Interesting Antique Silver Pear..Its Purpose??

[dartsil]

I thought I would post this interesting item and see what everyone's thoughts were as to what its actual intended use is?

As you see its shaped as a pear, It is silver but no marks can be found but it has been engraved with the year 1840.

Lid pulls off so one would think its a snuff box or even a trinket box but the very top part(stem) is threaded and screws perfectly into the base making it into what appears to be a goblet or other way around could be a drinks measure.. Anyones thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Appologies for not polishing it but we only got it yesterday.

[dognose]

Hi,

What is the height of the piece?

Trev.

[dartsil]

Just under 3 1/2 inches Trev

[dognose]

Hi,

Although you would normally expect to see religious inscriptions, I am wondering if this may have once been part of a traveling holy communion set. When closed, a ciborium, used for storage of sacramental wafers, when open as a chalice for the wine.

http://www.925-1000.com/silverglossary2.html

Trev.

[bubba]

My thoughts are a traveling figural goblet for ones favorite drink, pear schnapps.

[Qrt.S]

No marks!? That is bad news indeed.

I have a suspicious mind, always had regarding this matter and for good reasons. There is a saying "no marks, hardly silver. I can not find many reasons for an unmarked object to be silver. Therefore always when somebody claims that it has no marks but it is anyway silver I question it indeed.
Now, what makes you think it is silver and not plated, German silver, nickel, pewter, pakfong or whatever? Please don't tell me that it feels like silver, the seller said so or something similar. Have you tested it, how? If you have tested it, is the scratch deep enough to reach a possible base metal/alloy? Please note that a plated object with a light scratch very often gives a positive result due to the fact that the electrolytically applied silver overlay indicates it of course. In addition it indicates often high purity, which is obvious because the electroplated silver overlay is always pure silver 999/1000. Testing with acid is not a fully reliable test. In addition, engravings prove nothing.

Just guess how many times "silver" objects have turned out to be plated or something else after a more thorough investigation. Please also consider what would be the reason for the smith/manufacturer not to punch silver marks on an object in silver and why did they formerly start to punch silver marks in the first place?

No hard feelings but once more, why is your object supposed to be silver?

I hope this will expand to an interesting discussion of what is silver and what is not and why.

[bubba]

The question about silver or not is valid but the obvious denting in the images implies a softer material than usually used for silver plate though not proof positive in this case.

[Qrt.S]

OK, and then the statement "no marks, hardly silver" is proved valid again.

[bubba]

not to punch silver marks on an object in silver and why did they formerly start to punch silver marks in the first place?

Early American silver had no marks unless the maker was proud enough to do so. Many examples, especially small ones, exist to prove this. This also applies to Native American silver items into the 20th century. Other countries had strict marking laws. Unmarked items from the countries with laws would almost certainly be other than solid silver.

[zilverik]

Hi,

In countries with laws there are a lot of examples of silver items without marks. For example church silver, miniatures in the Netherlands, London silver for small items. The statement "no marks, hardly silver" is not true.

Regards,

Zilverik

[zilverik]

Hi,

About English silver, I quote Christopher Hartop, Geometry and the Silversmith, 2008, page 78: "The law stated that objects that were offered for sale had to be assayed and hallmarked. If an object was commissioned and the silver for it supplied by old, outmoded, pieces that were effectively converted into the new object, it could be argued that the object was not being 'set for sale' and therefore did not require hallmarking. This became a much more attractive option after 1719 with the introduction of duty on wrought plate of 6d per ounce." (end of quote).

Regards,

Zilverik

[oel]

Hi Zilverik,

The law stated that silver objects that were offered for sale had to be assayed and hallmarked. If an object was commissioned and the silver for it supplied by old, outmoded, pieces that were effectively converted into the new object, it could be argued that the object was not being 'set for sale' and therefore did not require hallmarking. What does it mean and was it allowed? Old, outmoded pieces could carry hallmarks and if converted the old hallmarks are still valid? If melted down the old new silver should be by law hallmarked if modelled into a piece for sale. If remodelled and old pieces of ‘silver’ were used, who guaranteed the fineness and who paid the due tax? However I believe a silversmith could make a silver piece on private demand, negotiate a price and sell the piece without hallmarks. If on a later stage this piece returned into the public silver trade. I believe it required some form of hallmarks or sold privately without hallmarks or as a piece of white metal.

Regards,

Oel

[zilverik]

Hi Oel,

I think you are right. It could well be that an object is not stamped because the owner had it made from his own old silverware. I cannot image that the old marks had still any value. I think that the old silver was melted down and new silverware was made for the original owner. That is, for personal use, not for selling. In case the silverware is made with the purpose to sell it, the silverware is mostly marked. The marking for new silverware started in France, the edicts from april 25, 1341; february 17, 1349; july 26 1574. The use of the makersmark was obligated in 1363. On january 26, 1749 the French taxlaw also covered old objects that came on the market again. Most European countries followed the French systems. But not always all parts of every European country. There are many exeptions. For example Friesland en Groningen as part of the Netherlands (not Holland) had their own system for a while. In France there is the concept of the “maitre abonnee”, a silversmith living that far away from a bigger city (with an assay office) that he was allowed to put only his mastermark (3 times) on the (new) object. So, in that case no date letter, no citymark, no garanteemark for silvercontent. Only three mastermarks. When a piece like that (or a piece of Friesland, Groningen and a lot of other parts of Europe) came to the market again, I agree with you that in most countries it required some form of hallmarks, but not always in every country. For example Belgium (for a while), but even the "founder of the system" France. I have French silver with 3 mastermarks, but I have never seen French silver with only 3 mastermarks and other hallmarks from the times that it came back to the market again. I have seen a lot of Dutch silver without hallmarks that should be there because the (occupying) French and Dutch (the new ruler) claimed that everyone should give all silverware to the state, to become it back again after paying new taxis ("lossingsteken"). In a lot of countries a lot of people try to avoid paying tax. I am not surprised.

Regards,

Zilverik

[oel]

Hi Zilverik,

Thanks for your explanation. However I believe the UK beats France regarding rules on silver standards. According to Jackson’s Silver and Gold Marks of England, Scotland and Ireland ‘The Craft or ‘Mystery’ of the goldsmith is a very ancient one, and was practised in England at a very remote period. In the year 1180 an association or guild of goldsmiths was, with other guilds, fined for being irregularly established without the king’s licence (adulterine), and in the year 1238, by reason of numerous frauds having been perpetrated by certain goldsmiths, an order was made by the king (Henry III), in council, commanding the Mayor and Aldermen of London to choose six of the most discreet goldsmiths of the city to superintend the craft.
Also trade with the mainland Europe (particularly Flanders) asked for stricter rules and regulations on the used silver coins and plates. Hence trading partners on the Continent and in the UK made sure silver should be up to a standard for fair mutual payments to finance their trades and wars. In around 1300 the Leopard head has been introduced and around 1363 the Maker’s Mark
Yes, in remote areas (France, Germany, Scotland and Nordic countries etc) it was not uncommon for the Maker and Master Smith and member of the Guild to multiple strike his mark and in perhaps doing so to compensate for the missing assay/standard marks.
Yes, lots of Duty marks have been forced to avoid paying government tax (war tax) but tax marks are no guarantee for finenesses and has been misused and punched on forgeries with spurious or pseudo hallmarks.
Hallmarks for ages have been a good guarantee. Indian (Kutch) and Chinese export silver in the past could be without standard hallmarks and still be of a high silver standard. At the moment, a lot of those pieces offered are claimed to be made out of silver but unfortunately are not. A little assay test at the assay office (Waarborg Gouda) for a few Euros will reveal the truth and if the piece meets a Dutch standard it will be punched accordingly.
Hurray for valid hallmarks!

Regards,

Oel

[zilverik]

Hi Oel,

Thanks for your comment. It inspires me to react.
Since ancient times silver has been marked all over the world. That started with coins. Indeed, the craft of the goldsmith is a very ancient one, but not only in England. I was talking about the marking of silverware as an overall system. We know now that the French beats the English regarding rules on silver as a system. Jackson’s “English goldsmiths and their marks” was originally published in 1904. Although this book was several times revised and enlarged with additional entries, the English may have forgotten to mention that the French were first. In 1998 researchers in the Netherlands from the Dutch tax museum concluded “As far as known the first rules about this subject were issued in Paris”. In 1211 the “Genereaulx Maistres des Monnoies” was put into charge to monitor assay masters, coin masters, gold-and silversmiths, bankers, etc. In 1238 London follows with about the same rules in “De auro fabricandum in Civitate Londiniarum”. You are right that a little assay test will reveal the truth about the mount of pure silver in the object. A even more Interesting part about an assay test is that it is nowadays possible to more or less determine the age of the silver piece (and were it comes from). In earlier times old silver was melted down for the use of new silver objects or (new) silver from silver mines was used. The process of refinement was not very developed. Nowadays old silver is refined in a modernistic way before it is used to make new silverware. It becomes very “clean”. This clean, refined silver is definitely not 18e century or earlier. That is for sure, but it does not mean that unrefined silver is old, because it is possible to use old silverware to melt down to make new silverware. In case there is for example no trace of any gold in the object one should be suspicious. It is even possible to make a calculated guess were the silver of the object comes from. However it is difficult to draw conclusions based on only this determination. For example, Mexican silver was traded in China from the 16e century on. An old Chinese silver object could contain Mexican traces of metal and typical Mexican pollutions. It does not make that piece of old Chinese silverware Mexican. On the other hand if the silver of the Chinese object had no pollution at all, it is absolutely not old. Together with the determination of the form, marks and provenance these new techniques could help a lot.

Regards,

Zilverik

[oel]

Hi Zilverik,

Thank you for your interesting comments. Yes, I believe it is possible, like you say; to determine were the silver has been mined and age. Today’s technology is capable of telling us, if we find a few good ancient tooth and bones, the age and on which part of the world the previous 'owner' has grown up, including all about his diet. Ergo silver tells a story if we know how to listen.

Regards,

Oel

[zilverik]

Hi Oel,

Thanks for your response.
I am actualy new to this forum. Maybe this forum could use an addresbank for testing silver for the content all over the world. The only address I know is:
WaarborgHolland

Stationsplein 9a
Gouda
Nederland
2801 AK
info@waarborg.nl
0182-589300
0182-521745
http://waarborg.nl/

I know there is an address in London with even more expertise than in Gouda, but I do not know the address. There should be addresses in other European countries in the U.S. and other countries as well. It would be a good to sample all the addresses on this forum.

Regards,

Zilverik

[dognose]

Hi Zilverik,

This link supplies the address's for all the Hallmarking Convention assay offices:

http://www.hallmarkingconvention.org/assay-offices.php

Trev.

[zilverik]

Hi Trev,

Thanks. This is great! I sure hope serious silvercollectors will find these facilities.

Regards,

Zilverik

[larrywseale]

Very pretty piece.

I don't have the expertise of many who visit this site & in general agree that if it isn't marked, it likely doesn't have a high silver content but there are always exceptions. I guarantee that the pictured crumb knife is at least coin but there are no hallmarks or maker marks



So, why not test it & find out rather than speculate? I would never suggest acid on a piece that nice but weighing for specific gravity is completely non-destructive and pretty accurate if you have a decent balance beam scale. If not, you can contact a local upper grade school & ask the chemistry instructor to test it for you.