Hanau Pseudo marks on J D Schleissner box.

[gsmoggy]

Hi Members

Re one of my old posts ,Enamel top silver box.
With the help of members I found that the maker was JD Schleissner (Hanau)

I am curious if the other marks (not the "sickle" mark) are classed as pseudo marks?

And if they are ? are they suitable for the Hanau Pseudo marks area on the forum,also under the JD Schleissner area of their marks?




Regards Guido.

[AG2012]

Hi,
Let`s start with the word pseudo; Greek ψευδής, pseudes, means false, fake. Therefore, “pseudomark” literally means “fake mark”.
However, the definition is simplistic and complicated.

I think most pseudo marks were really used to deceive buyers (British lions, Birmingham anchors, Sheffield crowns, Augsburg acorns, N for Nuremberg, crowned letters for Paris etc).

On the other hand, I think Hanau silversmiths initially wanted to meet rising demand for ``antique`` silver, i.e. reproduction silver, with no fraudulent intention when marked with their marks (your box by JD Schleissner ).

What happened later was beyond their influence; even today people believe in great finds at garage sales, and one cannot blame Hanau silversmiths for that.

In short, if whatever mark resembles well established official mark but in reality it is not, can be defined as pseudo mark.
Regards

[gsmoggy]

Hi AG
Thanks for your reply and comments.

I think I understand what you are saying, even thought the other marks on my box may be called Pseudo marks, because the Schleissner mark is there,they are are not classed as Pseudo marks ,is this correct?

all the same should this mark be on the JD Schleissner ,section of marks as part of their recorded marks?

Guido.

[AG2012]

Your two marks on the right are not very clear for positive identification.
But JD Schleissner did use pseudo marks (e.g. Augsburg acorn) alongside their sickle mark, possibly indicating reproduced antique Augsburg silver.
The issue is purely academic once we identify the maker.
Regards

[gsmoggy]

Hi Ag
Thanks again for your comments, I have posted hopefully better images ,my main question is are these JD known(Pseudo ) marks or JD unknown marks,or some other marks (import or other maker?) They look like two different marks to me.

I realise in the scheme on things it probably does not matter what the marks are? if identified may narrow the date of the piece.

Regards Guido.