Fake hallmarks?

PHOTOS REQUIRED - marks + item
ibrusz
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2018 7:53 pm

Fake hallmarks?

Postby ibrusz » Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:04 pm

Dear all,

I have recently purchased a pair of candlesticks from the States, sold as sterling silver, made by George Hunter I in 1752, London. Before shipping, I have asked the seller to take some photos of the item. I am still awaiting delivery, however, upon closer inspection of the images, I have doubts about the hallmarks.

I know that fake silver, especially those with British hallmarks, are relatively rare, but the marks are just odd - or is it just me? Also, the colour of the candlesticks and the corrosion doesn't seem like tarnish. Could it be that it is nickel-silver, with fake British hallmarks?

Let me know your thoughts.

Regards,
Avram

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

SteveDWollongong
contributor
Posts: 244
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:28 am
Location: Australia

Re: Fake hallmarks?

Postby SteveDWollongong » Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:58 pm

Hi Avram,

I wouldn't be concerned about the assay marks as they appear perfectly fine to me for London 1752 and I don't see anything untoward regarding the tarnish either.

Confirming the maker is a little more difficult as I have not been able to find a confirmed positive attribution to George Hunter I to compare with. Looking closely at the slope of the letters and the chamfered corners of the cartouche of your mark, and comparing with the diagrams in Grimwade, it looks more like one of the marks belonging to George Hindmarsh.

In checking the silvermakersmarks.co.uk website, Phil has two attributions to Hindmarsh but they differ also.

I suggest you sit back and wait and see if someone can positively identify the maker.

Cheers,
Steve

silvermakersmarks
co-admin
Posts: 1132
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 9:22 am
Location: Hertfordshire, UK
Contact:

Re: Fake hallmarks?

Postby silvermakersmarks » Fri Nov 02, 2018 4:01 am

Welcome to the forum, Avram.

I agree with Steve that the hallmark looks OK - as far as it is possible to tell from a picture - and that the tarnish is not at all suspicious.

As far as the maker's mark goes the GH looks very like the mark of George Hindmarsh and I would have had no hesitation in attributing it to him had it not been for the fact that Hindmarsh is noted as having made virtually nothing except salvers and waiters. The version of his mark which matches most closely was registered in 1739 and a smaller, similar mark was registered in 1753, so the date is OK for him. George Hunter registered his similar mark in 1748 but, judging from the (not very good) illustration in Grimwade, the letters were not canted over as in your picture. My opinion, then, is that it could be either Hindmarsh or Hunter.

Phil

SteveDWollongong
contributor
Posts: 244
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:28 am
Location: Australia

Re: Fake hallmarks?

Postby SteveDWollongong » Fri Nov 02, 2018 5:15 am

Phil has picked up on the same points I found, making the attribution difficult but if pushed, I would sway towards Hindmarsh.

Steve

AG2012
contributor
Posts: 3864
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 9:47 am

Re: Fake hallmarks?

Postby AG2012 » Fri Nov 02, 2018 5:20 am

Hi,
The style perfectly matches George II period.
Patina looks OK.
Did the seller disclose conversion to electric lamp ?
Every cloud has a silver lining;I suppose due to conversion the price (not to be discussed here) was considerably lower than for intact candlesticks, and less likely to have marks faked.
Regards


Return to “London Hallmarks”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest