Moscow makers mark OE ?

[Atlas]

Help needed (again) with identifying the following makers mark OE ( Moscow, 2nd half of 19th century ) if you please?

[Qrt.S]

A dubious case this "case". The marks on the first picture are faked. The marks on the second picture look better but...???? The maker's mark is an unclear smudge. I'm not aware of any Russian master using the initials OE. Anyway, the letters ВП (Latin VP) were used by assayer Vasily Aleksandrovich Petrov in Moscow 1883-1893 but the faked marks on the first picture make me very very doubtful regarding the authenticity of the shoved cigarette case. It could be a "construction" from two different broken cases, but again "but"....?????

[Atlas]

[Qrt.S]

Sorry, but your new pictures doesn't change my opinion. The first picture with OE and 84 is still faked. Looking closely at the other maker's mark gives me the impression of it being something else that OE possibly ЛЕ or ? My personal opinion is that somebody has later added the OE 84 marks for the reason that all detachable parts on Russian made objects should carry marks but he has interpreted the original mark incorrectly to OE, which I don't think it is.

Let's wait for other opinions...

[Atlas]

Yes, dubious it really is.
And thank you, Qrt.S for sharing your perspective regarding this case. I do allways value your experienced opinion very high, even though it is not perhaps the opinion I hoped for on this occasion.
Non the less, there still is plenty room ( hopefully ) for other opinions as well. So the case is not yet closed for good...

[AG2012]

Hi,
There is no ``OE`` in Ivanov whatsoever. Searched all family names starting with ``E`` and no match for the first name ``O``.
Not even sure if it`s Moscow St George.
Cannot judge beyond these facts.
Regards

[Atlas]

None the less, thanks for your effort.

[Atlas]

Provenance regarding the box.
I bought it here in Helsinki from a local retired goldsmith. His father was a goldsmith here as well. I was told that the goldsmith father bought the box sometime during 1930`s or 1940`s here in Helsinki. It is an emigrant family emigrated from St.P. to Helsinki after / during the revolution.
Naturally this does not prove anything but makes me a bit wonder about the faking.
Perhaps not so likely faked those years here? Or possible also that the provenance story was remembered incorrect or something.

[Qrt.S]

Sorry Atlas but whatever the provenance might be, the mark on your first picture is still faked. To make it easy for you just compare this mark with the 84-mark on the next picture and you will immediately see the difference. For example take a look at the mark's frame's corners and compare. Next compare the 84 figures not to mention the maker's marks. Please as well note that there is no known OE goldsmith. And pay particular attention to the maker's mark on your last photo; is it really OE or something else. In addition, there is no assayer's mark and town mark with the faked mark, should be! Nonetheless, the case is not necessarily a fake but the mark in question is.

[Dad]

.... For example take a look at the mark's frame's corners and compare.....

Hi.

Qrt.S
I would only like to notice. The separeted mark of finess had such frame's corners. Right corners. At this period.

I think - it's original.

[Qrt.S]

@Dad
I already mentioned that that the assayer seems to be Vasily Petrov i Moscow 1883-1892. As from 1882 the fineness mark got its notches up and down, before that there were no notches on a separate fineness mark but the corners were cut and even earlier uncut (but still no notches!). There is no separate fineness mark with notches and uncut corners at any time! The mark in all looks very "clumsy". Also note the mentioned missing marks! As said before, the case might be authentic but the questioned mark(s) faked and most likely added later.[b]

[AG2012]

Hi,
Many European cigarette and tobacco cases have very tiny marks easily over-struck and transformed into ``Russian made``. Fully unmarked European silver is seldom seen.
What`s this? Looks like lettering or just a reflection of some kind or an optical illusion.

[Dad]

@Dad
..... There is no separate fineness mark with notches and uncut corners at any time! .....

Here example of a "separate fineness mark with notches and uncut corners". After 1882.

Can you show your example : "separate fineness mark with notches and cut corners" ?

[Aguest]

I am not sure if this is "cut corners" or "compressed corners"....

[Qrt.S]

Strange marks you show in my mind. The assay charter of February 9 1882 stipulated that the hallmark should be a poincon i.e chetvernik/troinik/dvoinik (stub) (1882->1898). Your marks are not. That is very exceptional. Anyway, it looks like Artsibashev in Vilna but who is the maker ЕД?

Please don't ask for an impossible task. There is no separate fineness mark with notches and cut corners.

Anyway, everything was more or less possible in imperial Russia, but still???

[Qrt.S]

@Aguest
The mark you show is a troinik and has nothing to do with this case.

[Dad]

Qrt.S

Yes, it is the Assay District of Wilno.
I wanted to show that such separate fineness mark was after 1882.
And.
In the assay charter of February 9 1882 there is no description of hallmarks.

[Aguest]

I see, the "Troinik" is a Triple-Mark and therefore the "84" fineness mark is not separate.

Thank you for the lesson and the helpful word Troinik.

[Qrt.S]

@Aguest
Please read: http://www.925-1000.com/Frussia_assay_01.html especially "Assay marks variations" and "Hallmark elements"

@Dad
Unfortunately I'm "evacuated" to my summer cottage due to "pipe repairs" in my apartment and therefore I have only limited access to my sources. Sorry about that. Nonetheless, I know that in the mentioned assay charter of February 1882 are new instructions enacted regarding the hallmarking. It introduced a new type of hallmark. The fineness mark, city mark and assayer's initials with the year mark should be joined to a compound mark/poincon. Later this poincon is called chetvernik, troinik or dvoinik. To my understanding separate punching of the respective marks was abandoned from 1882. The marks you show are dated 1887 and are punched separately, not take about the outlook of the fineness mark, which is strange indeed. I cannot remember seeing such marking before, but...? (There is a lot that haven't seen yet.... :-))))

Kindly tell me who is ЕД in Vilna 1887? In case you don't know the master's name, it makes the marks on your spoons even more dubious....

I would appreciate some more discussions about this marking after 1882, AG2012, Goldstein, Ubaranda...?

[Qrt.S]

Sorry for my typo; "...not to talk about the outlook..."