Ratsy Brown Posted July 24, 2017 at 12:32 PM Report Share Posted July 24, 2017 at 12:32 PM Hello all. I have an antique chinese silver bangle with chinese characters marked on the inside. Please can you help translate for me? Many thanks, Ratsy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zbigniew Posted July 24, 2017 at 09:54 PM Report Share Posted July 24, 2017 at 09:54 PM It seems to be 天 (lit. "heaven"), then a middle character I can't identify, then 福 ("happiness") above, and 足 ("foot") 文 ("writing"?) below. I don't really know what they signify, though the above may be the maker's mark, i.e. a name. Neither is likely to be a purity mark, I think. Sorry not to be of more help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publius Posted July 24, 2017 at 10:29 PM Report Share Posted July 24, 2017 at 10:29 PM 足文 is a purity mark. 文銀 = pure silver 足 = to the fullest 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zbigniew Posted July 24, 2017 at 11:41 PM Report Share Posted July 24, 2017 at 11:41 PM That's interesting, thanks. It needs to be said firstly that the silver is very unlikely to be pure silver (pure silver, or "fine silver", as it's known in the UK, is almost never used for something like a bangle that needs to be hardwearing), and secondly that unless this mark has been struck by a Chinese official assay office (we have four assay offices in the UK, but I don't know that China has any), the purity indicated has no legal status as a mark and it is up to the buyer to take it for what it's worth. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publius Posted July 25, 2017 at 12:47 AM Report Share Posted July 25, 2017 at 12:47 AM The term has been used for hundreds of years. What is considered "pure" varies over time. For example, the Ming dynasty standard was 98%; in Qing dynasty it was 93.5374%; today when people talk about 純銀 in the context of jewelry it's actually 92.5%, not as soft and pure as you would think. And when this particular piece was made, I don't think there's any assay office around in the world. Source: https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-hant/纹银 http://aushop.pixnet.net/blog/post/67400889-什麼!常見的925純銀不是純銀 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zbigniew Posted July 25, 2017 at 01:36 AM Report Share Posted July 25, 2017 at 01:36 AM I'm not an expert on foreign jewelry, but as a British-based silversmith I'd say the piece isn't particularly old, and is considerably younger than the emergence of official assaying in the UK, which dates from the fourteenth century. The bangle is almost certainly made from a silver alloy, not what in English would be described as "pure" or, more usually, "fine silver" (which must be 99.9%). As you rightly say, the typical alloy, which gives an ideal compromise between purity and durability, is 92.5%, which in the UK is known unambiguously as "sterling silver", never "pure silver". In the UK, the legal requirement that any item over 7.78g that is on sale and is being described as silver by the seller needs to be officially assayed and hallmarked is designed to protect the consumer from just the sort of uncertainty about an item's actual purity that we're talking about here. I'm afraid that in the absence of any standardized, legally binding, official assaying procedure in China, the 足文 mark on the present item is no guarantee of any level of purity whatsoever, and can only be regarded as a claim that needs further testing. You could say it's exactly the sort of situation where your signature verbum sat doesn't apply, and a different Latin phrase steps in to supplant it: caveat emptor. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publius Posted July 25, 2017 at 02:01 AM Report Share Posted July 25, 2017 at 02:01 AM Words, words, words. What are you trying to prove, huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratsy Brown Posted July 25, 2017 at 07:05 AM Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2017 at 07:05 AM Thanks for all this input, im learning so much already. I posted this on an antique site, someone suggested it could be made by an ethnic minorty in China (Miao or similar) who would rarely make items above 60% silver purity, so its interesting to note that a purity mark has been used at all. Im excited by the possibility it predates assay offices around the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zbigniew Posted July 25, 2017 at 05:20 PM Report Share Posted July 25, 2017 at 05:20 PM 10 hours ago, Ratsy Brown said: Im excited by the possibility it predates assay offices around the world. I'd stake a lottery win on it that it doesn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratsy Brown Posted July 25, 2017 at 06:10 PM Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2017 at 06:10 PM 48 minutes ago, Zbigniew said: 11 hours ago, Ratsy Brown said: Im excited by the possibility it predates assay offices around the world. I'd stake a lottery win on it that it doesn't. Ha, you are almost certainly right. Most likely 19th c. But will be interested to hear more input. Ive been browsing the web but not found any similar designs anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Members puckett34 Posted December 29, 2020 at 07:41 PM New Members Report Share Posted December 29, 2020 at 07:41 PM Hello, I have a similar topic and was hoping someone would help me translate this silver mark. I know the top mark is "pure silver", but I can't make out the rest of it. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and select your username and password later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.