Firm of Sazikov

[ARGENTUM49]

There is even worse example of two identical pieces: there are two imperial medieval crowns in museums — one in Budapest, one in Germany. One is definitely 19th century fake. Both museums were offered free precious metal analysis, exact dating and gems identification, but both museums refused and both still claim that their crown is genuine.
(from: ``Silber — Falschungen und Verfaschungen``)
Ivan

[ARGENTUM49]

Regarding the question of the year when St.Petersburg branch was closed, reliable information almost a year old:
``Christie’s Russian Art sale on April 23, 2010 in New York
Rare and Important Parcel-Gilt Silver and Enamel Imperial Presentation Charger Marked Sazikov with the Imperial warrant, St. Petersburg, 1882. An exciting highlight that rarely appears on the market is a silver and enamelled Imperial presentation charger by Sazikov presented by the Nobility of Smolensk to Emperor Alexander III and Empress Maria Feodorovna in their coronation year of 1883. The charger was purchased by a diplomat in Europe in the early 1930s and has since descended in the same family and is offered for the first time at auction``

It means that St Petersburg branch existed in 1882. and the charger was hidden from public for 80 years.
``They continued until the merge in 1887 `` (the comment by Qrt.S was correct conclusion).
How did we miss it? What is the next surprise? Several authors of books quoted were definitely embarrassed and they will have to ask for new revised editions.
Ivan

[piette]

Hi Ivan,
The auction houses sell fakes - never trust provinence without proper documents.
Regards,
Piette

[piette]

Ivan, bear in mind - this auction house shows no hallmarks, do they? Do they have any proof that the history of this item is as described?
As Postnikov once wisely told me - "Never trust the seller - only what you know"

Regards,
Piette

[ARGENTUM49]

If it has gone so far as Christie’s New York, this world will end very soon.Are they not afraid of legal consequences for selling fakes at immense prices ? Or buyers are stupid enough not to protect themselves ?
Ivan

[Postnikov]

Hi Ivan -

It sounds unbelievable - but the truth is: auction houses sell knowingly fakes. We have several members on the board who trusted in reliable names - but got fakes. There are two modes to deal with a customer who detected that he was cheated:
1) Your expert against our expert (with all the costs for lawyers etc.) - at the end you keep what you bought
2) Silent money back - minus provisions, photo - and catalogue costs etc.

In former times a reputed auction house never sold fakes, exept unknowingly. If this happened you got your money instantly back - without a hassle and a written "we are very sorry...").

Regards
Postnikov

[ARGENTUM49]

Several years ago ``The Economist`` published the affair: both world’s most famous houses — New York branches had to pay about 50 million US dollars for fixing the prices through forbidden communication (a potential seller would go to the first auction house for the estimate and then wanted the second opinion from the other one. In the meantime the other house was contacted and told to expect the potential seller and told their estimate, so that the other house would not offer more). The lady director was even arrested!
I think that ``free market`` leads the world to the 19th century early capitalism when everything was allowed.
Ivan

[oel]

Hi,


For more information about the unknown mark, the left looking profiles, double profile of the young Victoria and Albert. Please see:
http://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopic ... 61&t=22389" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regards,

Oel

[Postnikov]

Hi oel -
very interesting information. Do you know where from this Sazikov mark is (photo of the object, auction house, private collection etc.)? The explanation sounds plausible, but I never have seen this mark before in nature or literature. Other Russian Court jewellers who exhibited in London or Chicago and won several goldmedals never used it in this form. Only Sazikov? I have my doubts.
If you can shed some more light or informations I would be very glad.

Regards
Postnikov

[Qrt.S]

As you saw I attended that discussion and asked whether anybody has seen such marking before. The result is as for now negative. The Victoria-Albert mark is a copy of the price medal Sazikov won at the London exhibition in 1851 but eleven years later (?). However, there are some interesting things about the assayer's mark. It is either badly punched or an over stamp. It has also this a bit curious BC assayer again. In another source a book I have seen a soot mark of is Sazikov mark similar to this mark in connection with a head mark which seems to be the English sovereign duty mark of Victoria and of course the court supplier mark. Unfortunately the other marks are not shown. But an English duty mark and an English medal on a Russian object...!? This book is the only source where I have seen such a picture. In the text is nothing stated about this "additional"mark.

However, such medallions are often seen on Russian copper and brass objects e.g. samovars. There can be a lot of different won medallions in rows. But I have never seen them one on silver objects.

My theory is that is might be a question of export. In this case to UK, but? Any good ideas or maybe knowledge?
Have a nice day

Qrt.S

[oel]

Hi Postnikov,

Thanks but unfortunately no additional information, hence my request for more information. It looks dubious to me too especially because it looks like the medal award stamp comes in combination with dubious Russian hallmarks and Sazikov mark.

Hi Qrt.S
If an hallmarked piece of Russian silver has been exported to the U.K, after Nov.1784 and before 2nd May 1890, the Imperial piece will also carry, only if it is of minimum 925 fineness, six British hallmarks. 1)The British Lion passant for 925 fineness. 2) Importers mark. 3) The letter F (foreign/import). 4) City assay mark. 5) Date letter. 6) Duty mark.

Regards,

Oel

[Qrt.S]

Thank you Oel, I know that. Therefore a wrote in my previous post that "Unfortunately the other marks are not shown.". One could add "if any". It is really a pity that no further information was given by the original author. Unless no more info is available, I consider the marks as dubious.

Rgds

Qrt.S

[oel]

Correction regarding the duty head on imported items, only duty head for Vicoria. Jackson’s Silver & Gold Marks reads:

Imported plate was required in 1842 to be submitted for assay and marking before being sold in England, Scotland or Ireland ( an exception was made of pre-1800 plate).. There was no provision however, in this act for an import mark, the current marks of the assay office to which the piece had been submitted being stamped. It was the Act of 1867 that an extra mark of F in an oval punch was required to be struck on imported wares of the correct standard. This was further reinforced by the act of 1883. The act of 1883 also exempted wares imported solely for private use (not for sale or exchange), further exemptions were made for filigree work incapable of being marked without damage, from marking

Regards,

Oel

[Dad]

Hi, Qrt.S.
Here a subject (charka) with such mark.



Best Reg..

[Qrt.S]

Ahaa, very interesting thank you, what do you know about the mark? Note it has a Swedish import mark after 1912. Maybe the import theory is not so bad after all.

[Juke]

Hi!

I can tell that I have seen the profile of Victoria and Albert mark on three different Sazikov items during the last year.

1) A very high quality tea set with tray etc, sold in a Swedish auction (the mark which oel showed)
2) A quality tray, sold last year in a Finnish auction
3) A set of salts, sold last year in a Finnsh auction.

Unfortunately I don't have a photos of the other cases anymore.

On the two last mentioned cases there were not overstrucks so it and the existing of the profile mark itself don't tell if the items are authentic. Before futher knowledge I consider them possibly been authentic by Sazikov as the items were of good quality.

Ivan could you send the photo of the mark again as I can't see it totally.

Regards,
Juke

[Postnikov]

Hi Dad -

in my opinion it can not be an object from Sazikov. See the unclear and fragmental punches from Sazikov and the crisp and clear Swedish import marks. Note the poorly made enamel in the pattern and on the handles. That´s no Sazikov quality.
First I thought it could be from Norwegian Markus Hammer (1847-1927), his original punch overstamped by the St. Petersburg punch, known for his Viking motives - but the quality is even for him too bad. See some photos from his work:

His mark for the years 1888-1925



The quality of his different enamel techniques:









But from where was it imported? The Swedish marks are authentic and the original marks are overstamped.

What is disturbing me is the fact that the "medal marks" showed up only in Northern auction houses - known for their liberal business politic concerning fakes.

Regards
Postnikov

[Qrt.S]

Postnikov, the mark you show is a version of David Andersen's trademark from Norway from 1876->

[Juke]

Hi!

I agree that the quality on the cup showed by Ivan is not what one would expect from Sazikov so it is a question mark. Unfortunately it don't answear if the double monarch mark was used by Sazikov meaning if all items with this mark would be fakes.

I was also more refering to the other items I have seen previously. I sent you a link to the tea set so you can see it.

Regards,
Juke

[Postnikov]

Hi Qrt.S -

why are you always bashing me?

Please look here:



Regards
Postnikov