Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Christine Steingass, post: 13100784, member: 114460&quot;]I did some digging into this because the construction caught my attention more than the “925” mark itself.</p><p>The 925 mark is a silver fineness mark corresponding to 925 parts silver per 1,000, i.e. sterling standard. The Sheffield Assay Office documents 925 as the sterling-silver standard here:</p><p>Sheffield Assay Office: UK Hallmarks⁠�</p><p>That said, 925 alone does not identify the maker, country or age, and I wouldn&#039;t try to date the necklace from that mark by itself. Sheffield&#039;s hallmark-identification information actually makes a useful distinction between a fineness mark and the separate sponsor/maker identification marks:</p><p>Sheffield Assay Office: Mark Identification⁠�</p><p>What interested me more is the construction of the pendant. It has extensive applied scrolling wirework and clusters of tiny raised silver granules against a darkened/oxidized background. That combination sent me looking into Indonesian/Balinese-style silverwork, where granulation and wirework are well-established decorative techniques.</p><p>There is legitimate museum evidence for a very long Indonesian tradition of combining filigree/wire and granulated decoration. The Metropolitan Museum of Art has Indonesian pieces specifically catalogued as having “filigree and granulate designs,” as well as pieces constructed with wire and granules:</p><p>The Met: Indonesian ornament with filigree and granulate designs⁠�</p><p>The Met: Indonesian ornament with wire and granules⁠�</p><p>I&#039;m not saying this necklace is anywhere remotely as old as those museum pieces. Those are historical examples demonstrating the decorative tradition and techniques, not direct dating comparables for this necklace. From this one photograph I also wouldn&#039;t confidently call it Indonesian manufacture yet. At this point I&#039;d describe it as 925-marked sterling with workmanship strongly reminiscent of Balinese/Indonesian silver jewelry, pending better photographs.</p><p>If you&#039;d like, I&#039;d be happy to keep researching it. What would help tremendously is:</p><p>1. A very sharp close-up of the “925” stamp.</p><p>2. The entire back of the pendant.</p><p>3. Both sides of the large bail above the pendant.</p><p>4. The clasp and every little ring/tag beside the clasp.</p><p>5. Any letters, symbols or stamps anywhere besides 925.</p><p>6. The pendant&#039;s measurements and, if possible, the necklace&#039;s weight in grams.</p><p>Those tiny secondary marks are potentially much more useful for identifying who made it and where than the 925 itself. If you can post those pictures, I&#039;ll see how far I can chase it down.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in