Thank you.
Paul.
Estonian mark?
Estonian mark?
Can anyone help me with this mark? I think it is an is early Estonian mark, but my Estonian references are rather sparse. The spoon measures 8" long and weighing around 72 grams.
Thank you.
Paul.
Thank you.
Paul.
Re: Estonian mark?
Hi Paul,
What makes you think this so called Device mark, put on by the maker, is an Estonian maker’s mark?
I believe we can find Device marks on 16th-17th century made items and sometimes without a City mark, which make it difficult to determine country of origin. And we have to ask ourselves original or replica?
Best,
Oel.
What makes you think this so called Device mark, put on by the maker, is an Estonian maker’s mark?
I believe we can find Device marks on 16th-17th century made items and sometimes without a City mark, which make it difficult to determine country of origin. And we have to ask ourselves original or replica?
Best,
Oel.
Re: Estonian mark?
If you look at 15th & 16th century maker’s marks from Reval/Tallinn you will see a similarity to the Single line incuse device mark on this spoon. Such devices seem only to occur on Estonian marks. The mark allied to the design of the spoon, which is very similar to spoons of such origin would tend to point to that area of the Baltic.
I have not seen any reproductions of this type of spoon, but if you know of any then that might assist in the search for the origins of this piece.
I have not seen any reproductions of this type of spoon, but if you know of any then that might assist in the search for the origins of this piece.
Re: Estonian mark?
Oel:
There are more issues to discuss; e.g. rather flat casting of the figure.
Ragards
Agreed;look at the gilded bowl - not a single scratch or stain.Was it sealed in oxygen free environment for 300 years?And we have to ask ourselves original or replica?
There are more issues to discuss; e.g. rather flat casting of the figure.
Ragards
Re: Estonian mark?
Like AG2012 the shining gilded bowl caught my eyes too. It is too shiny being that old. The mark is similar to such marks in any country not only Estonia. It is s a dubious spoon in my opinion.
Re: Estonian mark?
I initiated this post for speculation as to the spoon’s origins. Whilst I can understand the comments regarding the gilding, it should not be immediately regarded a ‘too good’. One has only to see pieces such as the William Cawdell spoons, known as the ‘Tichborne Celebrities’ from 1592 or pieces illustrated in Klaus Marquadt’s catalogue of ‘Eight Centuries of European Knives Fork and Spoon’s’, or indeed several spoons in the collection of the Ashmolean Museum and the V&A to realise that is it quite possible to find spoons of 4-500 years old with immaculate gilding.
As to the mark, I invited speculation that it might be Estonian, based on similar marks illustrated in Vende’s book ‘Väärismetalltööd Eestis 15-19 Sajandini’ such as the mark of Cort Sturdemann. Could Qrt.S please tell me where he/she has seen similar marks so that I may compare them to the mark on this piece? I have searched my library and other references without finding anything similar.
Also, I am hoping that someone who has experience with spoons such as this, can identify the figure on the terminal. That may also help in identifying its origins. Although it may look somewhat ‘flat’ in the pictures. It is really quite detailed, as one would expect on a spoon of some age. Or indeed a very good copy. Which leads me to my next question. If this is a copy, what is it a copy of?
As to the mark, I invited speculation that it might be Estonian, based on similar marks illustrated in Vende’s book ‘Väärismetalltööd Eestis 15-19 Sajandini’ such as the mark of Cort Sturdemann. Could Qrt.S please tell me where he/she has seen similar marks so that I may compare them to the mark on this piece? I have searched my library and other references without finding anything similar.
Also, I am hoping that someone who has experience with spoons such as this, can identify the figure on the terminal. That may also help in identifying its origins. Although it may look somewhat ‘flat’ in the pictures. It is really quite detailed, as one would expect on a spoon of some age. Or indeed a very good copy. Which leads me to my next question. If this is a copy, what is it a copy of?
Re: Estonian mark?
Yes everything is possible...almost, but there is also a saying: If something is too good to be true, it isn't. After your last mail I took a new look at the photos but they did not change my opinion of the spoon being dubious. There are no signs of use on the left rim of the bowl, no scratches on rest of the bowl. It isn't worn elsewhere either. No "dirt" anywhere. It just looks "newly" made. Mind my asking why do you place it in Estonia?
I understand the saying of something being a "copy" not necessarily so that it is an exact "copy" of another item but that the outlook has many similarities to some other similar object.
Yes the sources. Please look at:
Svenskt silversmide 1520-1850 pages 778-779
Väärismetalltööd Eestis 15.-19 ajadini, the index in the end of the book
Золотое и ÑеребÑаное дело XV-XX вв. p. 245.
In addition this link http://www.leimat.fi/en/responsibility- ... aturemarks.
You will find many similar signature marks.
In addition, I have seen similar such replica spoons made of silver sold in tourist shops here and there in Europe.
I understand the saying of something being a "copy" not necessarily so that it is an exact "copy" of another item but that the outlook has many similarities to some other similar object.
Yes the sources. Please look at:
Svenskt silversmide 1520-1850 pages 778-779
Väärismetalltööd Eestis 15.-19 ajadini, the index in the end of the book
Золотое и ÑеребÑаное дело XV-XX вв. p. 245.
In addition this link http://www.leimat.fi/en/responsibility- ... aturemarks.
You will find many similar signature marks.
In addition, I have seen similar such replica spoons made of silver sold in tourist shops here and there in Europe.
Re: Estonian mark?
Hi Paul,
To me the finial of the spoon is a half figure of a warrior or barbarian, bareheaded with ponytail. The figure on the shoulder of the spoon carries a shield, being the guardsman, guarding the gate. Symbolic for a safe haven, protected against the outside danger of the world (barbarian invaders). The roundness of the bowl and stem with broad shoulder, perhaps suggest being made in German/Eastern Europe, around the 16th century. Those decorated spoons were owned by the rich and famous, the spoons were not used as an eating utensil but kept for remembrance and often kept in a safe concealed place, thus perhaps one of the reasons those old spoons could look new.
The provenance of the spoon is of great importance, the beauty & truth of the spoon is in the eye & mind of the beholder.
Herewith some Dutch Device marks. NB. Those marks normally occur in a shield. The shape of the shield could mirror the heraldic fashion of the time.
Oel.
To me the finial of the spoon is a half figure of a warrior or barbarian, bareheaded with ponytail. The figure on the shoulder of the spoon carries a shield, being the guardsman, guarding the gate. Symbolic for a safe haven, protected against the outside danger of the world (barbarian invaders). The roundness of the bowl and stem with broad shoulder, perhaps suggest being made in German/Eastern Europe, around the 16th century. Those decorated spoons were owned by the rich and famous, the spoons were not used as an eating utensil but kept for remembrance and often kept in a safe concealed place, thus perhaps one of the reasons those old spoons could look new.
The provenance of the spoon is of great importance, the beauty & truth of the spoon is in the eye & mind of the beholder.
Herewith some Dutch Device marks. NB. Those marks normally occur in a shield. The shape of the shield could mirror the heraldic fashion of the time.
Oel.
Re: Estonian mark?
Thank you Gentlemen. That is just the information that I needed to continue the search. My original thought that they might be Estonian, was due to the similarity of the mark to ones which I had previously seen. However, Oel’s Dutch marks have shown that this kind of device is more widespread and I can now widen my search accordingly. As to provenance, I can only trace the spoon back to the East Anglia region of England. This is a very loose link, but there was a great trade connection between the Baltic and especially the Netherlands, and that part of England. So that is really a circumstantial dead end.
The situation regarding original or replica is not really important, although it would be nice to find that it was an original. The workmanship is pleasing, whether it is old or new.
I will now dig out even more books and hopefully find the answers that I seek. If I find anything conclusive I will post the results on this thread.
Thank you for your efforts.
Paul.
The situation regarding original or replica is not really important, although it would be nice to find that it was an original. The workmanship is pleasing, whether it is old or new.
I will now dig out even more books and hopefully find the answers that I seek. If I find anything conclusive I will post the results on this thread.
Thank you for your efforts.
Paul.
-
Francais
Re: Estonian mark?
I stayed out of this discussion, because I didn't understand the question itself. Basically because I evidently don't understand the use of the word "device". I read the posts several times and still don't understand.
I presumed the engraved mark was a device or a symbol used by the owner to identify it as his. These marks were engraved by the silversmith, only at the owner's request. Some makers, and towns used devices in their marks, but these would be stamped in not engraved. I have seen these marks on pieces before, and never thought they had anything to do with the maker or locality of origin, except they seem more common in Germanic countries. In fact I posted a somewhat similar mark found on a Swiss bowl. http://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopic ... 60&t=33740
This kind of mark was also used by engravers on early wood block prints.
I guess I would like to point out something else. The spoon may have a gilt bowl, but the handle isn't gilt, and would have to be polished on a regular basis. Entirely gilt pieces don't have to be polished if not used, so for instance I saw a collection of gilt Huguenot silver, meant to be displayed but not used, even those pieces showed some use. If you didn't ever use a spoon like this, you would still have to polish the handle, and it would be a rare servant indeed who would polish only up to the gilding and stop there. I personally never heard of spoons being hidden away, as a standard practice. Most silver was a display of wealth or used, in either case it was meant to be displayed. Even if it there was some practice in some country of putting away souvenir spoons, later other owners would presumably use the spoons. It is only recently that we consign old silver to safe deposit boxes. I can also assure you that even the finest fire guiding, usually ascribed to the Strasbourg silversmiths, when used has to be polished. I don't know why but the inside of a gilt beaker gets a residue build up, even when used for just wine and beer, ans rinsed regularly.
Even if a copy, I would think the original is published somewhere as paulh said.
Maurice
I presumed the engraved mark was a device or a symbol used by the owner to identify it as his. These marks were engraved by the silversmith, only at the owner's request. Some makers, and towns used devices in their marks, but these would be stamped in not engraved. I have seen these marks on pieces before, and never thought they had anything to do with the maker or locality of origin, except they seem more common in Germanic countries. In fact I posted a somewhat similar mark found on a Swiss bowl. http://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopic ... 60&t=33740
This kind of mark was also used by engravers on early wood block prints.
I guess I would like to point out something else. The spoon may have a gilt bowl, but the handle isn't gilt, and would have to be polished on a regular basis. Entirely gilt pieces don't have to be polished if not used, so for instance I saw a collection of gilt Huguenot silver, meant to be displayed but not used, even those pieces showed some use. If you didn't ever use a spoon like this, you would still have to polish the handle, and it would be a rare servant indeed who would polish only up to the gilding and stop there. I personally never heard of spoons being hidden away, as a standard practice. Most silver was a display of wealth or used, in either case it was meant to be displayed. Even if it there was some practice in some country of putting away souvenir spoons, later other owners would presumably use the spoons. It is only recently that we consign old silver to safe deposit boxes. I can also assure you that even the finest fire guiding, usually ascribed to the Strasbourg silversmiths, when used has to be polished. I don't know why but the inside of a gilt beaker gets a residue build up, even when used for just wine and beer, ans rinsed regularly.
Even if a copy, I would think the original is published somewhere as paulh said.
Maurice
Re: Estonian mark?
Hi Maurice,
Device mark is a maker’s mark; some claim based upon the fact a good smith, in early ages, could be an illiterate and used a kind of personal sign (hieroglyph) to mark his work.NB. Those marks normally occur in a shield. The shape of the shield could mirror the heraldic fashion of the time. I agree most of the time we like to show off our silver but sometimes we accept them in a box and put them in a drawer for years to come or only show the silver on special occasions.
Oel.
Device mark is a maker’s mark; some claim based upon the fact a good smith, in early ages, could be an illiterate and used a kind of personal sign (hieroglyph) to mark his work.NB. Those marks normally occur in a shield. The shape of the shield could mirror the heraldic fashion of the time. I agree most of the time we like to show off our silver but sometimes we accept them in a box and put them in a drawer for years to come or only show the silver on special occasions.
Oel.
-
Francais
Re: Estonian mark?
I still don't understand are you saying a silversmith engraved his device mark, or stamped it?
I know silversmiths used device marks, and have seen them, but even if he was illiterate he would still use a stamp.
Are you saying there is a custom somewhere for not using silver? For a silver spoon not to have any patina, it would have to be kept somewhere where it does not tarnish, or be polished for 2-400 years. As I said large pieces of gilt Huguenot silver were sometimes never used and only displayed, and of course Russian enamel spoons, etc were sometimes never used for over 100 years, but I have never heard of a case where and 18th c. or earlier spoon was not to be used. I may be wrong, but I have never heard of such a practice, do you have a source?
Maurice
I know silversmiths used device marks, and have seen them, but even if he was illiterate he would still use a stamp.
Are you saying there is a custom somewhere for not using silver? For a silver spoon not to have any patina, it would have to be kept somewhere where it does not tarnish, or be polished for 2-400 years. As I said large pieces of gilt Huguenot silver were sometimes never used and only displayed, and of course Russian enamel spoons, etc were sometimes never used for over 100 years, but I have never heard of a case where and 18th c. or earlier spoon was not to be used. I may be wrong, but I have never heard of such a practice, do you have a source?
Maurice
Re: Estonian mark?
Maurice, I never said the silversmith engraved his device mark. A device mark was registered with the City Assay Authorities (Guild’s register) and stamped for reference on a copper city Guild plate with the particulars of the silversmith. A device mark, normally stamped witin a shield, comes in combination with a City mark and or without date letter.
Are you saying there is a custom somewhere for not using silver?.....but I have never heard of a case where and 18th c. or earlier spoon was not to be used....do you have a source? You use too many words because most of us believe the spoon in question is of a recent date but if not the only explanation is the spoon has been kept in a concealed place (just playing the devils advocate).
Memorial spoons or Special spoons most often were not used for shuffling food but kept on display or in a concealed place and only shown or perhaps used on special occasions.
My source:
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O69209/spoon-unknown/
http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/spoon-52503
Spoons are among the earliest domestic objects. As distinct from dishes or knives which were often shared, spoons were treasured individual possessions. This silver spoon is entirely covered with enamel in distinctive stripes of colour, inset with the repeated letters M and O in silver. Both may indicate the original identity of the owner, now unknown. The quality and material of this spoon suggest that it must have been the property of a person of rank and not intended for daily use.
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O68998/spoon-unknown/
With a little of your precious patina
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O69007/spoon-unknown/
http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/hi ... poons.aspx
http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/6HK ... 013-01.jpg
With plenty of patina see particulars:
http://nms.scran.ac.uk/database/record. ... -002-094-C
The truth is in the mind of the beholder.
Regards,
Oel.
Are you saying there is a custom somewhere for not using silver?.....but I have never heard of a case where and 18th c. or earlier spoon was not to be used....do you have a source? You use too many words because most of us believe the spoon in question is of a recent date but if not the only explanation is the spoon has been kept in a concealed place (just playing the devils advocate).
Memorial spoons or Special spoons most often were not used for shuffling food but kept on display or in a concealed place and only shown or perhaps used on special occasions.
My source:
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O69209/spoon-unknown/
http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/spoon-52503
Spoons are among the earliest domestic objects. As distinct from dishes or knives which were often shared, spoons were treasured individual possessions. This silver spoon is entirely covered with enamel in distinctive stripes of colour, inset with the repeated letters M and O in silver. Both may indicate the original identity of the owner, now unknown. The quality and material of this spoon suggest that it must have been the property of a person of rank and not intended for daily use.
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O68998/spoon-unknown/
With a little of your precious patina
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O69007/spoon-unknown/
http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/hi ... poons.aspx
http://www.photo.rmn.fr/LowRes2/TR1/6HK ... 013-01.jpg
With plenty of patina see particulars:
http://nms.scran.ac.uk/database/record. ... -002-094-C
The truth is in the mind of the beholder.
Regards,
Oel.
-
Francais
Re: Estonian mark?
I thought we were discussing a particular spoon. I didn’t say anyone said the silversmith engraved the device. I asked a question. I guess I will ask it another way. Does anyone think the device on the spoon in question is stamped or engraved? It seems obvious to me that it is engraved, and is therefore an owner’s device. So why all the discussion of maker’s marks (etc) that have a device in them? That is why I don’t understand the original question, unless someone believes devices are restricted to a particular area, in which case I will start posting other examples.
As for other examples given, I think I gave examples of totally gilt and enameled pieces, without going back to rather rare examples from the 15th century, I think if those are what someone is relying on, the argument is mine. I absolutely shouldn’t have said “or earlier” but if I thought someone would go so far out of the period of discussion, I guess I would have exempted the 15th c. and also the Roman empire. I guess if I was going to discuss gilt pieces that weren’t for regular use I would have used royal christening spoons. I was again talking about spoons like the one being discussed.
So I guess my question is: does have an example of a spoon even vaguely similar to the one being discussed that was not used for “shuffling food”, please leave out any owned by the Holy Roman Emperor. I absolutely disagree that with what was said about memorial spoons. Memorial spoons were meant to be used, and to remind the person using them about an event or a person who had passed. I don’t think that is really debatable, but if someone thinks it is, then I suppose memorial brooches, and rings were also meant to be locked away, and only taken out for special occasions. I have no idea what a “Special” spoon is.
As long as we are discussing spoons as personal possessions, I have to agree. Some people were very proud of their single spoon, but why bring up knives? As long as we have, I guess I should point out that spoons and forks came in large sets, long before knives. Sure I have some 18th c sets with knives in them from Europe, but originally personal knives were brought to the table, even when spoons and later forks, were supplied. In fact knives were not commonly supplied in sets in America until well into the 19th c.
Then Oel, and this I direct to you personally, talk of “my precious patina”, which from earlier correspondence I have determined you don’t believe in. But rather than me saying what you believe, perhaps you can explain what you mean by “my precious patina” as I know of no “expert” in either Europe or America who doesn’t believe in patina. In fact your last example shows you have misunderstood what patina is. If you bury a spoon, all the wear, nicks, scratches, etc. are replaced by a chemical reaction which destroys the surface of a piece of silver. In fact that kind of “patina” is regularly used on fake pieces. I really don’t know how to discuss.
Finally I don’t like speaking of what I believe about a piece, and try to avoid giving an opinion about the authenticity of any item, unless in private. But I don’t mind commenting about what a piece has or lacks, and let both the poster and others come to their own conclusions. I don’t always succeed, and sometimes I am amazed people don’t recognize the obvious. Having said that “using too many words” reminds me of a comedy I remember seeing about Amadeus, when a critic said a piece had too many musical notes. I would rather everyone would leave out addressing these posts to particular people, and leave out ad hominem arguments or references. I only sign my posts out of habit and because I don’t really like my chosen moniker, as it isn’t even French.
Maurice
As for other examples given, I think I gave examples of totally gilt and enameled pieces, without going back to rather rare examples from the 15th century, I think if those are what someone is relying on, the argument is mine. I absolutely shouldn’t have said “or earlier” but if I thought someone would go so far out of the period of discussion, I guess I would have exempted the 15th c. and also the Roman empire. I guess if I was going to discuss gilt pieces that weren’t for regular use I would have used royal christening spoons. I was again talking about spoons like the one being discussed.
So I guess my question is: does have an example of a spoon even vaguely similar to the one being discussed that was not used for “shuffling food”, please leave out any owned by the Holy Roman Emperor. I absolutely disagree that with what was said about memorial spoons. Memorial spoons were meant to be used, and to remind the person using them about an event or a person who had passed. I don’t think that is really debatable, but if someone thinks it is, then I suppose memorial brooches, and rings were also meant to be locked away, and only taken out for special occasions. I have no idea what a “Special” spoon is.
As long as we are discussing spoons as personal possessions, I have to agree. Some people were very proud of their single spoon, but why bring up knives? As long as we have, I guess I should point out that spoons and forks came in large sets, long before knives. Sure I have some 18th c sets with knives in them from Europe, but originally personal knives were brought to the table, even when spoons and later forks, were supplied. In fact knives were not commonly supplied in sets in America until well into the 19th c.
Then Oel, and this I direct to you personally, talk of “my precious patina”, which from earlier correspondence I have determined you don’t believe in. But rather than me saying what you believe, perhaps you can explain what you mean by “my precious patina” as I know of no “expert” in either Europe or America who doesn’t believe in patina. In fact your last example shows you have misunderstood what patina is. If you bury a spoon, all the wear, nicks, scratches, etc. are replaced by a chemical reaction which destroys the surface of a piece of silver. In fact that kind of “patina” is regularly used on fake pieces. I really don’t know how to discuss.
Finally I don’t like speaking of what I believe about a piece, and try to avoid giving an opinion about the authenticity of any item, unless in private. But I don’t mind commenting about what a piece has or lacks, and let both the poster and others come to their own conclusions. I don’t always succeed, and sometimes I am amazed people don’t recognize the obvious. Having said that “using too many words” reminds me of a comedy I remember seeing about Amadeus, when a critic said a piece had too many musical notes. I would rather everyone would leave out addressing these posts to particular people, and leave out ad hominem arguments or references. I only sign my posts out of habit and because I don’t really like my chosen moniker, as it isn’t even French.
Maurice
Re: Estonian mark?
Hmmmm...interesting discussion. Anyway, a short note only. In Sweden-Finland there is a regulation stipulated 1485 that demands silversmiths to mark their silver either with the silversmith's initials or with his device mark. There are similar regulations regarding marking silver in other European countries too. We all know why silver was/is marked in the first place. However, a device mark is also an owner's mark, but regarding silver it is in most cases the maker's mark. Is it stamped or engraved is of less importance.
What one call "patina" is a matter of opinion. To me it is any kind of coating on silver among those pure dirt that should be removed as soon as possible. Silver must shine.
Try to manage
Qrt.S
What one call "patina" is a matter of opinion. To me it is any kind of coating on silver among those pure dirt that should be removed as soon as possible. Silver must shine.
Try to manage
Qrt.S
Re: Estonian mark?
Patina is not only dirt and comes with age, like our skin, dirt can be washed away with water and soap, patina not.
http://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopic ... 34&t=26020
The way we use and take care of our silver could influence its patina and the absent of patina does not always mean, not old or fake.
For example, two of alike and four hundred year old spoons; one spoon has been used as an utensil, on a regular daily base and the second spoon kept as a “Special” spoon, never used and kept in its container. In my opinion the used spoon will show wear and tear marks with perhaps a paper thin bowl and perhaps even some repair marks, the second and unused spoon will look new (younger). Both spoons are of the same age but aged different and may show different patina.
For bronze & wooden statues patina is of the greatest importance and if been removed makes the statues worthless. Like my silver, I love women who show some patina, without facelifts, botox free and not over polished. Before I spent too many words and go off topic, I better sign off. By the way; I should not have stated; with a little of your precious patina but with a little of our precious patina. Mea Culpa
Best,
Oel.
http://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopic ... 34&t=26020
The way we use and take care of our silver could influence its patina and the absent of patina does not always mean, not old or fake.
For example, two of alike and four hundred year old spoons; one spoon has been used as an utensil, on a regular daily base and the second spoon kept as a “Special” spoon, never used and kept in its container. In my opinion the used spoon will show wear and tear marks with perhaps a paper thin bowl and perhaps even some repair marks, the second and unused spoon will look new (younger). Both spoons are of the same age but aged different and may show different patina.
For bronze & wooden statues patina is of the greatest importance and if been removed makes the statues worthless. Like my silver, I love women who show some patina, without facelifts, botox free and not over polished. Before I spent too many words and go off topic, I better sign off. By the way; I should not have stated; with a little of your precious patina but with a little of our precious patina. Mea Culpa
Best,
Oel.
Re: Estonian mark?
Well, I didn’t expect top open such a can of worms when I asked the initial question, but it has raised some interesting points of discussion. Further to Maurice’s point about spoons being made to be used, this is quite a valid point, but there are exceptions to this logical idea. I recently came across a St Julian spoon. This particular type of spoon, similar in appearance to an Apostle Spoon, was linked to the Worshipful Company of Innholders and it was customary for those elected to the Company to present such a spoon to the Company on their election. This was not intended to be used, but was more along the lines of a symbol of membership.
Paulh
Paulh
-
Francais
Re: Estonian mark?
I have suggested before that there should be a section for nomenclature. I don't see how anyone can agree on the age of a piece of silver, if everyone has there own definition of "patina". in my opinion the lack of patina, or the surface created by burying a piece of silver, with very few exceptions, is a sign of lack of age, faking, or having been wrecked as far as value goes. Obviously Russian enamel spoons don't often show wear, as they often come in their original box. It is also obvious, to anyone who has watched the market, that this has led to them being faked. I know friends who dealt in Russian silver, who now won't buy a piece today without personal inspection. Indian Trade Silver is another example, since some pieces were buried with their Amerindian owners, it opened a gateway for fakers. Anyone, myself included, can make a convincing fake, but I have never figured out a way to fake patina, so to make it really convincing i would have to bury the piece. This removes any patina there would have been, then I can explain the lack of patina by "it was buried". The end result, thousands of nearly worthless fakes have flooded the market, and what little scholarship there has ever been on the subject has been thrown out the window. Then someone has a perfectly legitimate 18th century spoon, and buffs it, because he like silver shiny. The result, a piece of silver worth 1/10 of what it was. Why, because knowledgeable people are afraid it is faked or repaired. I have bought buffed pieces, for different reasons, but then I have offered to buy fakes, too. Many well known dealers will "fix up" a piece of silver. I know one major silver dealer, now dead, who sold to major museums, and collectors, whose repair person "fixed up" all sorts of pieces. He added missing finial parts, filled in engraving, etc. But he couldn't fix up patina. Obviously there are a lot of gullible people out there buying fixed up pieces.
As far as two silver spoons (not gilt, not enameled) being 400 years old and one being "special", in my opinion that is a real stretch. Anything is possible, but some things are so improbable they demand proof. Again Occam's Razor, unusual statements demand unusual proof.
First and foremost, no one owns a four hundred year old piece of silver, he rents it. If I live to be 80 and got the piece at the time of my birth, and the same could be true for each or the 4 previous owners, then I rented the piece for 1/5 of its life, less if I don't destroy it when I die. So this special spoon would have to have been handed down over the years and every owner had to keep it in an hermetically sealed container, so it didn't have to be polished. I think I've made my point, maybe that spoon exists, but I doubt it.
The argument could work for two spoons one hundred years old, but even that is unlikely.
I have used patina to date and authenticate silver, or at least help to date and authenticate silver, for over 50 years, I wouldn't want to do without this tool. And I generally warn collectors and dealers about buying pieces that don't have understandable, age appropriate patina.
I guess I have seen one engraved maker's mark in 50 years, (and that might have been and engraver's mark) so statistically if it is engraved it is an owner's device.
If I said that all spoons were meant to be used, I did not mean only to eat with, there are spoons I have already mentioned, that had other uses, but not this type of spoon. Obviously even the St. Julian spoon, was used, maybe not to eat with, but it was used. And if not gilt, would have to be polished.
Maurice
As far as two silver spoons (not gilt, not enameled) being 400 years old and one being "special", in my opinion that is a real stretch. Anything is possible, but some things are so improbable they demand proof. Again Occam's Razor, unusual statements demand unusual proof.
First and foremost, no one owns a four hundred year old piece of silver, he rents it. If I live to be 80 and got the piece at the time of my birth, and the same could be true for each or the 4 previous owners, then I rented the piece for 1/5 of its life, less if I don't destroy it when I die. So this special spoon would have to have been handed down over the years and every owner had to keep it in an hermetically sealed container, so it didn't have to be polished. I think I've made my point, maybe that spoon exists, but I doubt it.
The argument could work for two spoons one hundred years old, but even that is unlikely.
I have used patina to date and authenticate silver, or at least help to date and authenticate silver, for over 50 years, I wouldn't want to do without this tool. And I generally warn collectors and dealers about buying pieces that don't have understandable, age appropriate patina.
I guess I have seen one engraved maker's mark in 50 years, (and that might have been and engraver's mark) so statistically if it is engraved it is an owner's device.
If I said that all spoons were meant to be used, I did not mean only to eat with, there are spoons I have already mentioned, that had other uses, but not this type of spoon. Obviously even the St. Julian spoon, was used, maybe not to eat with, but it was used. And if not gilt, would have to be polished.
Maurice
Re: Estonian mark?
Thanks Maurice and I am glad you more or less confirm what I tried to explain in a few words. A little and minor issue and only for the record; a device mark is a maker’s mark, struck by the master, reference; Dutch Goldsmiths’ and silversmiths’ marks and names prior to 1812, Citroen page 12, first chapter.
Oel.
Oel.
Re: Estonian mark?
To All,
I humbly have to correct my previous statements about a Device mark because the device mark shown on the spoon, to be a maker’s mark, should have been surrounded by a shield. NB. Those marks normally occur in a shield and the shape of the shield could mirror the heraldic fashion of the time. Maurice has been right, the device mark is engraved and not struck and as such could be an owner’s device.
Below an example of a correct Dutch device/maker's mark linked to city of Bolsward, and the master only known by his first name being Sitge, 2nd quarter 16th century:
Regards,
Oel.
I humbly have to correct my previous statements about a Device mark because the device mark shown on the spoon, to be a maker’s mark, should have been surrounded by a shield. NB. Those marks normally occur in a shield and the shape of the shield could mirror the heraldic fashion of the time. Maurice has been right, the device mark is engraved and not struck and as such could be an owner’s device.
Below an example of a correct Dutch device/maker's mark linked to city of Bolsward, and the master only known by his first name being Sitge, 2nd quarter 16th century:
Regards,
Oel.