www.925-1000.com

My next puzzle is another little dish, again, from the home of a Jewish businessman from Mainz am Rhein ca. 1920.

Unfortunately, the ornate design of the dish makes it almost impossible to read the faint hallmark, and it doesn't scan easily, but in the hope that someone might recognize it anyway, I include a 1200 dpi image of the mark, and a link to a lower resolution image of the dish itself.



I see, from left to right, a faint crescent; the crown; the fineness "800" stamped upside down; and then, I see what appears to be an imperfect stamp of a circular monogram of some sort, perhaps containing a Fraktur capital letter K or R, perhaps inside a Fraktur C or E...but I'm just guessing.

Here is a link to an image of the dish itself, which contains a central cartouche depicting naked babies or cherubim; I believe one is waving a veil or standard of some sort, and another appears to be blowing on a conch shell; the figures may be depicted floating on a sea-shell on waves, but I'm not sure.

http://www.concentric.net/~rsk/Ag/dish2.jpg

The hallmark is stamped under the (viewer's) left-hand edge of the dish as viewed in the above picture.

Hello, if You turn the row of marks 90 degrees to the right and then compare the lowest mark to that of Adolf Mayer (see German marks after 1886) - could it be the one ? Cannot see it to clearly on my screen. Best wishes, Bahner

You know, I looked through that page carefully, and didn't really see the similarity; however, now that you point it out to me, and I pull the piece out again with my magnifying glass, I think I do see the tiny little "M" under what can easily be an ornate "A," and, of course, the outer ring might simply resemble a "C" because of the tricky location in which the hallmark is stamped.

I think your guess is probably correct: and certainly, Frankfurt a/M is close enough to Mainz a/R.

The piece itself doesn't look much like Jugenstil to me, of course; if anything, it probably was already a bit Kitsch at the time it was made, because I cannot imagine it being much older than, say, 1920.

But unless someone comes up with a more likely I.D., I think you may be quite right about the maker...AGAIN!

I don't think I'll be able to prepare a clearer scan of the mark itself, given the equipment I have available to me, but I don't think a clearer scan will really help much: the mark itself is not stamped with clarity and definition.

Of the two marks I posted, yesterday, I thought this would be the "unsolved mystery!"

Thank you so much for your keen observation!

I have had to move the images in my initial post to a new location:

http://home.earthlink.net/~rsk0/Ag/dish2.jpg