ebay wing - Reproduction WWI Jessop and original bracelet

[blind pew]

Any opinions on this? It looks like a casting to me and there is "spill over" of the gold from the "US" onto the shield. 

[5thwingmarty]

I think the bracelet looks ok but am not a fan of the wing.  The wing feather details also look like they were cast into the wing, and I think Chris has shown the feather details on WWI wings were more typically added by hand by the jewelers and have much more crisp/sharp edges.

[rustywings]

I think Marty is spot-on with his evaluation! It's a really nice bracelet... period.

[pfrost]

Just to add a couple of "teachable" moments to this thread.  A good point to start is this thread via Marty (and his always great research) and Chris' previous posts.

 

1) The stars on most WWII hand engraved wings are incised into the shield while (in general) die struck wings tend to have the stars excised (projecting out of the shield). This isn't a 100% solid rule, but more a generality.  However, in hand chased wings, when the stars are incised into the shield, the seem to have been carefully carved into the silver planchet using a sharp chisel tool to make the 5 pointed star rather than a simple star shaped punch.  Thus, many hand chased WWI wings will have very sharp stars that (sometimes) are uneven in the length and position of the arms in each star.  This gives the original wings some flair and character, with may subtle differences between the 13 stars.  In contrast, this wing has what appear to be simple stars that were punched into the shield (or more likely in to the casting mold).

2) Many hand chased wings have many fine, hand carved lines that were used to outline and define parts of the shield. Depending on the skill of the engraver (and perhaps if he had a large double expresso before work (or a few shots at the pub the night before) and his hands were shakey), the lines will be even and sharply etched. The type of fine work when the engraver added lines to the wing aren't typically as apparent in die struck wings.  Not that die struck wings didn't have very fine details, but the variations between hand chased and die struck is almost always apparent by careful examination.

 

3)  There are wings that are 100% hand carved and chased onto a silver planchet (like the Eisenstadt wings) some that were both hand chased AND die struck (like some of Dunham wings) and some that were 100% die struck with no hand chasing (like most of the "Dallas type" wings).  The original Jessop wings (as this one is trying to be) seem to have been BOTH hand chased and die struck

 

4) I believe Chris Norma calls the fine jeweler cuts on hand chased wings "brilliant cuts".  If you refer to many of his wonderful posts, you will see multiple examples where a highly skilled engraver has used saws, files, and fine sharp chisels to carefully score and chase the silver to give the metal many new reflecting spaces.  These brilliant cuts are hard to see unless you use a loop, but have a profoundly beautiful effect on the wings.  Here is a photo of a close up of some brilliant cuts on a hand chased wing.

 

5) Feathering on the wings can frequently show a wide variation in skill and workmanship.  Some of the finest feathering looks very "natural", and has gaps and breaks that are similar to what would happen to the individual vanes of a feather shaft.  This highest type of detail is usually seen in die struck wings, where as it seems harder for the hand engraver to put this onto a wing.  The "default" of poor workmanship (especially in reproductions), seems to be simply putting in little V-shaped lines down the center of a feather. Again, this wing seems to have been a casting of a casting.  I suspect that the original mold had some details added.

 

All in all, as noted by Marty and Russ, this appears to be a mated vintage bracelet with a fake casting of a Jessop type wing.  While the originals of the Jessop wing seem to be very rare, the cast reproductions (aka museum copies) are not that uncommon.

[blind pew]

Thanks for a very detailed explanation, Pat!