Austria-Hungary Austrian hallmarks on Orders & Medals – additional comments

[Elmar Lang]

thank you.

 

Very curious thing...

[StefanK.]

On 22/07/2020 at 16:57, GdC26 said:

Looks like a Austrian 750 silver mark to me, but the shape seems a bit weird. It may help if you post a pic showing the entire object.

What is the difference between 60 and 61? And until when was 750 used instead of the chamoise‘s head?

[graham]

The '60' has no .(Dot) under the A

[tifes]

2 hours ago, StefanK. said:

What is the difference between 60 and 61? And until when was 750 used instead of the chamoise‘s head?

Difference between hallmark 60 and 61 is very slight. No 60 is for Hallmarking Office (Punzierungsamt) in Vienna and No 61 with "vertical line" (mit senkrechtem Strich) is for a Branch of Hallmarking Office (Filialpunzierungsamt) in Vienna I. This one was used from 1867 onwards but No 60 is very old one and was in use since 1807.

 

That lead us to 750 hallmark. There is no true that first hallmarking law was adopted just in January 1867. There were different regulations for hallmarking for different parts of Monarchy since 18th century. Bit messy and many small items like jewellery and orders were exempted. This changed with hallmark act of 1867 which unified the system for the whole Monarchy and introduced the obligation for all items to be hallmarked, even small ones made of precious metals. 750 is so-called "stock hallmark" (Vorratpunze) for 18k. gold pieces. In the hallmark act of 1867 it was stipulated that stocks of silver and gold items which had not yet been officially hallmarked were to be provided with a stock hallmark similar to the older regulations, provided that the precious metal content exceeded at least a quarter of the total value.This is why we see "750" hallmark sometimes alone, sometimes mixed with "new" hallmarks of 1867. So golden pieces made closely before or during the introduction of hallmark act 1867 plus some years on (like till 1870, still old stock used) could be seen with this stock hallmark of 750.       

Edited February 15, 2023 by tifes

[StefanK.]

10 hours ago, tifes said:

Difference between hallmark 60 and 61 is very slight. No 60 is for Hallmarking Office (Punzierungsamt) in Vienna and No 61 with "vertical line" (mit senkrechtem Strich) is for a Branch of Hallmarking Office (Filialpunzierungsamt) in Vienna I. This one was used from 1867 onwards but No 60 is very old one and was in use since 1807.

 

That lead us to 750 hallmark. There is no true that first hallmarking law was adopted just in January 1867. There were different regulations for hallmarking for different parts of Monarchy since 18th century. Bit messy and many small items like jewellery and orders were exempted. This changed with hallmark act of 1867 which unified the system for the whole Monarchy and introduced the obligation for all items to be hallmarked, even small ones made of precious metals. 750 is so-called "stock hallmark" (Vorratpunze) for 18k. gold pieces. In the hallmark act of 1867 it was stipulated that stocks of silver and gold items which had not yet been officially hallmarked were to be provided with a stock hallmark similar to the older regulations, provided that the precious metal content exceeded at least a quarter of the total value.This is why we see "750" hallmark sometimes alone, sometimes mixed with "new" hallmarks of 1867. So golden pieces made closely before or during the introduction of hallmark act 1867 plus some years on (like till 1870, still old stock used) could be seen with this stock hallmark of 750.       

Interesting, thank you very much! If a piece bears either a marking "before" 1867 and "after" does that mean that it was tested two times? See picture.

 

On the second picture one can see a 750 F.R piece. So that one should be around 1866/1867?

[tifes]

Hi Stefan,

 

"tested two times"...basically you can put it like that. There was a development in hallmarking in old Austria in 3 consecutive bills. First from May 1865 stipulated that all items of precious metal must have maker´s mark and be proofed by hallmarking office for the content. Second one from 27. May 1866 (came into force as of 1. August 1866) introduced the obligation to hallmark all item with the hallmark showing the proportion of precious metal or "Feingehaltpunze", later called "stock hallmark" or "Vorratpunze", because such items had been hallmarked before 1. January 1867 when the Hallmark Bill adopted on 30. November 1866 came into force and then some of them being held in the stock. Third one it that from 30. November 1866.     

 

Your first picture - item produced before 1/1/1867, hallmarked with 750 "Feingehaltpunze"/"Vorratpunze" as obliged by the hallmarking law of 27/5/1866 but put in the sale/ sent to Order´s chancellery later after 1/1/1867 (might be even years later), so went through second hallmarking according the later law. 

 

Second picture (if there is nothing else) - item hallmarked according the law of 27/5/1866, before 1/1/1867

 

Remember one thing...it was just on the paper. Hallmarking meant paying taxes and "bending the rules" and to sale orders privately even without "proper hallmarking" wasn't so uncommon. What I can add that both orders on the pictures were made by Rothe till mid-1880s, when this particular Rothe maker´s mark was used.      

[StefanK.]

Thank you, that is very interesting. Only your last sentence confuses me. Does rhat mean that both medal in theory could also have been made in - let‘s say - in 1875? Or were you referring only to the maker‘s mark?

 

 

Going back to my MMThO: what makes you think that this piece was made by Rothe? I know two types of Rothe MMThO that are slightly different in size and design (the „WW1“ type and the „1866“ type). A third pattern, worn by Ernst August of Hannover, with straigth arms, could have been made by Rothe. All three are pictures in Ortner/Ludwigstorff. If my piece was made by Rothe, what sense does it have to change patterns of such a rare award so many times? 

[tifes]

Yes, I was referring to the maker´s mark of Rothe but as you probably know all orders had to be returned to Order´s Chancellery after the decease of the awarded person. It happened many times that decoration was distorted, mainly it concerned enamels. Maker repaired it, sometimes even replaced some parts, which were totally destroyed or even missing. Then such decoration could have been composed of different parts from different period. In any case it had to re-hallmarked (if possible, sometimes not because it would destroy enamels), consequently returned to back to the Order´s Chancellery and awarded once again to another person. So I do not know what´s on the first picture but it´s something that was entirely or at least partly made before 1867 and then hallmarked according new law from November 1866 (valid as of 1. January 1867) 

 

I believe it´s Rothe, because of some signs like suspension, central medallion, enamels quality, overall execution etc. It´s close to this one: https://www.emedals.com/europe/austria-imperial/orders/order-of-maria-theresa/a-napoleonic-order-of-maria-theresa-to-the-von-pittel-family   , which should be Rothe too. There were more producers during Napoleonic wars and then in 1820s and 1830s not only official ones (Kobril, Schmidt) but later this practice of private pieces of different size, quality etc. was forbidden and even later (since late 1850) there was just Rothe who repaired old pieces and produced also new ones. Mayers came only just at the latest stage as private maker. All 3 MMTO-knights of Ernst August von Hannover as pictured in the above mentioned book are of Rothe production and they are all different, as you can see. Your MMTO-knight is very similar to MMTO-Commander on the page 264 and MMTO-knight of GdI Graf Clam-Gallas on the page 284 (first line, very right). I wouldn´t say that Rothe changed pattern very often. Rothe had just more than one stamping tool and they were not entirely identical.

Edited February 18, 2023 by tifes

[StefanK.]

Any opinions on this hallmarks? Note that the "A" has very straigt arms ("sans serif") instead of the usual serif font.

 

thanks in advance.

[graham]

Maybe the first hallmark is:

 

 

 

The second hallmark looks like a typical FR (Rothe) hallmark.

 

 

The third 'A' hallmark looks similar to 'A's' on the left below:

 

[Farkas]

Gents,

would it make any sense for there to have been a previous mark scrubbed off this before it was stamped with the A??

 

 

I can’t help seeing (imagining 👀) lines and a box or something running left to right 👀

 

 

I’m also seeing (imagining) a first letter in the box...

👉 maybe R, W, A, H or F?

 

 

Stefan, Is there any chance of another picture of yours, if you have one without glare on that bit? Just to shut me up! 👍

 

cheers

tony 

 

[StefanK.]

16 hours ago, Farkas said:

Gents,

would it make any sense for there to have been a previous mark scrubbed off this before it was stamped with the A??

 

 

I can’t help seeing (imagining 👀) lines and a box or something running left to right 👀

 

 

I’m also seeing (imagining) a first letter in the box...

👉 maybe R, W, A, H or F?

 

 

Stefan, Is there any chance of another picture of yours, if you have one without glare on that bit? Just to shut me up! 👍

 

cheers

tony 

 

There is no other marking or traces from a scrubbed one. Its just the photo and the fact that the surface is convex. Attached another photo.

 

Of course it shows the Diana's Head 2A along with a Rothe marking as well as the one for the Hauptmünzamt. I was just wondering if they were faked or used after 1922 to fool collectors because the piece that bears that markings could raise some questions.

[Elmar Lang]

Would it be possible to see the piece on which these marks have been struck? This would help quite a lot.

 

Many thanks in advance,

 

E.L.

[StefanK.]

On 22/07/2020 at 16:57, GdC26 said:

Looks like a Austrian 750 silver mark to me, but the shape seems a bit weird. It may help if you post a pic showing the entire object.

What is the difference between 66 and 66a and from where did you take the picture? Thanks!

[Farkas]

On 24/04/2022 at 11:50, Elmar Lang said:

These are the Vienna "A" marks for precious metal; then, the trefoil mark of messrs. "Brüder Schneider", Vienna, and their signature mark. 

A full, obverse/reverse picture of the piece would be most welcome... 

 

I love this thread, I reckon it’s worthy of being pinned, 🤞

 

tony 🍻

[Graf]

On 16/03/2023 at 04:16, Elmar Lang said:

Would it be possible to see the piece on which these marks have been struck? This would help quite a lot.

 

Many thanks in advance,

 

E.L.

I agree It can give more clues

[Igor Ostapenko]

It’s can to be Austrian hallmark ? 
( may be Italian ?) 

 

THANK YOU ! 

[Farkas]

12 hours ago, Igor Ostapenko said:

It’s can to be Austrian hallmark ? 
( may be Italian ?) 

 

THANK YOU ! 

Hi Igor,

I can’t really see too well but looks like a pattern in a single diamond shaped stamp, i’d expect more for a hallmark, possibly this is only the jewellers makers mark? I know the French were keen on diamond shaped ones but that’s all I can say without a better look…

if you can post a better angle of it that would be 👍 & What medal is it Igor? 
 

cheers

tony

[Igor Ostapenko]

Thank you for answer, Tony ! 
sorry, cannot to make better pictures … 

It’s montenegrin for zeal medal, I think from V. Mayer, Vienna production 

[Elmar Lang]

Hello,

from what I can see in the picture, it should be a French mark.

Best wishes,

Enzo

[Igor Ostapenko]

3 hours ago, Elmar Lang said:

Hello,

from what I can see in the picture, it should be a French mark.

Best wishes,

Enzo

Thank You Enzo 👍

[Farkas]

Moving this back up 👍