Tray with Unusual Mark - SMP Silver Salon Forums

SM Publications

Silver Salon Forums - The premier site for discussing Silver.

SMP | Silver Salon Forums | SSF - Guidelines | SSF - FAQ | Silver Sales

The Silver Salon Forums
Since 1993
Over 11,793 threads & 64,769 posts !!
American Sterling Silver Forum

Silver Salon internal search
or

How to Post Photos

REGISTER (click here)

SMP Silver Salon Forums
tline

American Sterling Silver
tline3

Tray with Unusual Mark

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

SSFFriend: Email This Page to Someone!

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Tray with Unusual Mark
Brent Posts: 1507 Registered: May 99	posted 11-19-2002 10:13 PM Here is a very nice tray with an unusual Tiffany mark. The hammered, kidney shaped tray is quite heavy and very much in keeping with the "Japanesque" aesthetic. The pattern number dates the piece to around 1878 (I think). The mark is unusual in that the usual 925-1000 mark and the "date letter" M you would expect to find on Tiffany holloware of this period are missing . This immediately made me suspicious of a possible fake. There is some fakery of Tiffany silver, and the fake piece profiled in Silver magazine some years ago had very genuine looking marks. I also learned that the tray had come from a dealer who specialized in Russian silver, which made me even more suspicious as the Silver magazine piece was likely made in Russia. I was, however, able to come up with a plausible expalanation for the abbreviated mark. When Tiffany made pieces of silver combined with other metals, the mark would read "STERLING-SILVER / AND OTHER METALS", with no 925-1000 or date letter. The "mixed-metal" pieces were most popular during th 1875-1885 period, and the tray in question would have gone quite nicely with one of Tiffany's small tea or coffee services. I hypothesize that the tray did accompany a mixed metal set, marked as above; but, since the tray itself did not have any "OTHER METALS", they simply left that part of the mark off. What say ye? I would appreciate some further insight with people who have handled this type of material. Thanks! Brent [This message has been edited by Brent (edited 11-19-2002).] IP: Logged
wev Moderator Posts: 4121 Registered: Apr 99	posted 11-20-2002 12:42 AM I know cofessedly little about Tiffany or their marks; is the disjointed TIFF ANY & Co. a recognized variation? It seems rather sloppy die cutting for work of such high standard otherwise. A very unscientific survey around the web did not find any other such examples out of about 40 pieces from roughly the same time period. Nor the oddly hyphenated STERLING - SILVER or is that just a ding in the metal? IP: Logged
Scott Martin Forum Master Posts: 11520 Registered: Apr 93	posted 11-21-2002 09:35 AM I have spent the past day+ looking at as many Tiffany marks as I could find. I think WEV may have it right. IP: Logged
wev Moderator Posts: 4121 Registered: Apr 99	posted 11-21-2002 10:27 AM I found a hammered bowl at auction with the same disjointed mark ( Even given the double-strike (which looks a bit odd in itself), there is a definite gap in the word Tiffany. There is also the hyphen in Sterling-Silver, as well as Other-Metal. And there is something about the whole design and finish of the piece that just doesn't feel right to me. IP: Logged
Scott Martin Forum Master Posts: 11520 Registered: Apr 93	posted 11-21-2002 11:27 AM The hammering is similar to the tray -- maybe they go together? The mark on both and the decoration on the bowl seems sloppy for old Tiffany work. Dr. Hood you been through the Tiffany archives, what do you think? IP: Logged
Paul Lemieux Posts: 1792 Registered: Apr 2000	posted 11-21-2002 12:09 PM I have a Tiffany chatelaine clip that also has a hyphen between "sterling" and "silver". I don't have any doubt that it is genuine. I can't remember if it has the disjointed Tiffany mark though. I will try to find it and get a picture taken of it and its mark. However, I'm not even sure if the disjointed mark alone is cause for concern: note the mark illustrated on p. 219 of the '97 edition of Carpenter's "Tiffany Silver". It is disjointed in the same manner as Brent's tray and the eBay mixed metal bowl, and it is from a genuine example of the firm's work (in this case, the mixed metal pitcher that adorns the cover). IP: Logged
Richard Kurtzman Moderator Posts: 768 Registered: Aug 2000	posted 11-21-2002 09:22 PM Contrary to what many believe there are all sorts of variations, sloppiness and omissions on Tiffany hollowware marks. I do not believe there is anything wrong with either of these marks. The marks on the pieces in Silver Magazine (January/February 1996) were anachronistic in that they contained a twentieth century m on stylistically 1880s pieces. As to whether the two pieces under discussion are actually real cannot be conclusively determined without seeing them in person. Although the second one looks pretty darn good to me. IP: Logged
wev Moderator Posts: 4121 Registered: Apr 99	posted 11-21-2002 09:36 PM Speaking of that M, was there a second use of M, designating another director? As I understand it, the original M for Moore was stopped after his death in 1891, yes? I have seen several pieces on ebay lately that show an M in a san serif, 20th century type font. There was nothing decidely 19th century about the designs. Or is this some sort of additional code? IP: Logged
Paul Lemieux Posts: 1792 Registered: Apr 2000	posted 11-21-2002 11:43 PM Yes, I agree with Richard. Nothing wrong with the marks themselves. And to me, at least from the images, the first piece looks legitimate. wev, Tiffany used various "M" marks from 1907-1956 as well. The sans serif "M" you mention is probably the 1947-1956 mark. It stands for Louis Moore, son of John, great grandson of Edward C., the original M. [This message has been edited by Paul Lemieux (edited 11-21-2002).] IP: Logged
William Hood Posts: 271 Registered: Apr 2000	posted 11-22-2002 11:44 AM Due to computer problems, have been unable to join in this discussion until now. My research in the T. & Co. archives was limited to flatware. My other experience suggests that there is nothing wrong with either of the two sets of marks. As Richard points out, there is a good deal of variation in Tiffany's marks. And I agree with Paul's comments about the significance of the M mark. IP: Logged

All times are ET	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a

^1. Public Silver Forums (open Free membership) - anyone with a valid e-mail address may register. Once you have received your Silver Salon Forum password, and then if you abide by the Silver Salon Forum Guidelines, you may start a thread or post a reply in the New Members' Forum. New Members who show a continued willingness to participate, to completely read and abide by the Guidelines will be allowed to post to the Member Public Forums.
Click here to Register for a Free password

^2. Private Silver Salon Forums (invitational or $ donation membership) - The Private Silver Salon Forums require registration and special authorization to view, search, start a thread or to post a reply. Special authorization can be obtained in one of several ways: by Invitation; Annual $ Donation; or via Special Limited Membership. For more details click here (under development).

^3. Administrative/Special Private Forums (special membership required) - These forums are reserved for special subjects or administrative discussion. These forums are not open to the public and require special authorization to view or post.

| Home | Order | The Guide to Evaluating Gold & Silver Objects | The Book of Silver