www.925-1000.com

I have dug out this photo of a small mid 17th century wine taster that I have to give you a comparison.

This has been altered. You do not mention the size, but I suspect it started life as a wine taster. Some well meaning vandal, perhaps in the 19th century, decided it would be of more use as a cream jug so added a pouring lip, a new and different handle and feet. Versions of the maker's mark are reco...

Can't help on the marks. The text round the piece translates as "Drink to (good) health"

Your picture is not showing. The host website requires viewers to be registered and, as a Russian site, might not be easy to navigate for non Russian speaking forum members even if they were prepared to go to that trouble.

I must confess I was puzzled as to how CAC could stand for Sazikov. An abbreviation of the family name would be саз with a zed. Sergei Ignatiyevich Sazikov's initials would be сис.

Glad you have reached this conclusion. I had been thinking of coming back to be a bit more assertive about serving tongs rather than surgical tool. As an aside, I take a passing interest in Roman flatware (only passing because most of what you see is of doubtful provenance and often fake). One of my...

They look a bit like an early to mid 18th century version of asparagus tongs, though perhaps for serving something a bit chunkier judging by the gap between the ridged sections when closed. I'm afraid I cannot help with the maker's mark. I don't find it in any of my reference books for English silve...

Could it possibly be I.C for James Curtis of Colonial Williamsburg?

And the initials пфю (PFYu) will identify the workshop but I am afraid I don't have any references that list them.

I meant to add a question as to whether there is a fuller set of Russian marks elsewhere on the main body of the item.

Regarding the spelling of Русское Изделие (Russian manufacture), the latin-like I in the penultimate letter of the second word is surely consistent with the pre 1917 Russian alphabet and not a reason to doubt the provenance. I read the Russian marks as 88 as well as ИВ for the maker. I am not compet...

A quick afterthought. Could it be an altered spoon? There is a little notch between the tines that intrudes on the pattern suggesting that something has happened there.

I cannot help with the maker's mark. With no King's Head duty mark the fork must be prior to 1784. Perhaps a maker in a lost register. Unusual to be marked above the tines rather than on the stem. You write of forks in the plural. Is this one of a set? And what size is the fork? Looks quite small. P...

Hi Goldstein I am not sure your point is as easy as you think to understand on first reading of your original post. Are you saying that spoons of the same pattern but marked by other companies than the Grachev Brothers were very popular, however you cannot tell whether they were locally made or impo...

Heraldry is not really my thing but I see that a talbot (heraldic hound) between 3 buckles on an azure ground has been associated with a family named Carter. This might be the origin of one half of your shield.

I cannot make out enough of the mark to say anything confident about the maker -ageing eyesight and the deficiencies of a computer screen don't help. However, whoever the maker, the whole spoon seems to be a marriage or even a menage a trois so I haven't spent time trying to compare the mark one by ...

As a known spoonmaker, Bennett was my first thought as a possibility.

A maker's mark struck twice on an early 18th century spoon could be London or, I guess, any of the regional centres. Ebenezer Coker of London, who is a known spoon maker, entered a mark similar to these in 1738 but I would not want to claim this is definitively the same mark.

I'm no expert on Irish silver but the style of the spoon, Hanoverian rattail, points to early 18th century, not late 16th. Seems unlikely that the same mark was in use for over 100 years. I think the coincidence of initials is just that, a coincidence. To me, opposed initials suggest a different ali...

It is in the list of incuse marks so not actually a match. And I'm not sure the mote spoon is early enough for a Britannia standard mark. However, I am afraid I have nothing more helpful to offer.