Niello Spoon

[madej]

Hello.
A set of 12 teaspoons decorated with niello, in the box. There are also sugar tongs included. Assayer is Andrey Antonovich Kovalsky from Moscow.The silversmith will be the PL # 2696?
Regards

[Qrt.S]

Could be, he made spoons. However, Postnikova writes that his working period was 1845-1850, but the year on the spoon is 1844. Wouldn't be the first time there is a mistake in P. Unfortunately the sugar tong seems to be missing, or?

[madej]

It is true that PL writes that he was active from 1845 and is marked in 1844, but it does happen.

[madej]

Hi Qrt.S
I wrote at the same moment :) The sugar tongs are available but I do not have pictures.
Regards

[Qrt.S]

How do you know that? What does happen, that Postnikova made a mistake or what?

[Qrt.S]

Nice if you have the tongs, then the set is complete.

[madej]

I suppose. Since Postnikowa often happened, why not in this case. Maybe someone else will say.
It's good that the set is in the original box

[Goldstein]

A wellknown silversmith - father and son - Michail and Anton.

[Qrt.S]

Hmmmmm... I'm not fully convinced that this is the case. The time span is rather big. The spoon's year is 1844. In addition, there is no mentioning of that Anton Tchevarsin would have used the mark М.Ч.

Since Goldstein is always so eager to know the source, now I in turn would like to know where from is the information that Mihail Tchevarsin would have been a silversmith, marking М.Ч.? If Mihail and Anton are well known, why is Mihail not mentioned anywhere? At least I have no records of him. Anton's patronymic name Mihailovich tells only that he was Anton's father. Anything is possible of course, but the source?

[Goldstein]

Just use the search function on the upper right side - enter "Tchevarsin" and read/understand what you see! The information is from the year 2016!

At least I have no records of him.

As a "copy and paste artist" you missed this one. Maybe you will realize one day that the indication of sources is the most important thing! You are the only one who refuses to indicate sources. We had this discussion several times - in vain.
To boast of the knowledge of others / to spend them as your own leads very soon to a dead end and is only ridiculous.

Knowledge not shared is lost knowledge.

[Qrt.S]

Thank you Goldstein. Good to have the one and only all knowing perfect person attending these sites. I must admit that sometimes my memory fails me. Now it did, sorry for that.

[Goldstein]

Here some more objects - from the son as well from the father. Notice the different years and compare with Ivanov´s notices.
In order to be able to form a realistic judgment, not only information about the manufacturer but also real pieces is required. Books alone do not always help. Luckily, objects from this manufacturer are not very rare ...

[madej]

Hello.
Thanks for the answers.
Because of my poor English maybe I did not understand everything well. Why should I assume that the silversmith I am asking is Tchevarsin, and not as Postnikowa says under number 2696? On my spoons is the mark М.Ч and in another thread I see that it is M.Ч. that is, with two dots.
I know that the silversmith used a few signs but how can I be sure that it is Tchevarsin.
Regards

[Goldstein]

Hi madej -

if you have problems with the translation use "google translator". It is very time consumating to explain to you what was written again and again!!

This are the marks of Tchevarsin Anton Mikhailovich (the father of Mikhail - the maker of your spoons).



This is the mark on your spoon ( Tchevarsin Mikhail Antonovich).



If you now replace the letter A with the letter M you have all variants - one (1) dot or two (2) dots!

2 silversmiths father and son - different marks - because they had different names - Anton and Mikhail!

Try to be a little smarter - use a translator - or ask someone who speaks Engish.

[Qrt.S]

@Goldstein

This are the marks of Tchevarsin Anton Mikhailovich (the father of Mikhail - the maker of your spoons).

FYI!
And just for the records:
In the forenames Anton "Mikhailovich" the latter (patronymic) name indicates that Anton is Mikhail's son. In other words Mikhail is the father and Anton his son, not the other way. It is good for you to know who is who for the future.
In addition, Google translate would tell you that it should read "These are the marks..." and "..time consuming..."(grammar) .... Also note that it is difficult for everybody of us to use as well as to understand a second language.

[Goldstein]

Hi Qrt.S -

Hmmmmm... I'm not fully convinced that this is the case. The time span is rather big. The spoon's year is 1844. In addition, there is no mentioning of that Anton Tchevarsin would have used the mark М.Ч.

Mihail and Anton are well known, why is Mihail not mentioned anywhere? At least I have no records of him. Anton's patronymic name Mihailovich tells only that he was Anton's father.

One week ago you did not know who Tchevarsin was - now you know everything better and start your notorious education program.
Stay cool and civilized - this is just a forum - and errors can be improved with ease and without being offensive. Try it....

Regards
Goldstein

[Qrt.S]

Better to admit not knowing instead of providing incorrect information to the readers and make nasty comments. Wouldn't be the first time...