversmiths' guilds had on production in the British Isles one probably can expect, in the majority of cases, that the hallmark represents the true state of the piece of silver.


Having just said that I know I sometimes should bite my tongue - I am also aware of the incidences of fraud and deception perpetrated by smiths high and low over the years. But they were mostly caught and punished.
'
Let's put it like this: these days it is more likely that fake or altered marks appear on an item that could be expected to bring in large sums of money - if it were the real thing. There is that incentive for fakery. For the average set of flatware, or hollow ware of relatively recent origin, it's just not there. Where are people going to get the punches? Not many floating around outside the museums and archives. To have a punch made for the purpose of fakery would require an awful lot of faked silver to be sold, in order to recoup the cost of it.

[byron mac donald]

Hello-
You both know way more than I will ever, just wondering, you say it may not be sterling, could FCS1 mean something like fine copper silver? I am just trying to learn and would appreciate your response. Also I found this which looks alot like the JR mark, J.Reid?

http://www.silvermakersmarks.co.uk/Make ... gow.html#J" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regards-

[kerangoumar]

Here is the problem with looking at a mark in isolation:

It is like looking at one eye, and finding another, and, on the basis of finding a similar or possibly identical eye, identifying the face.

It is not to rule out that the teapot is sterling, and by J. Reid. It is that, looking at all the marks that are present, they do not suggest sterling (tho a jeweller can test it for you) and they do not suggest J. Reid - unless J Reid had a really bad day, or was sloppy and forgot to have the teapot assayed etc. etc.

The best way to proceed, Sam, is this:

take the teapot to a reputable jeweller and ask him to test it for silver content. It might be sterling but one would not say so, given the marks. You can also send a copy of the picture to The Edinburgh Museum, 142 Canongate, Royal Mile. (Tel: 0131 529 4143), or you could contact the Edinburgh Assay Office

Edinburgh Assay Office
Goldsmiths' Hall
24 Broughton Street
Telephone 0131 556 1144
mail@assay-office.co.uk

As for buying on line:

IF you should think of buying from an auction website, first of all ask for the hallmarks and verify that they represent properly marked sterling.
As soon as you receive the item, have it tested!
At least that way if it is not what you thought you bought you can get your money back.