Henrik Wigstrom Faberge cufflinks ca 1890

[ktiggeloven]

Hi forum,

I recently acquired a set of gold, platinum, diamond and ruby cufflinks from an antique dealer, which I think might be from Henrik Wigstrom. They are a pair of gold anchors topped by a platinum doubleheaded eagle set with a diamond, and the bar is gold with two cabuchon rubies en set with a platinum and diamond x. The cufflinks are marked with a pre 1896 St Petersburg mark for 14K and with makers mark H.W.. I've seen similar marks on the net attributed to Henrik Wigstrom (including Faberge retailer box), but I want to be sure. the person I bought it from purchased it of an old couple of Russian origin in Munchen in the early 90's. It's still with what I believe is it's original box, which unfortunately had some wear to the silk lining (obscuring the retailers mark, although I do make out an Ф. I hope anybody can confirm whether this is Henrik Wigstrom's mark or not. Thanks in advance

ps: although this is a gold piece, as my research was to confirm the maker, I thought it better to place it in the Russian silver than in the gold jewelry section.

[Postnikov]

Hi -
If you have doubts, the first thing to do is: let all the stones, the gold and the platinum check by a trustworthy jeweller! Next step is quality check: H. Wigström was an excellent workmaster and knew how to produce top jewels - in every detail! (there were never open eyelets I can see on your piece nor sloppy soldering or unfinished eagles!! See the mounting of the stones, unprecise and ugly).
Next step: Information about H. Wigström. He had his one enterprise, later worked for Fabergé.How looked his stamp? What stamps you can see on your object? Is there a 56 Zolotniki (gold) mark?
This mark was obligatory (law)! Platinum was not marked at that time in Russia. If they were made (sold) by Fabergé (absolute possible without Fabergé´s mark, on small objects only the mark of the master was usual (H. Wigström was Fabergé´s headmaster!), the box is wrong. Fabergé´s boxes were made of maple-tree wood! If a box has the most wear not on the outside but on the inside, mostly on the signature of the maker/vendor, than something is very wrong. If the box is not from Fabergé, why destroying the maker´s/vendors address? Not the box is interesting or a proof that the object is authentic!
The marks are wrong.
See picture. Red squares are the usual discrepancies found on fakes.



Now you can make your own decision.

Regards
Postnikov

[ktiggeloven]

As far as I can tell, the 56 with the st petersburg next to it (see pic 3) is the zolotniki mark for the late 19th century (before the transition to the kokoshnik mark). Also the wear to the box is not done by the owner, but as the inside is fitted to accompany the cufflinks, the centre is raised and is pressing against the silk when closed. The wear is caused by continous opening and closing of the box (you see some of the blue fitting rubbed into the silk (better to see in real life than on the pictures). Itested the materials, and they come out as 14 k gold platinum and diamonds. I'v checked the diamond and they seem to be good quality. The only objection I have are the fittings of the stone are being a bit rough, (but in this period Wigstrom was just an assintant to Perchin, so maybe not to his best standard yet). As far as the boxes concerned, I've seen other early Faberge pieces in other than maple boxes. as far as I knew, they didn't introduce the wooden box as the only box they used until the late 19th century (although I might be wrong). Whether it's Wigstrom or not, the pieces and the box do have serious age to it. I hope we can find out more.

[Postnikov]

Hi -
I have never seen oxydized platinum....
but maybe you have followed the different disussions on this board re fakes: it is anoying for both parts.
Please have a look at: "The beauty of Russian silver" on this site under your contribution - there you have authentic marks of H. Wigstöm and can see how an object was marked correctly.

Regards
Postnikov

[Postnikov]

Hi -
forgot to mention: please check the box under UV light - you will see that the material is "glowing" - the reason: bleached modern sint. materials.

Regards
Postnikov

[ktiggeloven]

ok, I'll do that. And if it's a fake, I'll go back to the dealer (as he guaranteed the authenticity).
thanks for the info

[ktiggeloven]

I've put the box underneath UV light, but it did not light up (apart from some very small dust flecks). So it's not this bleached synthetic material.

[Qrt.S]

In addition of what is already stated earlier I find it odd indeed that anyone would deliberately destroy the text in the box/case. It is not destroyed by it self and not either worn off.
Fabergé realized in a very early stage that packaging is part and parcel of every product and an important marketing factor. Cases were made by hand by master craftsmen. No jewelery was sold without it. With Fabregé worked several extremely skilled case makers like Simo Käki, Albert Ampuja , Antti Heinonen, Otto Saikkonen and some others. They were all Finns and they made the cases mostly of holm oak, elm, maple, birch and even pine. Those cases made for the court were covered with red morocco, while less expensive ones with velvet or cloth or just with a wooden surface as such. They were of very high quality. The inside of the lid was always marked with the name of the goldsmith or the company's name.

The box in this case is in my opinion not of such high quality and the name inside is as mentioned destroyed. One can only guess why....?
Moreover, Henrik Wigström marked H.W. in an oval cartouch...and where is the Fabergé mark not to forget the court supplier mark...?

But this is only my humble opinion....