Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Was this basket for sugar? I hope it is genuine, but I am not sure anymore about Russian silver. Two pictures of marks on the handle are very small. I wasn't able to make a good photo. Sorry for that. I read 1861 Brandenburg, Eduard Fedorowitsch (1850-1866). The makersmark is not in the surrounding of the assaymark. Maybe one of the marks on the handle? Hard to say. Who knows more?
Hi zilverik -
This basket, depending on the missing measures was used for several things: bread, cake and fruits.
You have all the necessary marks: townmark, assayer, maker and silver content.
A. Kordes is well known and one of the better smiths.
Congratulation - it is a nice, authentic piece - you should send it to my address....
You don't have to eat you hat dear Zilverik, it is a good piece.
A bread or a fruit basket's diameter is about 25-35 centimeters. A sugar or a candy basket is smaller, about 10-15centimers.
Alexander Kordes was born in Riga. He became journeyman in St Petersburg in 1824 and master 1828. He got orders from the court as from 1839 and in 1840 he became court supplier. Indeed, he worked still in 1874. He marked also "KORDES" in a rectangular shield.
You seem to have learn to look for marks on all detachable parts when it comes to Russian silver, good Zilverik! :-)))))) Please, don't send it to Zolotnik, he already has many many nice pieces. Send it to me, I'm a poor man... ;-)
Thank you for your information. That information is not in my books. And I am happy to know.
The basket is about 21,2 cm long and 9,5 cm high (without the handle). Bonbons?
I am happy that I can keep my cap.
But what about http://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopic ... 60&t=25475" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ?
Thank you! Very very nice work. What I don't understand about this scoop is that it looks like the marks are all put over the engraving. That means that the object was offered to the assayoffice in a finished state. In France, the early Netherlands and a lot of other countries there is obviously another sequence in the marking of objects. First the maker marks the object that is not finished yet (1), then the assayoffice marks the object if the silvercontent is at least as it should be (2). Then the maker finishes the object and after that it is marked again by the assayoffice (3). So only those last marks are put over the engraving.
To Zilverik about punching the hallmark,
Originally an object had to be brought to the assayer in pieces, unfinished and unpolished but punched with the maker's mark according to the law. In any other case it was forbidden to hallmark a finished object or one lack of a maker's mark. However, around the turn of the century the rules were changed and an object could be brought to the assayer completely finished and ready for sale. For the moment I cannot find the exact year but I will tell you that when I find it.
Before this change there were rules where to punch the hallmark. In the beginning the rules were not very strict and the assay master retained the right to punch where ever it pleased him but did not "damage" the object, at least not much anyway.
The change around 1900 explains why it sometimes looks like the hallmark is punched on a finished item because it might be punched on a finished object. What I don't know is that how engravings were dealt with. To my understanding it was the more or less the last process carried out when finishing an object. In such a case when a master brought a finished and engraved object to be assayed, I think that the assayer looked a bit closely where to punch the hallmark in order not to destroy a fine engraving. I have seen objects with the hallmark punched so well hidden that it was almost impossible to find it before you suddenly realized it being a kind of a part of the engraving figure.
Thank you for your comment. Very interesting.
An 18e century French object with marks that are struck in one time with the same force, I would see as fake before I have even seen the object itself. Just as I know now (from you) that a Russian object should be marked on all different parts.
Just to avoid misunderstanding. My previous comment concerns Russian marking rules and legislation only. I don't know much about French marking, it is worst than a jungle, it is a complete mess to me, "millions" of different marks all over. On the other hand somebody might carry the same opinion regarding Russian marks, but...:-)))))
Undoubtedly that is the case here. It as well confirms what I anticipated that engraving was a part of the finishing process. The object is made 1861 when objects had to be unfinished before they could be assayed.
I have found the edict that allowed masters to bring finished objects to be assayed. It is the Assay Charter of February 9th 1882. As from that date finished objects were assayed.
Zolotnik is right. Althought at first it lookes like the marks are struck after the finishing, with a closer look it isn't. It is just very very well done. Incredible! Now I am happy that I brought this up. Otherwise I would have missed the worthwhile information of Qrt.S about the date objects were allowed to be offered to the assayoffice in Russia in finished state. Learned again. Thank you all.
