posted 11-02-2011 07:03 AM            

This my first time posting in the forum.

I am a seminarian and have recently purchased this chalice. I would like to restore it properly. However, I need to know more about it.

This chalice was personally engraved in Latin with the date 16 Jul 1899.

There is a makers mark at the edge of the rims base. Though due to its age etc. it is difficult to make out exactly what is says.

I have reason to believe that the cup is at least silver and at one point gold plated. As for the base I am not completely sure.

Since the mark is on the base then perhaps the entire chalice is silver. If not sterling silver then perhaps a different grade?

There is also a serial number on the underside of the chalice. Someone told me that the number may have been engraved by a liturgical goods restoration company in Omaha Nebraska in 1983. I did contact the company and they do not keep records for that long.

Another individual said that during that time period many chalices of this quality were made in France or Germany (speculation).

Any help you can offer me would be very much appreciated. Thank you for your time.

God Bless,
Andrew

posted 11-03-2011 08:15 AM            

At first I wanted to re-gold plate the whole chalice and the restore the enamel work above and below the node of the chalice on the stem. However, I think that will take away some of its character. Now I am considering having it what they call, "artistic restoration" which is where the company will clean it and only gold plate the inside of the cup. Not sure exactly which direction to take. As for other marks, the only other ones that I have been able to spot are a serial number on the base (7052-83), and corresponding number and initials behind some of the filigree work, inside of the stem. That's why I would really like to find out more about it, perhaps that will help me make a decision.

posted 11-03-2011 09:02 AM            

I really can not tell if this is plate - I do not think so but the lack of other marks is odd.

Until you find out what it is, I too would not make a decision. If sterling I think your second plan is good.

posted 11-03-2011 02:49 PM            

Also, are there stones or something on the four nodes on the stem? I am having a hard time seeing what they are. Is that the enamelling you were mentioning or are they some kind of stones?

I do not recognize the marking but my sense is that it is either the maker or the company that retailed the chalice. Hopefully someone here will recognize it.

What does the bottom look like? Is it solid, partially hollow, completely hollow? covered by a metal plate or something?

What does the text around the cup say? Is it in Latin or some other language? Is it from the communion service or bible or something else? As you are a seminary student you will naturally be a scholar of religion so hopefully the exact wording might help you zero in on a time period to date it? I know that over time there have been different wordings, translations, or versions of prayer books and the bible that can be useful in narrowing down dates, though it sometimes older texts are used to give an object that is new at the time a more traditional look and feel.

posted 11-03-2011 04:18 PM            

Thank you for your time responding to this.

The outside of the cup does look tarnished between the detailed filigree work especially. Hopefully you could see the enamel better in the photo below. Those stones which surround the node seem to be malachite. That is what I thought at first, however, someone said that it may be enamel made to look like malachite because of the way one of them is chipped.

Below is a photo of the bottom of the chalice. It is not solid. I have not removed the Latin unscripted plate, because I do not want to damage it. If you are curious it translates to, “The relatives of Fr. Cornelius dedicated this chalice of the blood of Christ, the font of water flowing to eternal life. July 13, 1899.”
As for the text around the cup, it is from Psalm 116:13, “I shall lift up the cup of salvation And call upon the name of the LORD.” I asked the Latinist at the seminary about what you said regarding its date. He said that this Latin text goes way back and would not be a hint as to the particular time period. That was a good though, I had not thought about asking that. Also, your point about the silver markings makes sense, but does make it a little more difficult 112 years later .

I really appreciate all of this help. I am an amateur when it comes to this type of work, but it is a lot of fun though.

God Bless,
Andrew

posted 11-04-2011 11:11 AM            

It appears that the enamel is not too far gone - at least on the areas shown in the photos. You could have them restored to perfection but I would urge that you do not do so as a bit of enamel loss makes it consistent with the chalice and speaks to its many years of use for its purpose. A full restoration would take all of that away. Also, repairing enamel can be tricky to get it just right since enamel is not just paint - it is ground glass that must be melted into the reserves in the metal at high temperature which can create other problems when done after the fact.

You will not want to fully polish the chalice either - you want to have some of that tarnish in the nooks and crannies remain. For this reason never use a silver polishing dip as it will take all of that beautiful patina away. And, that tarnish in those nooks and crannies makes the design look three dimensional. It is like when you draw a picture, you put in some shading to make it look 3-D. Without it the chalice will look flat and lusterless.

The stones around the node do look exactly like malachite cabochons. Their prong settings also suggest they are malachites set into the stem rather than paint. Malachite is an inexpensive, commonly available but beautiful stone that has been used for thousands of years. Basically it is copper ore. This stone is also fairly fragile and is easily chipped so the fact that one of the stones is chipped would tend to confirm it is malachite.