antique French oil&vinegar set - 1795?

[horgab]

Hi all,

Could anybody help me to identify the silvermith's mark of this oil&vinegar set?




Many thanks for your help!

Best wishes,

Gabor

[blakstone]

Ange Denis Collier, who registered his mark on 15 Feb 1808, working at 7 rue Nazareth and (by 1814) a 38 Quai des Orfèvres.

His marriage record, on 8 Nov 1817, to Antoinette Adelaide Payen at the Church of St.-Merri, gives his age as 29 (thus born ca. 1788) and his parents as Jean Louis Pierre Collier & Louise Elisabeth Bonamy. A son, Ange Arthur Collier, was born 8 Dec 1818, but I found no information thereafter.

Hope this helps!

Ref: Catherine Arminjon, James Beaupuis, & Michèle Bilimoff, Dictionnaire des Poinçons de Fabricants d'Ouvrages d'Or et d'Argent de Paris et de la Seine 1798-1838 (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1991), p. 57, No. 138.

[horgab]

Thank you very much for the identification!!

It is surprising that the maker is "Ange Denis Collier" who registered his mark only in 1808...

However, the item clearly shows 6-8 silver marks used by French Silversmiths' Association (Association des Orfévres) in 1795-1797. It is highly unlikely that Ange Denis Collier completed this item at his age of 7... :-)

Is there any reasonable explation how this item, likely made by Collier after 1808, can have the old marks of the French Silversmiths' Association (Association des Orfévres)?

[Waylander]

I'm no expert on French silver, but I had a glance at my copy of Tardy, who seems to indicate (page 188) that the lady-head mark (used by the Association of Gold and Silversmiths) was found 50 years later on some Paris pieces (and shown as being used from 1794 to ?)....perhaps suggesting that your situation isn't unknown. This isn't answer to your question, but just some more information. Fairly sure someone can provide an answer though. Perhaps, because the lady-head mark had no value as a guarantee mark, it was just used to add "colour" to an item...? Just a thought.

Cheers

Waylander

[anikopol]

Hi,

In fact, if some books states that French Silversmiths' Association (Association des Orfévres) mark was used in 1795-1797, others books admit that the period when this marks was used is still unclear. You can see the mark on items produced during the "coq" period (1798-1819), and I think even on some "vieillard" items.

[blakstone]

Arminjon (the reference I cite) has a two-page section on of the “head of a Greek woman” mark, which she calls “poinçons d’essai” [“test marks”]. She states that there is still much mystery surrounding the mark and its purpose. Among her observations:

1. That similar marks were used at the same time in other cities - Lille, Douai, Clermont-Ferrand, Toulouse, Lyon, etc.
2. There is no reference to them at all among the Paris legislative records or of the Paris Mint, strongly suggesting that they were not state-authorized marks.
3. The number of marks and numerals on them correspond in all observed cases to the new standards for gold and silver introduced by the law of 19 Brumaire an VI [9 Nov 1797]
4. The marks are always found only on pieces with the lozenge-shaped maker’s mark (also initiated with the Brumaire law) and usually in very close proximity to them
5. Given the two previous observations, Arminjon concludes (most emphatically) that the marks cannot date any earlier than November, 1797.
6. The “test” mark appears on around 15%-20% of pieces from 1797 until 1819, when its use begins to gradually decline, ending completely in 1838 with the advent of the “Minerva” mark.

It is her opinion that the marks were some sort of private assay mark used by silversmiths who were suspicious of both the new standards and civil assay offices:

Avant la loi de Brumaire, les orfèvres et bijoutiers étaient habitués à présenter à l'essai leurs ouvrages à l'état d'ébauche ; ils furent assez méfiants à l'égard des nouveaux règlements de 1797 qui leur prescrivaient de les apporter suffisamment avancés. Il semble aussi que ces fabricants aient peut-être douté des capacités des affineurs et des nouveaux essayeurs après la loi de Brumaire. Ils risquaient en effet, en cas d'insuffisance de titre, non seulement le bris de leurs ouvrages, mais aussi une perte de main-d'oeuvre. L'orfèvre devait sans doute prendre sur lui de présenter de manière officieuse des morceaux d'objets à "monter" et d'y faire apposer ces poinçons "d'essai", puis dans un deuxième temps, selon la réglementation, il devait présenter l'ouvrage une fois terminé pour l'ins-culpation des poinçons officiels. Cette opération semble donc avoir été une précaution probablement tolérée administrativement, mais n'est'attestée par aucun document. Cette tolérance était sans doute la conséquence de désagréables surprises antérieures dues à des affinages insuffisants ou à des alliages non conformes, peut-être effectués par l'orfèvre lui-même ou composés par lui à partir de réemplois.

Translation:

Before the Brumaire law, goldsmiths and jewelers were accustomed to submitting their work for testing in unfinished form; they were quite wary of the new 1797 regulations requiring them to bring them in sufficiently completed. It also seems that these manufacturers may perhaps have doubted the competence of refiners and new assayers after the Brumaire law. Indeed, they risked, in the event of insufficient fineness, not only the destruction of the piece but a waste of manpower. The goldsmith probably took it upon himself to present informally parts of objects for "assembly" and there affix those "test" stamps and then, a second time, according to the regulations, he was obligated to present the finished work for the striking of the official marks. This procedure seems to have been a precaution probably tolerated administratively but is not attested by any document. This tolerance was probably the result of earlier unpleasant surprises due to insufficient refinements or non-compliant alloys, perhaps made by the silversmith himself or caused by him from re-use.

Of significance here is her observation:

Il faut encore noter que les poinçons losangiques auprès desquels sont insculpés les poinçons "d'essai" n'appartiennent pas toujours à des maîtres reçus avant 1789 comme certains l'ont avancé, mais aussi et assez fréquemment à des fabricants qui se sont installés après 1798 ou 1809, voire plus tard encore, puisqu'on en trouve encore à côté des poinçons officiels jusqu'en 1838.

Translation:

It should also be noted that the lozenge-shaped marks with which the "test" punches are struck do not always belong to masters received before 1789 as some have suggested, but more frequently to manufacturers who were set up after 1798 or 1809 or even later, since they are still found alongside the official marks until 1838.

Hope this helps!

[horgab]

Thank you for for the good discussion!

Observations here:
1. Evidently, numerous old French silver marks appear on the item.
2. The marks' locations suggest that the marks were not struck at the same time.
3. The “head of a Greek woman” mark (1795-97?) appears at several (6-8), "well-protected" parts of the item, always together with the lozenge-shaped maker’s (Collier 1808?)mark.
4. Separately of them, at not so "well-protected parts", other old French fineness hallmarks (1809-19?) are visible on the item (see below).



So, if I am correct, we should conclude that the “head of a Greek woman” mark of the Silversmiths' Association (Association des Orfévres) should not be used to estimate the item's age, that can be derived more likely from the maker's and the other fineness marks.

PS: I would highly appreciate to have a reference photo of Ange Denis Collier's mark from somebody. Many thanks!

[blakstone]

You are correct in your assumption that the “Greek Woman’s Head” mark cannot be relied upon as an indicator of age (other than its established time frame of 1797-1838). Now that I see all the marks, it is clear that the piece dates from 1809-1819, which marks it bears; this is entirely in keeping with Collier’s known working period.

Your observations regarding the placement of the "Essai" mark are entirely, even astonishingly, consistent with Arminjon’s :

Il faut aussi observer l'emplacement de l'insculpation de ces poinçons "d'essai", comme la "tête de femme grecque" pour Paris lorsqu'il est à côté du poinçon de fabricant de forme losangique ; ils sont très souvent insculpés côte à côte et apposés la plupart du temps dans les endroits inaccessibles à la marque après la finition du travail ou tout au moins dans ceux qui présentent un risque inéluctable de détérioration, comme par exemple le fond d'une verseuse ovoïde, le pied d'un calice ou encore un retour d'anse . . . Cette marque insculpée dans des endroits inaccessibles n'est possible que si les divers éléments de l'objet sont présentés séparément avant le montage. En revanche, les poinçons de titre et les poinçons de garantie sont apposés dans des endroits faciles d'accès une fois l'objet terminé, suivant les prescriptions données pour les objets finis, comme il l'est indiqué dans le volume concernant les “Prescriptions de la Marque” établi par la Direction générale de la Garantie.

Translation:

We must also note the location where these "test" marks are struck, as the "Greek woman's head" for Paris when it is next to the lozenge-shaped maker’s mark; they are very often struck side-by-side and placed mostly in areas inaccessible on the finished work, or at least in areas which present an unavoidable risk of damage, such as the bottom of an ovoid verseuse, the foot of a chalice, or even the extension of a handle . . . This mark struck in inaccessible locations is only possible if the various elements of the object are presented separately before assembly. However, the standard and guarantee marks are affixed in easily accessible locations on the finished object, according to the requirements given for finished items, as is pointed out in the volume regarding “Marking Directions” instituted by the General Directorate for Guaranty.

Here is the listing from Arminjon for Collier:



The additional biographical information I culled from the surviving fragmentary Paris civil register indices.

Finally, I must say that I am personally very skeptical of this so-called “Association des Orfévres”. References to it as the origin of these marks is widespread, but none seem to provide any legitimate documentation of it. It is so stated in Tardy & Beuque, but none of the “authoritative” sources provide any primary source references, nor any other information regarding this mysterious organization. Arminjon does not even mention it, and her research into the civil records of the period is extensive. Frankly, I strongly suspect there was no such thing, and that Arminjon is much closer to the mark regarding the origin of these “poinçons d’essai”.

[horgab]

Thank you very much for the detailed info & the reference picture!
Your answers also help a lot to understand this time period (i.e. 1795-1819) of French silver :-)