No clue what were looking at, any help is great
1 Like
For openers, that’s a fake hallmark. At first blush it look like a legitimate Birmingham assay mark, but the lion is facing the wrong direction, which certainly ends that line of inquiry!
ETA: That leads me to think this is American silverplate. If it were from the U.K., somebody would have ended up a guest of Her Majesty for a few months - it would have been a jailing offense.
If it were American sterling, it would say “STERLING.” No one is going to go to the expense of making something from sterling silver and then try to disguise that fact.
No luck identifying “S&M,” however, other than some extremely misleading Google searches, sometimes involving light bondage.
Not sure what function the object served, either. How large is it?
2 Likes
A little more digging suggests that this piece might be from Starr & Marcus, which marketed a line of this kind of neo-classical piece in the mid-Victorian era. They were a retailer, and it’s been suggested that the piece might have been made by someone like Gorham.
And sure enough, Gorham was known to use this “lion, anchor, G” mark:
It also appears that they used this only on sterling, so your piece might not be silverplate, after all! 
ETA: The word “STERLING” would normally appear below the marks. Why it’s lacking here, I don’t know. But I think it’s a reasonably safe bet that it’s not plate.
2 Likes
https://www.reddit.com/r/Hallmarks/comments/1sryq5f/sterling_pocket_knife/
Gorham, 100%.
Retailer’s mark Starr & Marcus.
Jeff, good job!
https://www.ebay.ca/itm/135421406011
https://www.etsy.com/listing/1229038208/bust-by-gorham-sterling-silver
1 Like
That might explain why it doesn’t say “STERLING.” The pieces were coin silver, which usually means something between .800 and .900 purity. In mid-19th Century America, a lot of silver was .800 purity, rather than the .925 of sterling.
2 Likes
Hell yeah, Jeff! ---------------------------
1 Like