posted 09-19-2002 10:45 AM            

I wanted to share a recent experience of mine to elicit some opinions from our readers. I was recently asked to examine a Southern coin silver soup ladle, circa 1825. It bore the clear mark of a noted North Carolina silversmith, identified as such in Cutten's book, and very likely made by him. I am sure the mark is genuine and correct.

Now the bad news. The ladle, which was supposedly passed down within one family since it was made, had been completely buffed to a high polish. In addition, it bore a succession of identical machine-engraved initials and dates, the last dated 1957. My best guess is that whoever owned the piece in 1957 decided to "fix it up". I would guess that it once bore a series of hand engraved initials and dates, which were removed and replaced with a nice series of identical engravings. Of course the initial removal created a very shiny patch, so they went ahead and buffed the whole thing. It now looks almost brand new.

In my opinion, this piece now has almost no collector value. Even with the family provenance, the removal of the patina and the original initials ruins it to my eyes. I certainly wouldn't buy it, even if I were desperate to have a piece by this silversmith.

How about you? Is original condition important when buying coin silver, or does rarity and desirability of the maker (i.e. Southern origin) mean more? Does the family provenance matter if all traces of age have been buffed away? Would you buy this piece, as described?

I'd love to hear your thoughts. The owner had been told that the ladle was very valuable; I say that most of the value got buffed away.

posted 09-19-2002 09:03 PM            

The main characteristic determining authenticity in my opinion is patina. While I doubt the piece you speak of was actually faked, how would you know? Marks and styles can be copied, and old metal can be used. On the other hand, if you find a piece with good early engraving covered with good patina, how could you fake that? I know that some pieces don’t have patina (boxed Russian enamel, some early monumental gilt English side board pieces, etc.) but they are almost a different field of collecting.

When you find one of those pieces which has each member of the family’s initials and date, added each generation, the market seems to ignore the damage done, although personally I think there is something a little pretentious about the custom, and I personally don’t like it. In the case of this ladle, with all the engraving done recently it really bothers me.

What damage has been done to market value? Personally I don’t think the value is completely gone to a collector. If you accept that the piece is authentic, then the style and mark can be of some value as a study piece. If it was worth $2,000 before buffing, etc. then now it is worth maybe $400, at least to me. In reality if posted on Ebay I would bet some collector would pay as much as $1,000, and regret it when they learn more.
Having said all that, sometimes you have to accept things for what they are. I bought a stuffing spoon, which I just had to have. It is a French style 18th century spoon probably French colonial. It has two different unlisted maker’s marks both LS, it also has a later mark of Gorham & Thurber. It was buffed at some point and was engraved with a ghastly Old English K. My best guess is that someone brought the piece in to G & T as old silver to be melted. They saved it from the smelt and remarked it. Possibly at that time or sometime later it was buffed and the inappropriate engraving was done. I can’t look at it without a strong cringe of regret, but I think it is a great study piece all the same. It shows that the piece changed hands, went through time and yet still survived, not intact but still interesting. Value? It would be one of the last things I would sell.

posted 09-23-2002 12:42 AM            

I also cringe when confronted with an old piece of silver that has been machine polished within an inch of its life, adding insult to injury, when it has been de-monogrammed and re engraved, well it does retain some value, but as TJG said, I would give it away also..

That being said, in the case of the North Carolina ladle (my state) the value drops 75% with what has been done to it. I will say that most of the value lost is due to the removal of the old monogram and the machine engraving of the new history. In this case the removal of the patina costs 1/3 of the value loss and the mono removal and machine engraving with a modern date costs the other 2/3 of the value drop.

As Maurice says, merchandise can be faked, but unless the pieces are really super and expensive, it is so much easier to alter an item than to fake it.. I look on the loss of patina as serious, but not extreme... Mono removal on an old piece... now that's extreme.

And as Bill says, Buffed and modified pieces will find a home with the beginning collector, at a price level commensurate with its condition..

There are ways of putting scratches and patina back on silver and ways of aging it, and the piece of silver will look 'OK' or "good", but it won't be right! But a 1957 date is almost forever!

posted 10-01-2002 04:12 PM            

That said, almost all of us probably have a piece or two that has been damaged or altered, but which we still enjoy having for one reason or another. A thread of mine from a couple of years ago ("An unusual American Mark", 10/05/2000) shows the mark of William McParlin of Annapolis, MD, overstruck by Samuel Kirk. The salt spoon that bears this mark had its original engraving removed, and the handle is now paper thin and shiny as tinfoil. Like Labarbedor with his piece, I cringe a bit when I look at it, but I still like having it as an unusual specimen.

By the way, Labarbedor, your piece sounds fascinating. I'm sure we'd all like to see a picture of it at some point.

Thanks again!

posted 09-22-2007 08:05 PM            

quote:

---

I read A 1999 post The value of Patina and want to respond to it but can not do it there so here is my response here......

I read the above thread again to get a feel if i should polish my pot. The last post comments of things seen on the roadshow.
I saw a recent roadshow in which the appraiser told the owner of a silver item "it is silver and is supposed to shine - polish it. As opposed to furniture which should be left alone" So a hand polishing is OK but not overpolishing?

---

posted 09-22-2007 08:18 PM            

Short but Sweet.

There's shine, and then there is SHINE!

posted 10-13-2007 10:59 AM            

But the other side of it is that polishing destroys surface as well as builds patina. To me, removal of monograms and machine buffing is nearly criminal.