Hello,
I bought this spoon which is 18 cm long and weighs 60 g. It has a hand hammered bowl and an interesting style.
I thought it could be a reproduction made by a dutch silversmith but I found no other mark than the three marks below.
Moreover I found in Wyler's 'book of old silver' a mark which fits pretty well the mark in the middle. It is mark #7731 displayed at page 384 and briefly described at page 392 as 'inspection mark for VLISSINGEN (Province Zealand)'. I have no clue about the other marks. Can someone help with more precisions on this Vlissingen mark? Can ND be a maker's mark? And the third one a date letter (A or H or ...)? Or are all these marks pseudo-marks? I am interested in your opinions.
Thanks,
Dinio
.
ND is indeed most probably the maker's mark, but very little is known about Vlissingen.
This type of spoon was popular in the 17th century and they were made again at the end of the 19th century. Nice spoon and rare marks.
.
Thanks Doos,
I also appreciate this spoon and I have a good feeling with it.
I knew that these spoons have been reproduced in the 19th century, and I was wondering if this one is a reproduction. In your opinion, does the lack of standard 19C hallmarks mean that it could be genuine?
I also think that if it is a reproduction then the marks would be pseudomarks and they would have been struck in the same way by the reproducer. But when looking closely to the marks, we can see that the "maker's mark" (on the left) is struck differently than the two others. Its background appears as if made of diagonal stripes (like traces of a file) whereas the background of the two others is more smooth (like if they have been cast). I'd like to know if there existed different methods of making a punch which could explain this difference.
Since my first post, I finally found another description of the town mark in Beuque's 'Dictionnaire des poinçons officiels', tome 1, mark #1035. It is described as a 'crowned vase' and it is said that this mark was used in the 16C by the Vlissinge town for marking precious metal made objects. However I notice that the drawing in Beuque exhibits a small pike at the bottom of the outline which is not present on the spoon. What can be the explanation? There is also the mark #1031 which is an 'antique vase' without a crown and in a different outline which was used subsequently during 16c and 17C.
If this crowned vase is the town mark for an early part of 16C then it would be helpful to identify the mark on the right which could be a date letter, provided that such a dating system existed at that time in this town. Does someone know if there exists a documentation concerning the 16C Vlissinge date letters?
It is actually a flask (the flask of Willibrord) that is depicted - after an old legend. It has been used since at least the 16th century until the early 19th. I have seen a few variations of the mark, and some come close to yours, but there is no match. I also found a pseudo mark from the 19th century, but again not a match.
So there is the possibility of it being a reproduction, but I just can not say.
Maybe someone else can jump in.
The 3rd mark does indeed look like a dateletter (which was used), an A is what I see.
.
If this spoon is Dutch, 17th century and marked like this ,it also should have a sratch "Trembleersteek".
The weight is alright for an old spoon between 2-3 gram/centimeter, late 19th C spoons often are to heavy.
I don't know the design of the end of this spoon as Dutch.
But I also know that we find these kind of spoons in the Scaninavian countries, i know them in Norway but I could not find yet the makers mark in the book of Norwegian silver.
I don't know what a "Trembleersteek" is, but I guess it would be like a tremolirstrich for german silver items? That is to say a zigzag mark left by the assayer?
There is no such mark on this spoon. I did not know that this assay method was practiced at any time in the Netherlands. Could you give some precision about this practice?
Hi,
This specific type of city guild mark ’the the flask of Willibrord’ for Flushing not mentioned in the book ‘L.B. Gans goud-en zilvermerken van Voet’.
The makers’mark ND conjoined in oval shield mentioned in ‘Dutch goldsmiths’ and silversmiths’ marks and names prior to 1812’; not mentioned for Flushing but indeed mentioned Netherlands 1750-1760 unidentified.
The exact maker’s mark ND conjoined in oval is also mentioned as a fake maker’s mark ( Valse Zilvermerken in Nederland/Fake Silvermarks in the Netherlands).
The weak date letter, if A could be for Flushing 1760 but…… date letters were changed normally every year, we could ask ourselves why is the date letter so rubbed and other marks crisp?
I should say too many red hearings but….
