www.925-1000.com

I've found some time ago this sugar cup,
but the mark seems suspicious to me.
The silversmith appears to be Bartolomeo Bernardi, but I've never seen it associated with the "five star mark".
The "BB" mark seems to crisp, and the five star mark too bad.
Additionally the sugar cup style seems of the XX century.

I give no importance to the fact that there is a date because it could be a presentation to someone of an old object.

What do you think???
many thanks

Hi,
Looks like late 19th century (trioni mark).
I think Torino XVIII century mark is not genuine.
Regards

thank for your answer

yes the "trione" is from 1812 to 1872
Bartolomeo Bernardi activity is from 1779-1816
so the two marks can be coherent
but I made a little search ad I've never found this two together, so maybe only works dated before 1812.
Marks of BB that I've found are usually worn, even if in a "no contact" position, and the crown is made better.
The mark BB with the shield is his own as assayer, so the mark of the silversmith is missing. Only the bottom of the cup is marked, not the lied.
The trione is not well punched. The number 2 of the silver finesse is quite unrecognizable, the world too.

To me both seem fake

Hi italiansilver
Your sugar bowl actually has something unusual, as the punching is not according to the rules, but I would not be so sure that it is a fake.
It is certainly uncommon to find the stamp of a Turin assayer together with the " trione", on the other hand they are two different countries, the kingdom of Sardinia and the Lombardo Veneto.
I modified your photo by pasting around the stamp of Bartolomeo Bernardi two other marks, which I consider absolutely genuine.

If yours is a fake, the forger is pretty smart.
I have also reported two marks attributed to Bernardi taken from "Bargoni" (B1 and B2). A significant difference in the shape of the crown can be seen. He evidently used different punches.
I wouldn't mind the "trione" too much. As you can see there are some well-struck and some very badly struck.
To conclude, I would not bet that the sugar bowl is genuine, but neither that is it certainly false.
Best
Amena

Great hint Amena !!!!
Of course this is why I didn't find any other "trione" associated to BB mark!!!!!
I understand that this doesn't say 100% that is fake, but , in my opinion, goes in that direction.
Another strange thing is that the crown is badly made and the two B have a square print outside, in the marks I've found and in the ones you have shown the're is very very small space printed outside the Bs.
Finally, even I said that I wouldn't consider the presentation date, is a bit strange that an object is presented as gift more than one hundred years after the fabrication. For sure someone can give as a gift an owned object...but even this doesn't goes in the right direction.

About the manufacturing process is clear that there is an horizontal welding in the body at 2/3 of the height from the top.
What age is coherent with?

What about the style?