Unknown Reval master

[Qrt.S]

My apologies Dad, I have completely forgotten to answer you about Jakov Natarov's Riga stay. The information comes from Valde Vilite's book Latvijas Subdrakali darbi un meistaru zimes, published in Rundales pils muzeis in 1993.

Chapter: Rigas apgabala proves palatas meistari (Riga district's control masters in the assay office), page 193.
Mark #1192 Jakovs Natarovs (Яков Натаров).
The text states that he became assay master in 1851 and he was quiet-mannered person with good technical skills but also suited for office work. In July 1853 he was moved to Tallinn Assay office. (at least that is what I understand from the Latvian text) Note that the year 1853 matches with Hephaistos' list

It must be the same J. Natarov.

That all I know.

[Qrt.S]

Hello again,

I've just noticed that there is a to name unknown assayer punching Я·Н in Voronège 1869. Could that be Jakov Natarov who could have moved from Tallinn 1869? Any ideas?

[Dad]

Hi, Qrt.S.

Thank you for your message. It's very important. I think, in 1851 Natarov was graduated the School of assaymasters in Riga. He was 18 (19). Is in your book (Latvijas Subdrakali darbi un meistaru zimes) information about: who was Natarov in 1851-1853 in Riga? Assaymaster (probirer) or assistant of assaymaster (probirschik)?
I think, his first position was assistant of assaymaster (probirschik). Natarov had begun to work like the real assaymaster (owns punch) in Reval since 1853(4) only.

Tht information about JaN in Voronezh in 1869 is from book of P.-L.? May be, may be... I know that Stepan Andrusenko was assaymaster in Voronezh in 1866 and 1876.
It need next research.))

Best Reg..

[Qrt.S]

Well my skills in the Latvian language are rather poor. Nonetheless, what is written in the book is: No 1851. g. proves meistars. To me it means that he was an assay master but not an assistant assay master as from 1851 to 1853. In addition it states that: "1853. g. jūlijā pārcelts uz Tallinnas proves palātu" i.e. moved to Tallinn assay office in July 1853. That all it is...

[Qrt.S]

Dad!
Herman Georg Clemens'/Klemens' punch is most likely in Postnikova #3450, page 245. On the same page is #3451 almost sure Jakov Natarov's punch. I don't know who BX is (#3452-3), do you?

[Zolotnik]

Hi Dad -

To Zolotnik. Where you took data about Ivan Spiridonov?

I really do not remember if from a collector or from others...

Please, show example of punches by Zagrebin (AЗ) and by Hermann Clemens.

Some explanations to the Clemens family, they are often interchanged:

Clemens, Carl Friedrich, 1768-1793 Father


Clemens, Hermann Georg, 1781-1856, son of Clemens, Carl Friedrich


Clemens, Carl Ferdinand, 1812-1846, son of Clemens, Hermann Georg


Very interesting that his father assayed the object as assay master.

Regards
Zolotnik

[Qrt.S]

Ivan Spiridonov assayed in Riga 1873-1889 and at almost the same time also in Tallinn ~1873(4)-1886. The former assayer P. Fjodorov had left Tallinn 1874 and they had no assayer. Spiridonov obviously traveled between Tallinn and Riga. The next assayer Ivan Andrejev superseded Spiridonov in Tallinn in 1887.

This is how I have understood it, but ?

[Dad]

Hi.

Thanks for your message.

Unfortunately, I don't know anything about Spiridonov. There can be it one of mistakes of the book (P.-L.))))
Somebody saw Riga's assay punch of ИС in 1873-1884? Show me, please.
I know that in 1888-1891 the head of Riga's assay office was Ilya Egorovich Sorokin (ИС) .

Assaymaster Stepanov (ИС) started to work in Reval's assay office after Fedorov's death in 1874 .
To Ort'S: Look please in your Latvian book about Stepanov. Stepanov studied in Riga's assay school in 1859 (probably).

Where are Spiridonov????

Best Reg..

[Qrt.S]

This is very interesting indeed.
Dad! Latvijas Sudrabkali only states that there are silver objects found in Riga with the assay mark ИС (Ivan Spiridonov) between the years 1873-1890. An assay mark is shown with with ИС and 1889. Its reference is PL#3295. It does not prove it is Spiridonov and could as well be Stepanov. Note in PL the year is 1883. No mentioning of any assay master I. Stepanov in Latvia in the respective book.

I think there is a mix between Spiridonov and Stepanov because both have the same initials. Could it be this way, it would make more sense to me?

----------------- TALLINN----RIGA-----------KAUNAS
Spiridonov ------------------1873-1886-----1860-1862
Sorokin----------------------1888-1891
Stepanov-------1874-1886?

Mind my asking who is this I. Stepanov, the same assayer as in Novgorod 1869-1870?

[Dad]

You don't understand me.)) I don't speak about Stepanov's work in Riga. Only about learn in Riga's assay school.
In Riga's assay office since 1888 I.E.Sorokin only.
In Novgorod's assay office in 1869 - another Stepanov. Sidor Semyonovich Stepanov.

[Zolotnik]

Hi Dad -

here are some photos of the assaymaster:





though all the spoons are the same pattern, engraved etc. - they are from different makers and assayers!!



Regards
Zolotnik

[Qrt.S]

I do understand you Dad...somehow ;-). Nonetheless, I haven't said a word about Stepanov in Riga but in TALLINN! What I did was answering your question and presented an assumption...

[Zolotnik]

Hi Dad -

found some information for you:





the source, p.15



Regards
Zolotnik

[Qrt.S]

Yes Zolotnik what you show is the current belief. I'm referring to Dad's statement 7.9. 7:39 am:

Assaymaster Stepanov (ИС) started to work in Reval's assay office after Fedorov's death in 1874 .

It could mean that this ИС in Tallinn isn't de facto Ivan Spiridonov but I. Stepanov 1874-86. At least the working periods matches quite well. Moreover, Spiridonov is known to have worked in Riga 1877-1886. That is almost the same period.

I think there is an error regarding number 9 in Reinans' book. Number 9 should read I. Stepanov, not I. Spiridonov. The problem is, however, that this Stepanov has popped up from nowhere. It was Dad who "found" him...

Dad! Where from is this I. Stepanov information?

[Zolotnik]

Hi Qrt.S -

without verifiable facts and sources such information is worthless! Just a name thrown into the discussion is of little use ...

Regards
Zolotnik

[Qrt.S]

Correct and therefore I'm asking Dad where from is the information. If Dad can tell that Stepanov superseded Fjodorov because of his death such information must have a source, what? I only made an assumption how it could be...

[Dad]

Hi, All.

Dear Zolotnik. I have no such purpose how to convince you of something. I only wrote information. You can accept it or you can throw out it. It's your right. I collect data like particles of gold everywhere and I have a doubt about everything, but...
Sources are very different. In modern sources in the end of books earlier sources are printed (bibliography), in those - more earlier and etc .Mistakes made in earlier sources repeat in later sources.
In the basis of all sources there should be real documents of old time. These documents is priority sources for me.

To Ort'S: About Fedorov's death and about Semenov I learned from archival documents of the Ministry of Mining. Now I know only a surname "Semenov", to find out any more there was no time.
About assaymaster I.E.Sorokin in Riga was written in Adres-Calendar of Liflyndskaya guberniya, 1889,1890.

Best Reg..

[Qrt.S]

Thanks Dad, sounds convincing, but mind my asking, now you are talking about assayer Semenov!? In your previous message you mentioned Stepanov who superseded Fedorov! Which one is it, Semenov or Stepanov?

[Dad]

Sorry, certainly Stepanov (1874). It is my mistake in text of message.

Right text:
"..To Ort'S: About Fedorov's death and about Semenov I learned from archival documents of the Ministry of Mining. Now I know only a surname "Stepanov", to find out any more there was no time..."

[Dad]

Sorry, certainly Stepanov (1874). It is my mistake in text of message.

Right text:
"..To Ort'S: About Fedorov's death and about Stepanov I learned from archival documents of the Ministry of Mining. Now I know only a surname "Stepanov", to find out any more there was no time..."

Excuse - was very tired. The Administrator can will correct?