Hahaha I remember those!!! And remember him on Seinfeld…
1 Like
Thank you! And believe me I didn’t spend ANYWHERE near that amount 
1 Like
Yep, that’s it. Can you believe I picked that over all that beautiful turquoise?! Although some of the other things I liked really well just didn’t fit me.
2 Likes
So I was reading “Indian Silver Volume Two” by Dale Stewart King, and came across a short section on hollow form which made me think of this thread. Here’s what he has to say about it, starting on p. 48 under the heading “Wrought, Embossed”:
“The bossing or ‘bumping up’ of large areas has increased greatly—one result has been the creation of massive-looking hollow forms which, however, economized on the use of silver and are comfortably light to wear. Hollow forms, technically difficult to make, began about 1950.”
So we have one source dating the technique to about 1950; as @Jason said above it would be interesting to find a date for it’s first use. And this correlates with @chicfarmer ’s dating of this bracelet to the 50’s or 60’s.
1 Like
Thank you for the info, @OrbitOrange. That does makes sense. When I bought it at Ogg’s Hogan, it was in the section labeled antique jewelry. Jeff also mentioned that case of his jewelry on his video as being “antique.” However, antique sometimes can mean 50+ years old, which would work for the time frame of '50s to '60s. The link that Jason put in this thread claims that that bracelet (which I think was also hollow form) was made in the 40s, so still a little bit of a mystery. I emailed Jeff, but I haven’t heard back. Hopefully I’m going to get out there next year and be able to ask him about it.
1 Like
I wouldn’t put too much stock in J. Peterman’s ad copy 
. Sellers often “err” in their dating by a decade or two.
2 Likes
Yes, I wondered about that j Peterman add 
.
And unfortunately if Jeff Ogg considers it antique to be made in the 60s, that means I’m antique also 