french hallmark circa 1809?

[needy]

Please any info on this 1809 hallmarked buckle?

[Francais]

I would suggest cleaning the mark up a bit with a little silver polish, and retake the photo.
Maurice

[needy]

Thank you. I have tried cleaning and here is the photos.

[Francais]

I hate to say it, but that is worse. Is it in focus? In your first photo I thought I saw numbers, are there any? What French mark do you think it looks like, because I don't recognize it as French. Quite honestly I sort of see a crown above a blob above part of a fleur de lys. It looks a little like a Rorshach test.
Maurice

[needy]

These are lightly struck on the back of buckle. The 1st standard cockerel and 91 assay office for departments are more clear deeply struck. The assay office strike seems doubled. Here is the photo of the front. My camera and photography are not best.

[oel]

Hi Needy,

Needless to say you should have showed us those mark straight away, it is far better to show all marks up front.

Oel.

[needy]

I am sorry for confusion. I am not use to this new computer tiny picks or posting. I usually use this forum for research. I thought maybe these marks could be importation marks or tax marks somewhere in that period. I thought it looked a little like the ciborium mark used in 1818-1838 that was depicted in the French e-book in the resource section. Obviously not that mark but similar.

[Francais]

One mea culpa is enough, I am fighting my computer too. We need one more thing. It the helmet of the warrior there is a number. Can you read it? Normally it is not legible, but yours has one of the clearest marks I have seen.
Maurice

[dognose]

It looks like '95' to me, but there is also something fascinating here, it would appear the assayer has struck a gold mark initially in error, and then overstamped the mark with a silver one:







Trev.

[Zilver2]

HI
Figure 95 was for Maastricht (Meuse-inférieure). That means that the buckle was made in Holland during the French occupation (1795-1814).
Because this medium guarantee mark was used from 1809 until 1819, the buckle must be manufactured between 1809 and 1814.

[Francais]

Normally for this period I would defer to Zilver2, but my list, soon to be shown on this site, for the period 1809-19 that 95 stands for Seine-inferieure ie;Rouen, or Le Havre.
I guess the maker's mark might be the test of whose reference is right. Could you describe it? It looks like an H over an object and another letter.
Maurice

[oel]

Hi Zilver2,

In my reference book is stated hallmarks of the French Empire 1809-1819 office mark dept. Meuse-inférieure, Maastricht =65

Oel.

[Francais]

Ok so back to your first question. I think you are actually right about the first mark. In my business I rarely worried about 19th c. marks, but I don't think I ever saw the ciborium mark in life. It wasn't used very long. I can see the cross, and the division of the bowl. Tardy just shows a drawing, and marks can vary somewhat with the way they are struck. Of course the East doesn't work, but I wouldn't worry about that. It is interesting to see the overstrike too. I thought I had a regional book covering Rouen, I don't so we will have to be lucky to find the maker's mark, still with a description I will give it a try.
Maurice

[oel]

For comparison:


Oel.

[needy]

Thanks everyone for their input. It kind of looks like the number 91 or 97 on the assay mark. There is also a round hallmark under bent part of buckle about the size of the assay mark impossible to photo without bending buckle. Here is a better photo of makers mark. It looks like H bird head B?

[Francais]

The problem is the same whether 91, 97, or 95. There are lots of books which cover 18th c French maker's marks, regional and general. There are also several lists of post 1838 marks. But the marks from pre-1838 are only in a few regional books, and one very incomplete general book. Also even if we find you the right regional book, your maker is probably a small worker, perhaps ignored. 91 would be Le Mans,97 would be Niort, both in Western France so they wouldn't explain the Est mark. The round mark could be earlier any numbers visible?
Otherwise you will have to be lucky enough to have someone find this thread who has the right regional bool.
Maurice

[dognose]

Any thoughts on the possible gold mark? Is it known if all the regional assay offices assayed gold as well as silver? I ask, as in some countries, not all assay offices were authorized to assay gold. For example, the Sheffield office in the UK was not allowed to assay gold until 1904. If a similar restriction applied in France, then it may narrow down considerably the location of the assay office, as only such an office would be be in possession of such punches.

Trev.