www.925-1000.com

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q168/okchris67/vinaigretteeggpic4.jpg
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q168/okchris67/vinaigrettepic5.jpg
In the pic below, the "SM" or "WS" mark is visible inside the dome at the very center:

A close-up of the mark:

I recently acquired this 2-inch long, egg-shaped vinaigrette. It's made of thin sheet silver with distinctive stippling and repoussé flowers/leaves. At least 2 of the 3 pieces are constructed of multiple elements; the tallest outer dome has a band of silver fashioned separately into a ring and then soldered just inside the bottom edge to form the means of attachment; there are threads on the outside of this band. The inner domed screen has a band of silver fashioned separately and soldered around the outside about 1/8 of an inch from the bottom edge to control how far the inner domed screen slides into the shorter outer dome; the band serves as a stop to prevent it from sliding farther. There is a fascinating assayer's zig zag on the top surface of the hole-punched inner domed screen. The assayer's zig zag (not pictured) is very delicately scraped so as not to pierce the thin silver, and it looks to have been done for actual testing and not for show. I apologize profusely for the terrible picture of this vinaigrette's only mark; it's incredibly hard to get a loupe into the recessed area close enough to the mark to even see it; it's located on the inside of the shorter outer dome (Pics 3, 4, & 5). The maker's mark is either "SM" or "WS." I'm guessing this vinaigrette is either 18th-century German or circa 1800 Danish, but I welcome your input.


(admin edit - Images too larg & remember to use the 'Preview' button)

There is a listing on an online auction site (which I can't reference directly because the listing is current) for an egg-shaped nutmeg grater; it's smaller than this egg-shaped vinaigrette but astonishingly similar in construction and decoration, though it is unmarked, but the very knowledgeable seller says that it's circa 1790, so that listing confirmed for me that my original theory is probably correct regarding the age of this item, though I now think it could be English sterling that wasn't fully hallmarked because it's provincial or because of the haphazard way small items were only partially marked in that era.

Hello,

The assay rules in Britain have been always very strict. Little patch boxes weighing no more as 5 grams were fully hallmarked; lion, city mark, date & duty mark and normally on both halves.
I do not believe your egg to be made in Britain and to pin point an exact age would be difficult. Many eggs have been laid during the year’s world wide and one have to be careful not to practice a form of wishful thinking. However a clear image of the mark could be helpful and others may react and contribute more correct information.

Regards,

Oel

Oel wrote, "The assay rules in Britain have been always very strict. Little patch boxes weighing no more as 5 grams were fully hallmarked; lion, city mark, date & duty mark and normally on both halves."

Actually, "The hallmarking of 'very small nutmeg graters' was not required under the Act of Parliament of 1739, until this was repealed in 1790. The result was that from 1739 to 1790 silver nutmeg graters were made abnormally small to escape the obligation of presenting for assay. Those made between 1784 and 1790 also avoid the duty tax of sixpence an ounce. In rare instances, silversmiths might send nutmeg graters to Goldsmiths' Hall for hallmarking: such marks struck between 1784 and 1790 do not include the monarch's head duty mark. Otherwise the only proof that a nutmeg grater was of sterling silver was the presence of the maker's mark as registered at the Goldsmiths' Hall."
From Small Antique Silverware by G Bernard Hughes, first published in 1957, pages 58 to 59. My egg-shaped vinaigrette may well be Continental, but the astonishingly similar egg-shaped nutmeg grater I stumbled upon in conjunction with this exemption at least suggest the possibility that mine could be British and still comply with British hallmarking standards.

Yes perhaps. The only early vinaigrettes I have seen are in the book; Silver Boxes by Eric Delieb. I do not know if the British hallmark rules of early nutmeg graters also applied for early vinaigrettes. The nutmeg graters claimed to be early 18th century British, to my knowledge, were in size 1.25 inch by 1 inch and without any hallmarks but sometimes with only the maker’s mark.
Begging the question if British; why has your egg an assayer’s zig zag, if British hallmarking was not required during 1739 to 1790?
Perhaps your egg could have been laid in Germany. For more information please read Bahner’s post;….. many silversmiths avoided that and that is why one can often find just a number for the Lötigkeit and the Tremolierstrich.
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=6550&p=13635&hilit=zig+zag#p13635"

The problem is how to determine the correct age of your egg and the country of origin. I believe a clear picture of the only one mark on your egg could assist others to give more useful information.

Regards,

Oel

Found this on the Internet; maker’s mark only and no assay marks but makers mark SM. It reads;
Georgian Silver Nutmeg Grater
An antique sterling silver nutmeg grater in the shape of an egg. Very pretty bright cut engraving. Detachable grater. Weight 20 grams, 0.64 troy ounces. Height 4 cms. Diameter 3 cms. London made circa 1750. Marked SM in the lid for Samuel Meriton — date entered in 1746.




According to my information we have; Samuel Mertion I registered in London in 1746


And we have Samuel Meriton II registered in London in 1775 & 1781



Perhaps Samuel Meriton II made your egg shaped vinegraitte and has the zig zag mark been applied later. To check the silver standard which should be sterling(925). Please let us know the outcome of your further investigations.
Thanks and good luck.

Oel

Yes, I think you've nailed it with this last post. I have handled many nutmeg graters which are makers mark only, by Meriton. He specialised in this sort of object.

This one has been later chased in the Victorian period, and sadly lost it's grille, but is still a pretty example.

JBA, did you happen to miss seeing the pictures that the admin reduced to links showing the inner screen?

This egg has a beautifully made, hole-pierced, lift-out, domed screen, so I wonder if it wasn't originally intended as a vinaigrette rather than a nutmeg grater? It was popular throughout most of the 18th century on the Continent to use egg forms as vinaigrettes, as German (and to a lesser extent Danish) examples abound, so why not in England also? I found a very similar example by Samuel Pemberton of Birmingham from 1801 with an almost identical, hole-pierced, lift-out, domed screen, and the defining characteristic that leads me to think the screens are original to both eggs is that both eggs are larger than the nutmeg graters of the period. My egg is 5 CM, and the Samuel Pemberton egg is 4.5 CM, whereas the period nutmeg graters are typically 3.75 CM or less. Can anyone provide a rough, working date for the pattern made by the hole punches (the era that this star style of punching was used, in other words) on the domed screen?
Also, JBA, I had considered the possibility that the Victorians displayed their usual penchant for embellishing plain surfaces with exuberant chasing, but this egg conclusively dates to the working dates of Samuel Meriton II, 1778-1788, as it displays his maker mark and not his father's, and other eggs from this later era are starting to be lathe decorated and chased, etc., so do you not think it's probable that my egg is simply conforming to the trend of the day, Late British Rococo? I find similar Rococo ornament and even Hanau-looking houses and people adorning other pieces (and eggs in the former case) by both the father and son, Samuel Meriton I and Samuel Meriton II, respectively.

Oel, thank you for your great work! I agree, Samuel Meriton II, London, 1778-1788, 1st Rococo. Perhaps an admin should move this thread to the British category.

Georgian Rococo silver dies out around the mid 1760's in England, so I do not think it can be original rococo chasing if it is the son, not the father (also, never seen an example of a chased egg nutmeg grater!). By the 1770's we are in to the Neo-classical/Adam period, and these are always plain until the 1790's when you get really pretty bright cut examples.

If the piece was from Ireland this would be a matter of greater debate as the fashion for Rococo continued there much longer, but in any case that is certainly not Georgian chasing. Despite that fact it is beautifully rendered and clearly executed by an excellent craftsman so I wouldn't worry too much. Still a lovely little thing!

And indeed, thanks for the extra pictures- I missed them. You're absolutely right, it is a vinaigrette not a nutmeg grater. On occasion people cast these grilles in to doubt as replacements or conversions from nutmeg graters but I see no reason to do that here. Difficult to be certain without handling, but the piercing is right for the period and there seems to be nice wear and a good fit. Incidentally, this "star" pattern of piercing was in use for much of the 18th and early 19th centuries. I've seen it on bun peppers of the 1750's and on egg peppers of around 1815!

JBA, I truly appreciate your comments, but you wrote that you've, "never seen an example of a chased egg nutmeg grater!"??
I shall privately send you 3 examples of chased, 18th-century nutmeg graters, all 3 of which have chasing strikingly similar to mine, and in one case, nearly identical to mine, and 2 of which are offered by the premier scholar of British silver, who doesn't note that the chasing is non-period; 2 of the examples are egg form, and one is urn form; I can't do so here because listing commercial auction or sale venues in the forum is prohibited.

I wanted to share an absolutely fascinating silver history article, Flashback: The Silver of Captain Tobias Lear of Portsmouth, by Stephen Decatur, that relates to the above discussion only in that Samuel Meriton I (the father of the maker of my egg vinaigrette, above) fashioned a cream pitcher that made its way into the household goods of a noted American, a close friend and relative by marriage of George Washington. I haven't seen this article referenced elsewhere on this site, but if it is, forgive my oversight, and I hope its inclusion here doesn't violate any rule of which I am unaware:
http://www.collectorsweekly.com/article ... ortsmouth/

Hello again!

Thanks for the PM. Apologies: I meant to say "never seen an ORIGINALLY chased egg nutmeg grater". Call me a pessimist but unless chasing is obviously Georgian I err on the side of considering it to be later. Also, chasing on an object made after the rococo period, unless Irish, is pretty suspect.

Your first example: definitely original chasing, but not an egg. Also it is Rococo period, so no great surprise to see it is chased.

Second example: I'm unconvinced this chasing is original, but in any case the grater is dated 1740 not 1790. I wouldn't say it's definitely Victorian chasing, but to my mind the chasing is "in doubt".

Third example: This actually looks very much like original chasing to me, but again the grater is dated 1760 and so is still rococo period. Thanks for the link though- an interesting piece.

Later or original chasing is a difficult field, and a matter of debate amongst experts. Personally I don't mind it provided it is nicely done, and hasn't ruined the shape of the piece. In the case of your grater it is lovely work, and the shape of the object has been nicely preserved.
By the way, I know the Schragers (Schredds) and Daniel Bexfield very well :).

I acknowledge that I haven't provided a sharp, close-up photo of the only mark on my egg-shaped vinaigrette, but it doesn't seem logical, or possible, that the thin, sheet metal of the egg could be so highly wrought on the exterior without affecting the maker's mark on the corresponding interior if the maker's mark had been applied before the elaborate chasing; until I can get my USB port microscope working again, I'll only be able to offer my impression that the maker's mark on my egg is uniform and undisturbed. I posit that if the maker's mark had been in situ before the chasing, it would show an undulation and distortion, but, as you say, it's a matter of debate even for true experts such as Daniel Bexfield, so our conclusions here matter little. I did privately provide you an unmarked 4th example, and this time, you'll be pleased, JBA, that the expert has put a date on it of 1790, and again, it's an egg nutmeg grater with well-worn chasing that is otherwise very reminiscent of mine.

You'd be surprised how good those chasers were! Sometimes hallmarks are lost in the chasing, but usually they've been very clever about preserving them nicely. I like the way you're thinking though- you're asking the right questions.

If you're convinced yours is original chasing then the very best of luck to you. That's not my opinion, but it's only that: an opinion.
In my view they didn't use rococo chasing in the 1790's, despite the fact that examples exist from that date which are chased. I think they were chased 40-60 years later, but you're more than entitled to disagree with me on that, and you won't be alone. Just be careful that dealers* who tell you so aren't simply doing so to get a higher price for something they own.

What we can both agree on however, is that it's a lovely little piece. :).




*I am one of these, god help my sanity!