Scratch engravings on silver

[Francais]

I guess the favorite pet peeve for everyone on this site, is people who send in lousy pictures and expect an answer. Personally I think maybe every new person doing a post should have to read something and check it, something that explains how to take a good photograph, and why it is so important to take lots of them.
But that’s not why we’re here tonight friends. My pet peeve is those people who should know better that don’t pay attention to scratch engravings.
I am not sure how common they are in some countries, (how about Europeans getting in here) but they are quite common on British and American hollowware. These are those little scratched in bits of information put there by the original silversmith or sometimes a later repair person. They are rarely found on flatware, but are quite common on larger pieces. In my opinion it is inexcusable for museums, auction houses, etc not to include them in their descriptions.
OK so sometimes I don’t either.
On this item viewtopic.php?f=3&t=33143&hilit=+hammersley
I didn’t mention the scratch engravings, but here they are, needless to say photos are often terribly difficult to take.
It is engraved 2 . 13 . This no doubt stands for 2 oz troy and 13 dwt. The item in fact weighs 2. 8 which is probably OK as there would be loss due to wear.

Then in what looks like a different hand is 720 44. Don’t ask me, I don’t know.

Then there is a different hand m pellet y pellet x or m.y.x This strikes me as a date code as
4/12/14 or 12/4/14 were earlier and sometimes today written 4.12.14. Unfortunately the two most obvious codes as a simple letter replacement does not work as it would be 13/24/25.
Also the next most likely code based on HAMMERSLEY doesn’t work either as there is no X available. Although if the second m were an x then it could be a date 3/10/4, but that is outside the possible dates.
Both silversmiths and repair people dated their work, so they could find the work in their day books.
Other interesting examples available?

[dognose]

Hi Maurice,

Here's a couple of good examples:

viewtopic.php?f=56&t=33235&p

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=22862&p

Trev.

[Hose_dk]

I have this bowl from 1777

The silversmith put information about the weight of object. The standard was 13,5 Lod = the coins. With weight is was easy to make coins from old silver objects-

13 lod 1 quint.
Lod sølv (0,0147 kg) & Kvint (0,00500 kg)

The 2 terms lod=weight - same word lod=lødighed
I this case its weight.

[oel]

Also to be found on silver plated items:



Oel.

[Francais]

I can't make out the engraving, how about on antique Dutch pieces?
Maurice

[oel]

If you click on the image (create bigger image) I believe you can read the code: 11530 if -/- k/x/x
To my knowledge I haven’t seen it on my Dutch 18-19th century pieces but most of my 19th century British pieces which have a pedestal do have “scratch marks” in the base of the pedestal. But having said that I have an early 20th silver tobacco jar and the previous owner has scratched his Dutch zip code/ post code on the jar's base.

Others have done research and/or asked questions about numbers and scratch marks:
http://www.ascasonline.org/articoloallnumber.html

http://www.smpub.com/ubb/Forum21/HTML/000886.html


Oel.

[Francais]

Can't get it to work, all I get are pictures the same size including ones of "that spoon". We have people who put on licence numbers here too, but that isn't going to count for this subject. I think I should rule out watches too, since I have never seen a pocket watch that doesn't have at least one scratched in code from repairers. English examples are a dime a dozen, although happy to see Trev's, but if they are coded, and the code can be broken, that would be very interesting. Since Hose_dk came up with one so quickly, I would be surprised to hear that Dutch examples don't exist. I can't turn up any examples as I no longer own any Dutch 18th c hollowware. I don't remember if I have seen 18th c. French examples, I will have to look. It could well be a anglo tradition, but I doubt it.
Maurice

[oel]

Sorry you should double click on the image to supersize it but it also could be that your browser does not support this action. Well I do not categorically deny the existence of scratch marks on Dutch antique silver, I only say so far I have not seen any. My latest catch, an 18th century silver brandy bowl bottom marks; hallmarks and maker’s mark, no scratch marks.


Oel.

[Francais]

You mentioned pedestal pieces, which made me think. I am not sure, but that may be a requirement. On a brandy bowl the bottom would show. So maybe one sees these things on trays, teapots, etc that are not meant to be turned over. I have never looked on anything but Eng. or American pieces. I guess I am going to be turning over a lot of European pieces the next trip to the bank.
As I was typing this, I remembered a 17th century Swiss beaker, that has one, I will look for it tomorrow.
Maurice

[oel]

Yes, I believe a hollow in a pedestal is a perfect spot for scratch marks and the brandy bowl has some sort of little pedestal:



No scratch marks, cheers.


Oel

[Francais]

Evidently my server doesn't like your image hoster.
But isn't there something to the right of the top mark?
Maurice

[Francais]

Here is one on a 17th c. magistrates or guild beaker. I presume it is old but certainly not original to the beaker. There is another one, which I can presume predates this, but is completely scratched out. In any case it looks lie a W over three Hebrew letters. They translate to Lamb. So maybe it belonged to a W. Lamb who had a bizarre sens of humor.
Maurice

[Francais]

oops!

[Hose_dk]

A bit different. Beaker second half 17hundreds,
Bottom repaird so marks missing.
The scrach makes the guilding stick - a primitive tree as decoration.