"T.C. 14K" Jewelry Hallmark Signature on Pendant

A clearly printed 14K above T.C. within a square box. The piece is a heart with an old fashioned jeweled telephone. Other pieces by this maker include simple round or heart pendants, as well as kitschy subjects (think golf, money...)

I've been unable to find this on my hallmark sites. I see other postings of similar pieces but no one seems to note a maker. I do not believe it is Tiffany or T&C.

Thanks!

 

Good morning and welcome to the boards! People will need to see some close up photos of the marks and front/back pics of the entire item. There are some very knowledgeable people here who would love to help.

 

https://www.antiquers.com/threads/making-a-post-and-uploading-pictures.16038/

 

Perhaps Therese Conradi?

 

Looks crudely made

 

that looks cut with a jewellers saw rather than cast......a front pic may reveal a finer piece...?

 

Would/could you post a photograph of the entire piece please?

Debora

 

The image I added, is one of Therese Conradi I found online. This isn't J Jones' pendant. I just posted it so JJ can compare the marks.

 

Yes , indeed it's not a telephone in a heart....... but we're discussing your pic...in lieu of anything else.

 

that's an exquisite broach !!!
the colors really POP 111

I have a 1st nations one......




mother of pearl , & jet !!!

 

That would be it! Surprised it didn't show up on my initial JU search, but it does when I search that name. Thank you for your help. Do you happen to know anything about this jeweler?

Also the lack of a pic was intentional because it was such a simple mark I guess even the easiest questions here need pics for some people. Sorry, I'm new!

 

No need to be so dismissive of the people here. People who know jewellery also know that there are quite a lot of 'TC in a box marks', which is why people asked for photos.

You may be happy with the ID given after your "easy question", but I wouldn't be. As we all know, sellers misidentify items all the time, whereas a forum like ours tries to find the facts by looking at every detail. If someone posts a photo, that is. If they don't, they'll have to make do with any old ID.

The Therese Conradi mark I know is just TC, without 14k, and the font is different and not crudely scratched, as you can see below.
If your mark is like the rough mark Marote posted, it is unlikely to be a Therese Conradi mark.
Therese Conradi was Austrian, and her jewellery is not only marked with the TC below, but also with an Austrian assay mark.

Therese Conradi:

https://www.langantiques.com/university/mark/conradi-therese/

If this is the mark on your mystery pendant, there is a good chance it is by Therese Conradi, but we would still like to check it.
If this is not your mark, and if you are serious about wanting to know who actually made your pendant, you'll have to show us photos.

My guess is that yours is North American, not Austrian. North Americans use the 'K' mark for carat. I also think it is more recent than Therese Conradi.

 

My Therese Conradi info was based on this site:
https://poshmark.com/listing/14-karat-happy-birthday-pendant-64319cb47f29dd3750faa622
Where the pendant is being sold as a Therese Conradi piece.

 

It was clear enough for someone to find it. These days listings are so based on location + advertisement data that some results are hidden, so I came here. I'm still new but it's been so far a good source of community knowledge from interesting folks.

I would disagree that the mark is crudely scratched (I believe it might be a stamp), and stated that mine is also clearly printed. A closer look at the posting shows that the focus of the photo is bad, not the lines of the mark. You're right in the fact that it is probably not an Austrian jeweler, so the lead might not be accurate- but it's one I didn't have before, and something to consider before marketing a piece.

I provide read-only I.D.s regularly and genuinely thought it would be very clear to anyone who fully considered the sentence instead of seeing only "tc in a box", or I would have posted a photo. I again decided not to post a photo after confirming the mark someone else posted. I think that's reasonable. Really didn't mean to make you feel like I was starting a beef with you or a friend of yours, but I'd like you to understand that if this were emergent, I would have pursued differently. It's not emergent. I'm sorry if this is upsetting.

Thank you everyone for your help! Again: the mark Marote posted IS my referenced mark, and I'm very curious to know who made / the history of these novelty gold pieces. Hit us up in the thread if you happen to recognize it. <3

 

I provide read-only I.D.s regularly............. maybe to other sites , but here , please and thank you...we live and die by clear crisp photo's of the whole item, the marks , and the size and where the item was found.
We need this to do a proper deep dive in order to find the right answer to any question.
@Debora asked nicely for a photo, that you have yet to provide.
Help us....to help you !!

 

That is definitely not by Therese Conradi. It isn't even Austrian, and it is too recent to be by her.
This pendant is ca 1960-70, Therese Conradi worked until 1922. Her work was special, whereas this pendant is very run-of-the-mill.

 

And someone didn't help you at all. (No offense Marote)
Others wanted to help you, but you wouldn't let them. You still haven't posted a photo.

Well, you have your read-only ID now, the wrong one.

Surely you have seen other posts and seen that other people post photos? And you must also have seen that we often ask for more photos to find the correct ID. What goes for others, goes for you too.

The irregularity of the lines of the mark is not a result of the quality of the photo, but a result of the way it was marked.
You may wish to discuss this further, I do not. The only reason I brought it up was to prove it couldn't be a Therese Conradi mark. I thought that was clear.

Which you still haven't done. You'd rather convince us that the crude mark is of good quality.
It seems being argumentative is more important to you than finding the maker.

 

None taken