Antique Gold Cufflinks - A few Questions

Hey folks.

Here is my small collection of antique gold cufflinks:



I have a few questions, however. They bear the following marks:

L: 9kt gold. 9kt gold.
R: 9kt gold. 9kt gold front (what does that mean?)
Bottom: 925 (sterling silver?), but looks like gold. Why?

All of them (with the possible exception of the bottom pair) date to about 1900. I bought most of them from the same very nice, English-accented jewelry dealer at the local flea-market, who trades in antique jewelry. He gives me good deals on cufflinks because I keep buying them from him!!

 

They should say 9ct, not 9 K, they must be mostly British as only Britain uses 9 Carat gold. It is typically abbreviated 9C or 9ct.

Gold front means a thin sheet of gold over possibly silver. 925 but gold looking is probably silver gilt.

The ones with the dumbbell bars are probably the youngest.

 

They say '9ct' if you wanna be nitpicky, but I was always taught kt = karat = gold purity. ct = carat = diamond size. And these ain't diamonds.

 

I think the "ct" designation also helps to ID them as British... so for that reason it's important to note. Although, AF also knew that just the fact that they are 9 karat means they are made in Great Britain.

 

Oh I don't doubt that they were made in Britain. But it's nice to know a few extra things about them.

 

The gold for those on the right looks to me like rose gold. The color of gold amalgams can be varied according to the other metals mixed in.

 

As af says, the instant clue to their being Brit is the spelling of ct and the use of 9 ct gold. Europeans and Aussies also spell ct that way but don't use 9. The Middle East regards 9 ct as junk.

You've got full hallmarks on that top right set, can you get a photo?

The silver ones are probably 1950s to 70s, from the style. The octagonal ones look Edwardian from the engraving and shape.

 

The octagonal ones are Edwardian, yes. So the seller told me.

Complete Hallmarks (L going down, R going down & middle-bottom):

[9] [375] [Anchor-mark] (as in Birmingham) [h] (tried to find info on this. Couldn't find anything).
[J.A. & S] (John Aitken & Sons)

[9ct]

[9ct]

[9ct Front]

[EFC] [925]

Those are all the hallmarks. Read using a 60x loupe.

 

The h will be the date letter. If there's no monarch's head, it's 1907, if lower case.

EFC will be a maker's mark, and as af would say, some blokes in a shed.

 

They say '9ct' if you wanna be nitpicky, but I was always taught kt = karat = gold purity. ct = carat = diamond size. And these ain't diamonds.

Nitpicking is often the way to more exact knowledge. Teaching is incomplete if it does not include the limitations of that which is taught.

In Britain the use of 9C and 9 ct died out in the early 1900s; by the 20s you'd expect proper hallmarks, so it is also a dating guide.

At that time (capital) CT was often used for diamonds, but usually there is no possibility of confusion.Until quite recently you would not find carat weight stamped in a diamond ring,and there will always be the quite separate gold makes so there is no confusion.

The Zeppelin shaped link dies out in Britain after the first world war simply because they were Zeppelin shaped.

 

af, I think the only rings I've seen stamped with carat weight were of the QVC variety.

 

I'd certainly agree with that but I'd widen it to include Ratners, H Samuel and their ilk. In olden days (1980s) for me, I'd flog these cheap around Prestatyn and Rhyl. Usually bought as 'Lot of mixed rings' if possible for less than the scrap gold value.

 

Oh yes. I'd forgotten those so-called "jewellers."