Postby dinio » Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:15 pm
Hi oel,
Very interesting pieces indeed! I agree with the dating of the statues to the beginning of 20C, mainly because of the fashion of chryselephantine in these years, and Hanau could be a good guess. Looking at their style, seeing the english import marks at first glance, I would also say that the other marks are pseudo-marks. But you sent us only the pseudo-marks, not all the clues. So I made some research and emitted the Salins hypothesis. I will try to continue this hypothesis defence, because it may prove some consistency if my guesses are right.
The 'knight' seems to be a post 1366 King of England according to his arms ( amazingly inverted !! and leopards looking backwards !! ??).
Obviously both statues are not made in the same way, considering their pedestal. Pedestal of the lady is made in a single sheet of silver and the statue seems soldered on top of it, whereas the pedestal of the king seems to be covered by the statue basement. It would be very interesting to check if there is some soldering at this junction (just below the marks). Could you post a picture of the base underneath? Also the style of the flowers is very different between both pedestals: almost art nouveau for the lady's pedestal, and neo-gothic for the king's pedestal.
The hypothesis I try to explore is that the king's statue could have been mounted on an older pedestal initially made for supporting a religious statue, which was commonly made for churches. It could explain why the english marks are struck at this place, and not in some place on the pedestal which was known as old and untouched during the marking process. I know exemples of silver knives where the handle is 17C or 18C dutch silver and the steel blade was replaced in 19C by english sterling, which was rather common practice with old silver in the 19C unfortunately. English marking on this flatware is done only on the blade (the new part). Nothing was struck on the handle (old part), hopefully! By the way do english silver specialists of this forum know where the marks should be struck on a statue like this, depending on its origin (english make or import)?
This hypothesis could also explain the presence of semi-precious stones on the knight body and not on the lady and their apparent (imaginary?) difference in their brilliance between the pedestal and the king's belt. Could you post macro photos of these stones of the pedestal and of the belt in order to see possible differences in status and mounting?
Coming now to the pseudo marks, it seems to me that there are some shiny dots on top of the "Salins" arms hallmark. Could they be the remains of the five pearls of an earl crown? This crown was not necessarily very prominent above the shield (see for instance Salins town mark, p345 of Wyler's book of old silver). As for the jurande mark, I was guessing one of the Salins "Communauté", not one of the Besancon's you are referring to (In such communauté there was an elected warden with his own letter mark, and his election took place regularly and his mark was changed at the time of his election, so the letter marks was not the same for different communautés). The important thing is trying to identify what is above the E letter: a crown, a fleur-de-lys, other? More precise pictures of the 3 marks, if possible, could be very, very interesting.
As for the english marks, do both statues bear the same set of english import marks? Could you post a pic of them?
Finally, do the lady statue bear pseudo-marks similar to the king's pseudo-marks? If yes a picture would be welcome. If no, this lack could be a clue in favour of my hypothesis...
Anyway, congratulations for such beautiful items, which seems of very good make and which are very interesting for our analysis and knowledge.
Regards,
Dinio