posted 12-21-2003 10:43 PM            

The Onslow terminal was cast, while the rest of the spoon was forged, so the terminal has to be attached by a solder joint. Onslow terminals have been added to spoons of other styles by cutting off the original ends and soldering on the Onslow terminals. Onslow examples are desireable and are not common, which has led to fakery. To ensure yours is genuine (which should be done when there are casting flaws as there seem to be on yours, in form of pits from trapped air bubbles) the solder joint should be examined - original terminals were usually attached via a slanted scarf joint, wheras most fakes are attached by a square-cut butt joint. That joint should be near the terminal, so the solder near the marks, which should be near the bowl, is probably an honest repair, but if you cannot find another solder joint further up the stem, then the terminal may be suspect (but the rest of the spoon would be genuine, anyway). Try breathing on the stem, as you would to clean a pair of glasses, and the joint should be revealed as the film of moisture evaporates.

posted 12-22-2003 10:48 PM            

quote:

---

Indeed, there is a scarf joint. An upper joint on one side and a lower on the other.

---

posted 02-09-2014 10:27 AM            

Above is a spoon I found at the Nashville Antiques and Garden show. It is a large serving spoon (10 7/8 inches long) with a date mark of 1763 and the city mark for London. The sponsor’s mark is for James Tookey. The spoon has a crest in the form of what may be a bear’s claw and a monogram M. It also has an attractive double drop.

Mindful of Swarter’s admonition to check the joint between the cast scroll and the handle of the spoon I breathed on the spoon, but no condensation formed. The cold weather has caused our furnace to run so long that the humidity in our house has dropped to 10%. I had to put the spoon in the freezer for awhile so that when I blew on it moisture would form. This worked and after blowing on the spoon I could see a scarf joint running from the bottom line of the crest to about an inch lower on the top of the spoon.

The Lady Carnarvon, the Mistress of Downton Abbey, was the keynote speaker at this antique show. Several antique dealers reported customers using images from the Downton Abbey TV show as a guide for what to buy and they were pleased to help them. I don’t think I have seen any Onslow pattern spoons on this show, but the beautiful sets shown on that show may have been the reason I brought this spoon.

posted 02-22-2014 08:41 AM            

Perhaps I might add a bit more about the pattern and some of its variants. I find a straightforward Onslow like yours more pleasing than those which add other decoration such as the example below with feather edging and shoulders at the base of the stem, marked RR (unidentified), London, 1772.

And it is not necessarily the case that an Onslow piece must have a scarf joint. The smaller examples in particular, such as teaspoons or condiment ladles, were often made in one piece. The teaspoon below was cast in one piece. It is punched with DS (Dorothy Sarbitt, entered 1753) and a lion passant.

posted 03-02-2014 11:18 AM            

Sadly I don’t have a set of condiment jars myself, but I do have a set of ladles that once adorned such jars.

The three ladles to the left of the second picture form this set. The first picture gives a different view of one of them, showing the hook by which they were hung.

The ladle on the right of the second picture is not part of the set but is by the same maker. Its handle is cast from the same mould as that of the larger ladle in the set and its bowl has the same style of piercing. It was not made to be suspended so no hook on the back and the bowl at more of a right angle to the stem.

Note that on this version of Onslow the moulding runs the full length of the stem.
All four ladles have just a maker’s mark, struck twice, not one I have been able to identify. It appears to be just the letter I with a crown above and a fleur-de-lys sprouting from its foot. Any suggestions for an attribution would be welcome.


This mark makes me suspect a Huguenot maker and wonder whether the date is nearer 1750 rather than the c.1770 I might otherwise have assumed.

posted 03-02-2014 12:44 PM            

This Eagle’s Head sauce ladle is by James Morison, London, 1749: the same year as the Delamerie jars, illustrated in my earlier post, that were accompanied by Onslow style ladles. However, the Onslow scroll was to become the more popular form, perhaps because it lent itself to spoons as well as ladles as well as possibly being a bit simpler to make. Here are a couple of long serving spoons made 10 years later in 1759, the first by Ebenezer Coker and the second by Isaac Callard.

Note the variations in the detail of the moulding at the stem end. A more marked variation is found on this 1758 soup ladle by Thomas Heming.


Meanwhile this sauce ladle by Thomas Rush, also 1758, has the standard form of moulding that was to remain the most common form of Onslow terminal.

posted 03-02-2014 05:11 PM            

Thanks for the great information and pictures. The variations really are significant and show a fascinating side to the development of the Onslow pattern.

Did many of the silversmiths that started with a variation switch over to the more common pattern?

posted 03-03-2014 08:40 AM            

However, when I look at my handful of Onslow spoons from the 1770s they all have similar “classic” terminals. The variety lies in whether or not they have shoulders and whether or not they are feather edged. I believe this to be pretty typical of the majority by then but there will always have been exceptions to the rule.