Baltic spoon?

[paulh]

The style of this spoon suggests that its origins are somewhere in the Baltic, but I cannot trace the town mark. Can anyone help?

Thanks,

Paul.



.

[admin]

Hi Paul,

According to "Znaki srebra do lat 40. dwudziestego wieku w Polsce", the mark is for Emil Radke, Warsaw, 1832-1868.

Regards, Tom
.

[dognose]

Hi,

I'm somewhat confused by the dating of this spoon as I believe that before 1852 Polish silver standards were expressed in Loths. After 1852 the Russians had control over Poland and the standards were then expressed in Zolotniks and of course subject to the Russian hallmarking system. This remained until 1896.

Or have I got my facts wrong?

Trev.
.

[admin]

Russian rule of the area dates back to the late 18th century, over the course of the 19th c. more and more bureaucratic control was put into effect. As applied to silver, this culminated in the opening of the assay office in 1852. I am sure there was, as was often the case, a transitional period of marks in flux, and suspect that the spoon would date to this period.

Regards, Tom
.

[dognose]

Hi Tom,

Many thanks for the explanation.

Regards Trev.
.

[admin]

Hi Trev,
Don't thank me yet, it is just a theory, perhaps blakstone or Jackk can provide a little more informed background.

Tom
.

[Stantheman]

There are known examples of Polish silver that have been done in period before 1851 and bearied 84 silver standard number. It was probably because some of the clients wanted their silver to be of higher standard used in Russia. You've got to remember that Poland at this point was strongly influenced by Russia. There were also many Russian officials that lived in Warsaw and were used to 84 standard.
.

[Qrt.S]

Let's not distort some facts now, admin's clam is a fact. Read the history. There is no such country as Poland between 1795-1920. The Polish area is split between Russia, Prussia and Austria. In addition there is the area of Duchy of Warsaw, and that's all. The respective countries' law was applied in the area.

This means that "Polish" silver is marked according to three different laws, Russian, Prussian and Austrian. When Poland again became independent 1920, the, in another thread discussed lombard mark, the owl head, is most likely punched on such "Polish" silver manufactured between roughly 1795-1919. The idea is to identify it as "Made in the area of (non-existing) Poland" irrespective of what the marks show.
.

[Stantheman]

You are right when you say there was no such thing as Poland at the time. When I used word Poland I meant the territory of today's Poland and Polish society in general. Don't teach a Pole about history of his country :)

The truth is that Russians at the time (Warsaw was controled by Russia when Emil Radke was active) didn't give a damn about our silver standard system, because they had some much more important political issues to work out. Wars with Napoleon, November Uprising, "diekabrists" and many other serious staff going on.

So simplyfing we may say that Warsaw's silversmiths had actually no control over them and were doing what they wanted to do. It was a time of chaos in silver control sytem.

When you say transition period you problably mean the period just before 1851, when the new silver standard system was being implemented. But how would you explain 84 mark on Lilpop's silver item? He died in 1833. I have got a picture of that signature.

Besides, just before 1851 silversmiths were allowed to still use 12 loth alloy. They were just obliged to stamp a new "Zapas" mark when the new system was introduced, and they had two years to sell that item. So there was no need for transition mark, there were just clients' preferences that mattered.
.

[Stantheman]

I just found a proper citation in a catalogue "Warszawskie srebra i platery w zbiorach Muzeum Mazowieckiego w PÅ‚ocku" (ang. Silver and silverplated items from Warsaw in collection of city Museum of PÅ‚ock) by R. Bobrow.

There is an interesting chapter on marks used on silver in Warsaw. First, we read: "Throughout the whole first half of the 19th century in Warsaw there was no municipal or state control of gold or silver used for manufacturing silverware or golware. The silver test sample was usually determined by goldsmiths". It's a citation from the abstract in English.

In Polish part we read: "Władze pruskie, później rosyjskie nie wprowadziły zarządzeń probierczych. Próbę srebra wybijali wykonawcy i to oni ją gwarantowali". It means something like: "Prussian and later Russian legislature did not introduce any laws concerning silver control and assayers offices. The silver standard mark was stamped by the silversmiths and they were the only ones who guaranteed it".

Then we read, what is more important: "W 2. ćwierci XIX wieku pojawia się też próba 84, a więc liczona tak jak w Rosji, w zołotnikach, najprawdopodobniej stosowana na specjalne zamówienie. Kształt znaku próby zależał od indywidualnej decyzji złotnika, zazwyczaj było to pole prostokątne lub owalne. Rzadko nadawano mu inną formę, np. używany przez Sommera romb lub tarcza stosowana przez krótki czas przez Frageta"

It means something like: "In the second quarter of the 19. century mark with 84 zolotnik standard started to appear (on items by silversmiths from Warsaw), probably on the special request of the customers (it was customized, taylor made). The shape of the 84 mark was based on the individual decision of the silversmith, usually it was oval or rectangular shape. Sometimes the silversmiths shaped it differently, for example Sommer used a rhomb (diamond), and Fraget for a short time used shield- shaped 84 mark."

I hope now it's more clear. Best regards!
.

[Qrt.S]

Thank you and yes, it is clearer now and you are absolutely right. But it it still sometimes difficult to identify "Polish" silver due to the above mentioned reasons. Actually the latter half of the19th century is easier because you have the Russian assay office in Warsaw which is using the Russian rather strict marking system. But Warsaw is not covering the whole former Polish territory.

That 84 statement is interesting too, indeed..

Anyway, my intentions was not at all to teach you, sorry if you took it that way. It was just a remark/request to use correct expressions in their right environment, that's all. There are many readers you know, misunderstandings can occur...
.

[Stantheman]

No problem Qrt.S I'm not offended or anything. Sorry if you took that way. Let me give you a big wet kiss to prove it =* :)
.

[jackk]

Just to add to this subject I saw "84" marks stamped on top of "12" marks in an attempt to cover it. I should mention that the purpose of this was not to fake the item, but most likely to adhere to the silver marking standards at the time.

I should have a pictured example of this and as soon I dig it out I'll post it here.
.

[Postnikov]

Hi -
this is a good example why so many identification problems around Polish/Russian/Austro silver exists: 12 Loth = 750/1000, 84 Zolotniki = 875/1000. If you overstamp the 12 with 84 you are just a swindler!

Regards
Postnikov

[the_nosferatu]

that was a superb read, very informative :-)
god damn i love this forum.