Russian 84 egg (Faberge style)

[neomax]

Hello everyone!

Can you help me with identification? I never before found the hallmark year without initials. Details outside the precise and beautiful while the three lions in roughly done. What do you think about this silver egg?

[neomax]

[dognose]

Hi,

Welcome to the Forum.

You are far more likely to get responses if you embed your images as very few people will click on thumbnails or links.

Trev.

[neomax]

Trev, thank you very much for the advice! This was my first attempt, I will try

[oel]

Hi, welcome to the forum.

Sorry but to me the smell of a rotten egg appears. with pseudo/fantasy mark, nothing to do with Russian (hall)marks.

Best,

Oel

[Goldstein]

Hi -
in my opinion from Persia. Persia used the 84 mark for some time (history) and the years were differenly counted (1086). All is like it should be: silvercontent, maker(unknown to me), year. By the way the lions have this Persian touch.
For comparison, another Persian punch - note the 84!



Regards
Goldstein

[neomax]

Oel and Goldstein thank you for your answers and opinion. I think the year 1886, hallmark is worn out. In my opinion, the style could fits with this year.
19th Century Russian Filigree Egg Silver 84 with Lion inside Year 1873 looks like this

[AG2012]

Hi,
The year is spurious for Russian Empire, and four digit number has to be year, right?
The second digit is the problem. What digits can be definitively eliminated? 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,9
Meaning it`s either ``3`` or``0``.
If it`s 1086 we have Hijri year 1675 or Iranian Calendar (Jalali Calendar) 1707, which is impossible.

If it`s 1386 the maker was honest, indeed. Made in 2007.
Regards

[AG2012]

If it`s 1886 in Gregorian/Julian calendar why is digit ``8`` completely different from ``8`` next to it? Besides, it`s not official assayer`s year, why should it be in Gregorian/Julian?

[neomax]

Thanks AG2012, I'm not finding never similar stamps (a long collects antiques) may have been false hallmark, that possibility is mentioned and Oel.
The problem is as hallmark is worn. Mostly I look like 1886. In the egg are repeated two other trademark but not the "years" all are poorly visible.

[neomax]

you're right, maybe it is not a four-digit date. I find this very interesting.

[AG2012]

On the other hand,I doubt Imperial Russia legislation regarding silver hallmarking was possible to enforce to the fullest extent within ex- Persian territories.Another point: faking Persian marks with ``84`` is not lucrative enough. There is more profit in e.g. Moscow marks.Gilding, hand engraving, age consistent wear etc. seem to be genuine.
Cheers

[neomax]

one of the hallmark reminds me the double-headed imperial eagle with spread wings. I note that it is worn. Through the history of the hallmark
changed here is an example of Russian hallmark of St. Petersburg 1700-1730

[neomax]

[AG2012]

There are two inconsistencies regarding 18th century:
I think Persian territories were incorporated within Russian Empire in 19th century.
Have never seen 18th century egg but probably I have not seen enough.
Cheers

[neomax]

The more I explore the hallmark look like older hallmark

example of Russia, Moscow XVII !!!

[AG2012]

I suppose marks should be consistent with the object itself and how it`s made.The overall appearance and details of this egg cannot be attributed to anything older than late 19th century (with the assumption 19th century is accepted as the manufacturing period).
My opinion.
Cheers