English Sterling or Silverplate Hallmark on Box

[PennyT]

I have an old vintage or antique English silver trinket or snuff box that feels like sterling silver but the hallmark is throwing me. The only mark I can find is on the bottom: English Sterling. I've searched this box over for marks typically found on English silver but haven't found any. I've also searched this website for the past two days trying to find an example of the hallmark but couldn't, although I may have missed it if it's here. Posting to the forum is my last resort. Thank you in advance. Please forgive me if my pictures are posted incorrectly.

[silverly]

Welcome to the forum. I don't know who the maker is, but for myself Tiffany would be high on the list of possibilities.
What does the engraving on the top of the box say?

[PennyT]

Thank you very much for your reply. The engraved words on the top of the box are so very faded. I've used loops and magnifying glasses to try to read the inscription. The top line looks like the name David and a last name that I can't make out. The second line looks like the month March, a day and then a year. I wish I could read at least the year. Tiffany? I looked at Tiffany marks after your suggestion and see that they used "english sterling" but I guess I'd have to see examples where that was all they used.

I put this question in silverplate forum since I'm not 100% sure that it's sterling. I've never seen an english silverplate piece marked as "English Sterling" and I'm wondering if anyone else has an example or has seen an example of a silverplate piece with that marking? Or a sterling silver piece? Thank you again.

[dragonflywink]

When I see that 'English Sterling' mark without a retailer's or manufacturer's mark, usually think of New York maker John Wendt first.

~Cheryl

[silverly]

My initial thought was that the trademark on your image was worn off. I did not consider that the marking English Sterling would be used alone, so with what Cheryl has suggested, I think you have a better starting place now.

Going by the what is showing in the image, there is no question that your item is solid silver.

[PennyT]

Thank you again for the replies. I'll add Wendt to my research list. So, is it safe to say that even if the box is sterling silver it didn't come from England?

[PennyT]

I just wanted to give a quick update on what I've learned as a result of both replies to my post. The hint of Tiffany as a possibility led me down a path of "good" google search terms looking for earlier american silver companies that marked their ware with "English Sterling" and why. Thank you. The suggestion of John Wendt was right on although I can't attribute this box to Wendt (or yet?). I found an example of the "English Sterling" mark used by the american company of Ball, Black & Co. Unlike Tiffany's mark, BB&C's mark was in the same shape and font. The box could very well turn out to be from Ball, Black co or the companies associated with BBco, including Wendt who took over some of their silver products.

This was very fun and educating. Thank you both very much for your expert help!

[dragonflywink]

Hi Penny ~ that mark, on its own, is generally attributed to Wendt, who was primarily a wholesaler - the Ball, Black & Co. pieces with that mark (also found with other retailers' marks) would have been produced for them by Wendt.

~Cheryl

[PennyT]

Thank you, Cheryl. I've been doing a lot of reading on Wendt and this particular "English Sterling" mark and I can understand why the mark is attributed to Wendt. There are enough examples of the English sterling mark on Wendt silver ware sold by other retailers such as Caldwell in PA, Braverman & Levy in SF.

I don't think it's a Wendt mark. Adding English to sterling is to make better, to prove or persuade, to sell. I think it's a retailer's mark- a term that started with Tiffany in early 1850's for the purpose of manipulating the public to buy more silver in order to make more money. John Wendt worked with Rogers for 7 years from early 1850's until 1860 and never used "English Sterling" on their silver even though the term was being used during that time period. They didn't have to because they were highly regarded and sold to the retailers. They were making their money whether they added their maker's mark or sterling or 925 or didn't mark their ware at all. It was the retailers who had to persuade the public.

From what I've read, Wendt went to Ball Black co in 1861 when their store on Broadway opened. A couple of years after opening the store they went full guns to earn the reputation of being high end retailers. It's interesting to me that the earliest example of BBco with English Sterling written in the shape of a smile that I've seen so far is from 1864-65 (but I'm still looking for earlier). They were in competition with Tiffany and it seems a good idea to closely follow the competition: English Sterling- it sounds so elegant and high class. And if Ball, Black co was in competition with Tiffany, Wendt was in competition with Moore. Moore didn't add English Sterling to his ware so why should Wendt?

Wendt may have worked directly inside the Ball, Black co store but he wasn't the only sliver guy that supplied Ball and Black. IF my box came from BB&co and IF "English Sterling" is a retailer stamp then the box could be attributed to any silversmith who supplied BBco. It could also be attributed to old stock from Marquand. The English Sterling mark is its own stamp and It could be that it was a preliminary mark placed on silver ware by BB&co. Why it never got the BB&co marks could be due to overstock or quality issues or going out of business. The silver ware attributed to Wendt that's marked by other retailers as well as the English Sterling mark could be stock originally made for BB&co that received the preliminary mark but never made it to the floor. Wendt left and took those pieces with him and sold it to other retailers.

...not to say that the box isn't Wendt :)

[PennyT]

At the risk of belaboring the topic of who the mark belongs to, I'd like to add one more thought. Probably the most compelling evidence to me that the "English Sterling" mark didn't belong to Wendt is that there are several examples of coin silver ware that have that very mark along with a Ball, Black & Co mark. Knowing that the purpose of English sterling on ware was to assure the public that a piece met the highest standards, it's hard for me to believe that Wendt would use that mark on his coin silver.

Going back to the box, I'm thinking that silver collectors might try to date and attribute unmarked silver by the construction and design. I've tried to find examples of similar American made silver boxes with reeded sides and style of decorative engraving with not much luck. It seems like most of the examples I've found date to before the 1860's although I did see one civil war era box similar only it wasn't attributed to a particular maker. Is there any opinion on the decade the box was produced and or the maker by the actual style of the box other than the mark? Is it in the style of any particular silversmith? Thank you.

[Jag]

Cheryl is the expert on the subject, but let me add my two cents for what it's worth (maybe only one cent?)

You said: "Adding English to sterling is to make better, to prove or persuade, to sell." I don't agree with this - English sterling is stating a silver purity of 92.5%, which is the purity of English sterling silver made for hundreds of years previous. It is tied to their coin money - pound sterling. It seems altogether reasonable that a manufacturer would mark a piece of silver with the purity (especially when it is higher than the coin silver purity which was more common), but would leave off his name so that the retailer could stamp his own name on the piece. It also seems reasonable that the retailer would sometimes miss adding his own stamp - which would be one explanation for the markings seen on a piece such as yours.

I also question your statement that "there are several examples of coin silver ware that have that very mark [English sterling]". Maybe this was a slip of the tongue - by definition American coin silver is a lower purity than English sterling, so I don't think it would be marked this way.

[PennyT]

Thank you, Jag. Wendt already used a "925" mark on his ware so what would have been the point of him changing that to "English sterling"? It seems to me that if he changed his 925 mark to English Sterling it would have been to add fluff to his ware- which doesn't make sense. His work was already highly regarded. Besides, if he was going to fluff up his mark he would have made sure his name was on his ware along with it as well.

"by definition American coin silver is a lower purity than English sterling, so I don't think it would be marked this way"

I know, right? That's kind of my point and know it wasn't a slip of the tongue. Unless "coin" is the name of a Wendt pattern or another pattern sold by Ball, Black Co., then BBco along with "English Sterling" is marked on coin silver pieces. I don't know if it's appropriate to link to other sites but a google search term of: "Ball Black co English sterling coin" will bring up several examples of what I'm talking about. I'm not a silver collector so maybe the term "coin" used in the examples that I'm seeing denotes sterling silver and if so I'm happy to be educated.

[dragonflywink]

Hi Penny ~

Have read over your last few posts a couple of times now, and I'm a bit weary at the moment, so please forgive my denseness, but am having a hard time following some elements of your theories. Am I understanding that you've found Ball, Black & Co. pieces marked both as 'Coin' and 'English Sterling'? Truthfully, not sure if I can even recall seeing a 'Coin' mark on their silver - if an 'English Sterling' or '925/1000' mark is present, it should be that fineness; and why would the prominent and respected B., B. & Co. be more likely to have what you seem to be suggesting is a deceptive mark than Wendt? If you are googling sales descriptions, not really a reliable reference source, they are often incorrect or misleading - among many other possible reasons, using the term 'Coin' in describing pieces that bear marks indicating sterling or higher fineness may simply be a keyword to catch the attention of folks looking for older silver, or the seller might just lack the correct information.

Also wondering why, if the mark belonged to a retailer, they would decide it was good business to omit their trademark from their goods? Why would the lack of an 'English Sterling' mark being used during Wendt's partnerships with Augustus Rogers be an indicator that he didn't use it later? Regarding the use of a mark indicating the piece was of the higher standard 'English Sterling' rather than 'Coin' being of importance only to the retailer, believe a wholesaler would also want his product to be desirable, if retailers and the buying public wanted 'English Sterling', then the manufacturer would make it and mark it as such, especially if requested by the retailers (Wendt also produced 950/1000 silver for B., B. & Co.).

Ball, Black & Co. was always a premier, high-end retailer, on the same level as Tiffany - Wendt left Boston to open his shop in the B., B. & Co. building after a failed, short-lived 1860 partnership with Augustus Rogers and George Wilkinson, which had been formed to provide silver for B., B. & Co. It was advantageous for both wholesaler and retailer - Tiffany's arrangement for exclusivity with the Moore shop had cut out one of B., B. & Co.'s larger suppliers. 'English Sterling' marks found on Tiffany silver of the same era vary, Carpenter's book, Tiffany Silver (1978), shows an example from the Moore shop, as well as others from Grosjean & Woodward, William Gale, and Bogert, Newburg. Since Tiffany didn't use date marks, the dating indicated for those marks covers only a range of years that they could have been used (from 1853-70, varying by maker) - most 'English Sterling' marked items seem to be, by style, circa 1860s. Personally, see nothing in the form of, or in what I can see of the engraving on your snuff box, that would preclude it from dating to circa 1860s, as indicated by the mark.

When John Wendt opened his shop on two floors of Ball, Black & Co.'s newly built establishment at 565-67 Broadway in 1860, the shop was not actually part of the store - very nice to have it right there on the premises, but there was no exclusive arrangement with B., B. & Co. The curved 'English Sterling' marks like yours (one that certainly wouldn't have been on the much earlier Marquand & Co. silver), as well as other marks attributed to Wendt, are also found with other retailer's marks from the same era, and not sure why, if as you suggest, Wendt would take pieces lacking a retailer mark with him when he "left", if he hadn't actually produced them - regardless, Wendt sold his share of the business to his partners Bernard D. Biederhase and Charles Witteck in 1871, seems he left the industry after that.

Suspect definitive proof of the generally accepted educated attribution to Wendt, or to anyone else for that matter, is unlikely. From Venable's excellent book, Silver in America, 1840-1940, A Century of Splendor (1994), "For the greater part of his career, Wendt did not use a manufacturing mark, his pieces being marked only by the retailer. Consequently, most pieces can only be attributed to him based on their style and his work for Ball, Black & Co.". Please keep in mind that, your curved 'English Sterling' is not a 'manufacturing mark' (trademark) - it is an indication of the silver content, the stamp being one that was used on pieces made by Wendt for Ball, Black & Co., a logical conclusion would be that when the same stamp is found on on other pieces, it originated in Wendt's shop.

~Cheryl

[PennyT]

Cheryl, thank you for taking the time to respond. You're right to point out that websites that sell silver aren't reliable sources. There are plenty of non-ebay auction houses and antique dealers with websites that sound so knowledgeable. Thank you for the reality check.

Why am I so persistent with this- what brought me to this forum in the first place was because I questioned whether this box was really sterling silver. Everything about the outside of the box looks and feels like sterling silver but the inside, not so much. And because of the inside of the box along with the strange "English sterling" mark, I expected to be told after my original post that the mark was bogus and the box not sterling. That's not what I was told.

But the darn inside of the box is making it hard for me to accept that it's sterling, even more so after I started reading about Wendt. And I guess that's why I got hung up on whether English sterling is a maker mark or retailer mark.

The inside of the box has a gold wash just like many of these types of boxes have. But it has the texture of the inside of a tin. I'm not sure how to explain it. The inside and the outside feel like two completely different metals. The outside is sleek and slippery while the inside is rough. Kind of like the difference between good cotton sheets and polyester only worse. Besides the difference in textures, the metal is messy inside. Along the sides of the bottom of the box is excess silver rather than neat clean lines. Not what I'd expect from a high end retailer or a top silversmith. So I had to question the mark and consider whether this box was old stock from previous owners or produced for BBco by another silver co rather than Wendt which led me to the theory that the English sterling mark was a BBco preliminary mark. I can't help but wonder if the reason the box never got marked with BBco was because of the quality. Perhaps it was stock sold by BBco to another retailer to sell.

I've spent WAY too much time looking at countless images of the inside of boxes like mine hoping to find the same quality as if it were the nature of these boxes regardless of how highly regarded the maker was. And then there's the feel- the texture of the box that's a problem. I don't study silver but I have a fair amount of it, some very old, some with gold wash but none that feels like the texture of this box. I can take a picture of the inside.

So, that's where I am...lol

[silverly]

Penny,

I probably exhausted my expertise on who the maker or manufacturer of your box is before I started, but if you take a good hard look at the inscription on the top of the box, it may be possible to tell you something about that person which adds a lot to the interest of the piece for many. Try different light, temporarily darkening the surface somehow or even putting it in the freezer for a while and seeing what that does for you. Sometimes even images shot in vary light enhance visibility. Be creative; you might be surprised what will show up. Good luck.

Kind regards,

Pat

[PennyT]

Thank you, Pat. I've so far tried several different loops, magnifying glass and even a microscope. I wasted two days just trying to compare the squiggle remnants to old english font. I'll throw it in the freezer tonight.

I finally just found a near identical box to my box. The box was also marked English sterling in the same style as mine but unlike my box, this one was marked with the number 105 above the English Sterling mark. The box was attributed to Wendt c. 1870. The latch (?) on the front of the other box was slightly different. The gold wash inside the other box was shiny. My lid is flat and the other lid looked slightly raised but that might be an illusion.The engraving of the design on the lid of the other box was beautiful and the name engraved on the box was as clear as day. No one had to throw that snuff box in a freezer!

The engraving on the other box allowed me to visualize it in a showcase at a high end store. Compared to the other box, the engraving on my box makes me visualize someone losing their job? I wish someone could see it but I don't know if I'm allowed to link it here. What is the 105 mark?

[silverly]

I do not know what the number 105 is for on the piece like yours. It could be a production or pattern/design identification number. It could be something the retailer asked the manufacturer to stamp on it for inventory purposes. Occasionally, I think there is documentation that explains numbers like that, but often there is not.