A XVIII century fake?

[amena]

Today I saw an object that intrigued me and put me some doubt.



It looks like an 18th century baptismal cup, but it has an engraving more appropriate for a death than a birth.



The letters are probably Cyrillic and the marks, which would look like silver marks, are completely unknown to me.



The object, however, on the back, is very worn up so to show the underlying metal.



As far as I know, they did not use marks for silverplate in the 18th century.
Could it be a fake from that century?
Every opinion will be appreciated.
Thanks
Amena

[AG2012]

Hi,
Could be very early 18th century Moscow;
Alderman in a trefoil, maker in a rectangle and date code in old Slavic alphabet.
Try to make sharper images of the marks, particularly date mark.
Regards

[AG2012]

Cannot find marks in Postnikova book.
The ring is very unusual.

[ALEKS]

[AG2012]

I stand corrected.It really looks like Tbilisi mark with year in Georgian, NOT Slavic alphabet
Assayed at Tbilisi mint (ТМД - Тифлисский монетный двор).It was closed in 1835 as far as I have found (not 1832).
So, it can be dated 1804 - 1835.
The engraving is not uncommon in liturgical items (found on baptism and communion spoons,too).
Not very familiar with liturgical practice but definitively church silver.

[amena]

Hi AG 2012
thanks for informations.
It remains an unresolved question: how to interpret the skinning indicated by the red arrows?



Obviously I could not verify which metal had appeared in the stripped area and I can not take other pictures because I did not buy the item.
What is your opinion?
Amena

[AG2012]

I have seen this kind of flaking in silver caused by crudely rolled or hammered silver sheets used for silversmithing. In short, I think it`s not another metal showing up.There was probably an old repair,too.Besides,Tbilisi mint was a reliable assay office.
Regards

[amena]

I understand what you mean, but it was also wear out elsewhere, just where rested the bowl, and so I became suspicious.



I pointed this out to the seller, who could not give a justification, but agreed that perhaps the object was plated.
In the end I decided not to buy the piece, maybe I did well, maybe I have done wrong, who knows.....

[AG2012]

Early 19th century in this condition is not something to regret. Your decision was sound.
Cheers

[amena]

Hi AG2012
Thanks for cooperation.
Best
Amena

[Qrt.S]

There is a saying "Broken is broken and therefore more or less worthless..." BUT! If it is 2000 years old it is acceptable. This object is not that old...;-)))

[Hose_dk]

I would not mind buying this.

[Qrt.S]

@Hose
Why?