Sign in to follow this  
JasonLee

Hill bow with tortoiseshell and gold

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone, I am new here, can anyone give me little advice how about this bow? There is nothing stamped on the face plate but the numbers 398 are stamped on the stick under the frog. Also the Fleurs De Lys looks funny to me. Can I still travel with this bow to Asian or EU with the permit? Any suggestions is appreciated.

EF7C82A6-6C5D-4A00-81A6-C4B25D5A803D.jpeg

1551F256-38A7-4E3D-917A-FB7294A4ECED.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wood looks right to me.  Is there a letter to match the frog to the stick?  It does look new Dwight.  I would expect it to be a 1950's-1960's made bow. Pre Cites ban.

The number sounds like the number they used to track the gold.

 

And there are always people out there trying to put a lot of artistic energy into creating fakes.  

 

I have noticed that there are Tortoise shell bows with imitation whalebone.  Was the whalebone outlawed first?  Or did Hill just use up their stock of that first considering it was put on most (all?) of their bows?

 

Dorian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is from the 50's-60's, although it is pre-cites, you won't be able to travel with it unless it is 100+ years old.

The Fleur de Lis doesn't look right to me. Perhaps the stick and the fittings didn't start life together.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hill started using faux tortoiseshell frogs as well as faux baleen lapping. Its a nice looking bow and well made but whether by Hills i dont know (not really my thing) , the Fleur de Lys looks messy and the points are all missing/rounded off. Could be one of the later bows by ex Hill related workers or very neat fake .

The 45 degree facet on the handle seems to run too far into the facet with the stamp on it which i havent really noticed on Hill bows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More views of the bow would be helpful for identification. The stick and frog should both be stamped with a letter that pairs them. The stick might have a number as well, which would often show the year.

As you said, there’s often a maker’s mark on the tip or face plate below the mortise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, martin swan said:

Any pre-Cites (pre 1948) bow can get a Cites license as long as you have corroboration from an expert.

This bow looks much too recent for that.

Martin,

Can you elaborate on how to get that?  Likewise is it legal to sell bows that meet that criteria? In USA I think tortoise comes under "not to be used in commerce" which makes sale by a commercial operation illegal. I'd be interested to know if they are still salable in the UK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No underslide? And The blue lapping and leather look really out of place? Or is it black and a photo trick makes it look blue?

the inlay on the frog looks like it’s scratched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would assume its a Hill bow , it is the one recently sold at Bromptons and i assume Peter Oxley has looked it over and hes probably seen enough Hill bows . I personally think this black and white lapping is probably my least favourite of any kind and always looks cheap  .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could this possibly be the late Bill Watson's work?

Something about the tortoiseshell looks right, also the head/pernambuco, and the wrapping is identical to one I have on my desk right now. (Totally agree with fiddlecollector; the black and white wrapping looks cheap! Question: is it authentic whalebone, or some kind of imitation?) Of course the brand is different...

Cheers!

Scoiattola

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/25/2019 at 1:06 PM, nathan slobodkin said:

Martin,

Can you elaborate on how to get that?  Likewise is it legal to sell bows that meet that criteria? In USA I think tortoise comes under "not to be used in commerce" which makes sale by a commercial operation illegal. I'd be interested to know if they are still salable in the UK

Hi Nathan,

Not sure how things work in the US, but in the UK, CITES export licenses are granted by DEFRA (kind of department of forests and agriculture).

If you can show that a bow and its constituent parts are pre-CITES (1948), or prior to the "endangered" listing of that species, it's not a problem to get a license. However, it's illegal to trade in such items if the receiving country isn't a signatory to CITES.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scoiattola said:

Could this possibly be the late Bill Watson's work?

Something about the tortoiseshell looks right, also the head/pernambuco, and the wrapping is identical to one I have on my desk right now. (Totally agree with fiddlecollector; the black and white wrapping looks cheap! Question: is it authentic whalebone, or some kind of imitation?) Of course the brand is different...

Cheers!

Scoiattola

William Watson stopped working for Hills in the 60s didn't he?

Also he made rounded bows. That so called stamp looks wrong. It's messy, as in looks hand scribed in, not stamped with a professional stamp.

Gold can be easily tested at a local jewellers to make sure it's carrot.

It's nice though. Bows are very hard to fake, so I would have to see it in my hand.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Normally agree that white lapping looks tacky, but here the black and white mirror exactly the tiles on the button and visually tie things together.
 

I've never done other than simple pearl insets so can't  judge fleur and am the last person to ask about authenticity. But that head looks beautiful to me and the workmanship very high level.

How does it play?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/25/2019 at 9:24 PM, PhilipKT said:

No underslide? And The blue lapping and leather look really out of place? Or is it black and a photo trick makes it look blue?

the inlay on the frog looks like it’s scratched.

Looks black on my computer.  Since I  don't recall ever seeing blue...I'll assume it's black...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rue said:

Looks black on my computer.  Since I  don't recall ever seeing blue...I'll assume it's black...

Yes, I think it was probably just trick of the light. But whether it is blue or it’s black, it looks like cheap plastic all around and it looks like a later replacement to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does it play?

If you've ever played one of them, you know how they all play.  Extremely high standard of standardness with those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EF7C82A6-6C5D-4A00-81A6-C4B25D5A803D.jpeg.8c64bc3fcd3c40089f6447a736effe01.jpeg

4B99BA81-B2C7-4E57-BE41-79ECC8EFCF87.jpeg.d58e0d273cec4eea2f47a0ba79cb7daa.jpeg

 

Okay...I'm missing something.

Why does the 'mint' bow look cheap, and the vandalized bow look good?

Consensus says they are both good quality bows, so I think a direct comparison is fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

67295968-770-0@2X.jpg?rev=2jaguar-e-type-series-i0002_B-610x343.jpg

 Does the green 1973ish Jaguar type E look better than the  mint 1974 Jaguar type E?

Just wonderin'...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.