Genuine snuffer?

[zilverik]

Hi,

This is a silver snuffer and I hope it is genuine. There are Russian hallmarks, the French swancontrolmark and the Dutch ZII controlmark for items that come to the market again. The mastermark is not to read, but maybe the form gives a clue.

Regards,

Zilverik

[Qrt.S]

Mind my asking zilverik , but where do you see a maker's mark? The mark right of "84" is supposed to be the town mark. If there is no maker's mark, kindly remember what I have wrote here about an item marked with hallmarks but not having any maker's marks.

[zilverik]

Hi,

It could indeed be the town mark. That means that the makers mark isn't there. Qrt.S earlier commented that "It was forbidden to sell silver objects without maker's marks and hallmarks. There were a few exceptions in St Petersburg that could do that". Does that mean that this snuffer is a fake? Or an exception?

Regards,

Zilverik

[Qrt.S]

Yes, I have said that but I have also stated that; "if an object carries Russian hallmarks but no maker's mark, the object is imported goods" and it is hallmarked by the custom. In 1852 Russia didn't have yet a special mark for imported goods. It came later. In addition, it was not forbidden to import unmarked silver objects and have them hallmarked before they were put on sale because it was forbidden to sale unmarked objects.
In my opinion your snuffer is genuine but not Russian made and imported from somewhere, maybe Germany or England. All anticipated that there are no maker's mark found on the snuffer.

[zilverik]

Hi,

Thank you Qrt.S. I count 15 marks, but no master mark. The only parts that are not marked are the three feet. So the snuffer is probably imported in Russia in 1852. The snuffer is made in a sort of ruff way. Every part looks handmade. Not smooth. Also because of the form, I can't image that this is English. German could be or maybe Scandinavian? What I don't understand is that there is no original mark from the country it was made. In the Netherlands, France end England it was forbidden to sell unmarked silver as silver. I don't know about Germany and Scandinavia. Wasn't it forbidden to sell unmarked silver as silver in the whole of Western Europe? So, could it be Turkish or Persia?

Regards,

Zilverik

[Qrt.S]

Russian tend to import quite a lot of unmarked objects from e.g. Germany. To my understanding silver objects manufactured for export in some countries among those Germany didn't need any marks. The marks were meant for the domestic market only and not necessary for export. To be honest I'm not so familiar with the export regulations in different countries. Does anybody know this?

Nonetheless, maybe you, Zilverik, has stumbled into an interesting question i.e. why was it forbidden to assay finished items? The answer comes here: Dubious and scruples persons soon found out that they could gain enormous profits by buying a lot of finished valuable and unmarked objects abroad and then smuggling these finished items to Russia and punch their own maker's mark on them. Doing that they then had the item legally assayed and hallmarked. Resulting in: Heureka, "a Russian made" and legally hallmarked object ready for sale. This nasty "trick" was soon reviled and a new regulation was set up in 1857. This regulation stated that an object must be unfinished and in parts before it could be hallmarked. All in order to avoid this "fraud". However, still today remains the possibility that an item from the period before 1857 can bear legal Russian marks but still be made abroad.

Now back to your snuffer. It seems to carry an assayers mark being ПИ, Latin PI. I my register I have only one assayer using these initials i.e. Pjotr Jefimovitsh Ilin 1848-1853. The year fits, BUT HE WAS IN KAMENETZ-PODOLSK!!! That is a small village by the river of Dnepr south west of Kiev. However, I have difficulties in understand how that village could be a place for import, but...?

An interesting piece you have in your possession dear Zilverik! Is the "smudge" the town mark for Kamenetz-Podolsk. Does anybody know how the questioned town mark from the mid 19 century looks like? The old town mark from 18th century is the double headed eagle. Does the shield fit the new town mark. The old shield doesn't fit at all.
I'm afraid that I don't know all answers to the many open questions, gimme some assistance will you.

It would also be interesting to hear comments from other attendants on this delicate matter, thank you in advance....maybe I'm out of topic, sorry for that, but the questions are still interesting, aren't they?

[zilverik]

Hi,

Very interesting!
I cleaned the townmark and I tried to get a better photo. Maybe it helps.

Regards,

Zilverik

[Qrt.S]

I have found Kamenetz-Podolsk town crest. It is very similar to Moscow's crest, St George slaying the dragon. Even if you have cleaned up the marks it is ,at least to me, quite impossible to say with certainty what the mark is supposed to show...maybe St George. Anyway, your snuffer is an imported object and maybe imported to Kamenetz-Podolsk, who knows?

15 marks you said....well the Russian law demanded every detachable part to be marked. Maybe your snuffer is made of about 15 separate parts? I'm afraid that I cannot tell you anything new what isn't already said.

[zilverik]

Hi,

The townmark looks indeed very similar to the Moscow crest, st George slaying the dragon. That is to say with my 10x loop. The 15 marks include the French and Dutch controlmarks. And note that not all parts are marked. The three feet are not. Where they not supposed to be marked as well? Or they were not detachable? But the parts on the handle are not detachable as well. That is not consequent. It sure looks like this snuffer was imported and marked by officials who didn't knew what they were doing. I thank you for all your worthwhile information.

Regards,

Zilverik

[Qrt.S]

Well punching silver is rather hard work. I can imagine that after punching close to a dozen marks on one lousy imported snuffer, the assayer probably thought that sh.., enough is enough I have reached my limit and took a break :-))))))

[Dad]

Hi, All.


I think, opinion of Qrt.S is right . It is Kamenets-Podolsk. But the Kamenets-Podolsk isn't "a small village by the river of Dnepr south west of Kiev")))) It is an ancient town with nice history.
Unfortunately, in the P-L's book there is an error (or a typing error). The unique example of townmark is wrongly dated by 18 century. It is wrong. It is mark of 19th century.
Kamenets-Podolsk became a part of the Russian Empire after 1793 only. When Austria, Prussia and Russia have once again divided Poland.
"Townmark" for “Podolskaya Probirnaya Palatka” (Podolsk assay office) began to be used only from the nineteenth century. It looked like as at other new attached territories, such as Minsk and Warsaw. "Townmark" is the Russian Empire's two-headed Eagle.
For example:



Therefore: Kamenets-Podolsk, assaymaster ИЛЬИН ПЕТР ЕФИМОВИЧ (Ilyin Petr Efimovich).
Makermark is difficult to determine under other marks.
For an example:




Best Reg..

[zilverik]

Hi,

Thank you for your comment Dad. Very interesting.
So, do I understand you that it looks like the original marks were overstruck by the Russian officials (of Kamenets-Podolsk) in 1852?

Regards,

Zilverik

[Qrt.S]

Excellent Dad, now we have a possible maker's mark (or do we, what is it?). If it is the maker's mark we can most likely skip the import theory. It was a bit odd as I also stated that K-P would be an importing town, but ....? However, I don't think it is a typing error in Postnikova. That sort of town marks are typical for the 18th century. They had many times the town initials in the crest like the crest in Postnikova "К П i.e. Kamentez-Podolsk".

Nonetheless, yes Dad you are right, Kamenetz -Podolsk is not a village it is an old town, not big but anyway a town, sorry. What is interesting is that their current town crest is St Georg slaying the dragon. When did this change happen?

Anyway, what still bothers me is that why is the town crest punched so badly? Lousy punched marks on clear places sometimes indicate a dubious item, but? Zilverik also stated that the snuffer is "rough work" that also means low quality, sloppy work...why?

[zilverik]

Hi all,

Yes, this Russian marked piece is rough work, sloppy. To compare with nicer work, I show you a French snuffer, Paris 1809-1819. Total different quality. Note that also the feet are marked. Peculiar is that there is no makersmark visible. The makersmark is probably under the screw-bolt/spanner. And there is controlmark for the province 1817-1819 as well (what I dont't understand). There is a small piece of metal worked in between the silver to cut the fuse. The scissor has a (working) spring.

Regards,

Zilverik

[dognose]

To me there is one point that strikes me as suspicious regarding these snuffers, and that is the assay date, 1852. Around 1825 we see the introduction of the self comsuming wick and from that date we see a sharp decline in the manufacture, firstly of silver snuffers, and then finially those made of steel.

The chore of wick trimming prior to the introduction of the self consuming wick was a tedious one, constant attention was required to stop the wick from smoking and thus damaging decorations and over a period blackening the room. When the invention of the self consuming wick was discovered it caught on very quickly, although, no doubt, more expensive, it was the same people who could afford silver snuffers that were the users of the new improved candles, and thus the manufacture of silver snuffers went into a nose-dive probably by 1830 or 1840 at the latest. Anything made after this date, I would think, would have made for a special order and thus unlikely to be made in 'rough work'.

Trev.

[zilverik]

Hi Trev,

Very interesting!
Could it be that this snuffer is made earlier and later - in 1852 - imported in Russia?
Or is it more plausible that the marks are not genuine (made in China) and that the whole object is a fake.

Regards,

Zilverik