posted 08-08-2005 06:59 PM            

I am also wondering about the crest, which seems rather "rustic". Does the style suggest either of the two dates? The maker? Any ideas as to whether or not the cross has any significance?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Tom

posted 08-09-2005 06:47 AM            

Can you post a better picture of the marks, especially the "B"?

Is the "B" in a shield/crest? From the photograph, I cannot really see the "B" - indeed, it may be a maker's mark...is there not some letter to the right of the "B" in the photograph? It would not be unusual for there to be no date letter for this period.

Based on what I can see, I would guess that the date is between 1776 and 1786: this has no regard for the date letter you say is there, which I cannot see.

Another picture and I'll look again.

Rgds,

posted 08-09-2005 08:04 AM            

Thanks for the help.

Here is a close-up of the "B," which is the best I can do given the condition of the mark and the resolution of my camera. The letter is set in a punch, and there is no letter to the right. I thought there might have been a letter to the left but upon looking more closely, I don't think so. The 1774 date for "B" is pretty close to your start date. What do you think?

Any thoughts on the crest?

posted 08-09-2005 12:41 PM            

I'm afraid the new picture does not help me much. Have you tried photographing it through a magnifying glass? (also, if trying afain, try to avoid the glare).

There is no "B" date later in the period other than one inside a crest/ shield. For that reason (and because I cannot really make out a "B"), I've been looking at contemporary maker's marks for something resembling a "B" or "P" or "R" where the mark is punched and without a shield/ crest. So far, I cannot see anything that resembles the mark.

Please try another photograph.

Sorry not to be of more help.

Rgds,

posted 08-09-2005 05:34 PM            

I still think this is a maker's mark! As a novice, I could well be wrong.

Any date letter for the period in a shield has the elipsis(?) at the top, not the sides, which should be straight and rounded to a point at the bottom. I'm still going through Jackson's looking at maker's marks!!! (Sorry to be a doubting Thomas, but I can't see any similarity for a date letter). I've even been throught my new book on Cork silver just in case there's something there.

I'd love to get to the bottom of this one. Sorry I'm not of more help. Hopefully someone else comes in with a view.

It's always nice puzzeling over a piece with the member who first helped me in this forum, some seven months' ago.

Best wishes,

Tom

posted 08-09-2005 05:43 PM            

Thanks again. The only thing I can think of is that because the spoon handle is so thin that perhaps the crest was turned. Anyway, I am hoping the "verterans" jump in and help us on this one.

Regards,
Tom

posted 08-09-2005 05:53 PM            

You responded to my very first post in January of this year concerning my Viennese beaker (most likely a salt celler) which my late father had. If you recall, my wife and I had been in Vienna for the New Year (at the VPO concert, and having visited some museums, decided to rekindle my interest in silver). I collected my daughers from my mother's house in Galway, Ireland and was given the piece along with a 1913 candle stick belonging to my Grandmother. I could not identify the mark on the beaker (a "Dianakopf") and you and later Blackstone helped solve the puzzle.

Rgds,

Tom

PS - Were you in Ireland recently to buy this spoon? You said you got in in Belfast, N Ireland - not sure if you were there personally, but if so, a pity you weren't in Dublin, where I live, as it woudl have been great to meet for a coffee or even a beer!

posted 08-09-2005 06:27 PM            

I'd love to hear of your trip.

I'm conscious that this is for silver chat; why not email me.

Rgds,

posted 09-01-2005 02:39 PM            

I've had another thought...I wonder could this be 1732-33? I say this because:

(1) the Hibernia mark has a very clear outlined oblong; with space to top and bottom and in the mark in Jackson's;
(2) the harp crowned is without an outline; and
(3) the date mark (yes, I guess it is a date mark) looks like the "M" for 1732-33. The eclipse or { is there for that year and the "o" and "o" are directly beneath it...could this possibly be the archanely shaped "M" in Jacksons?

Best wishes,

posted 09-01-2005 05:19 PM            

I believe you have solved the puzzle. Looking at the mark from the angle you suggest, I see that the bottom portion is rubbed out right at the line separating the upper and lower parts of the 1732-33 "M", making the letter look like a "B" when turned on its side. The monogram letters also look a bit crude as well, further supporting your conjecture. So unless we hear from one of our colleagues, I am tempted to say "Mystery solved!"

By the way, the dealer who sold me this spoon for 8 pounds sterling said it was a bargain. I had no idea how much of one!

posted 09-02-2005 01:11 PM            

Glad to help. Hopefully I've not given you a bum steer. Next test is to ascertain what M D + C means!

If it is the year we now suspect, it was a sterling bargain (sorry to pun!) and a great find. Either way, it is a nice spoon.

Some time you will have to email me a picture of your Irish silver collection - I'd love to see your prize pieces.

Kindest Rgds,

posted 09-03-2005 02:41 PM            

The initials scratched upon the front indicate a husband and wife - conjoined as it were by their common surname - thus your spoon might have belonged to David and Catherine Murphy for instance.
Table spoons were 'entry level' acquisitions, often as wedding presents, literally the first piece of silver ever owned in a family and as such were revered and kept. A very appropriate possession for an economic historian!

posted 09-04-2005 05:24 PM            

Thanks for the info. Is this the view you wanted?

By the way, I am a British/military historian, not an economic one. I research and write about terrorism, insurgency, etc. Collecting silver is a diversion from the mayhem I usually study!

posted 09-05-2005 03:05 PM            

Firstly, I am sure that the B is the second part of the maker's mark. Three marks thus is quite normal on c.18th Dublin silver; in addition the maker's mark is nearly always nearest to the bowl of spoons.

It is usually possible to work out the approximate date of the various harps and Hibernia using pieces with date letters as the basis.

Your spoon is the exception. It appears to have the harp used (amongst others)1752-1757 but this is too early for the 'Celtic point' style, I think.

Often Irish spoons have been 'updated' and changed in form in order to bring them up to the prevalent fashion, thus making the marks seem rather extraordinary. I can see no evidence of this type of alteration on your spoon although I can't rule it out from here!

This leaves other possibilities such as the accidental use of an old harp punch or a remarkably early 'Celtic point' (not very likely.

posted 09-05-2005 03:50 PM            

Well, we all seem to agree mid 18th century is the date range. I am curious about your reasoning for eliminating the possibility of the 1731-32 date letter TBC suggested. Not that I am questioning your call, I would just like to know.

I have found for the period in question the following Dublin Smith's whose last names begin with "B" and whose mark looks promising:

William Beates
Mathias Brown
Ambrose Boxwell
John Bolland
LB (not identified)

Yes, this piece has been a fun one!

posted 09-06-2005 03:28 PM            

The style of the harp and Hibernia punches (shape and size of punch) are not consistent with the general type in use before 1750.

The puzzle is indeed to fit the design and general manufacturing features of the spoon (c.1770-95) with the possible combinations of harp and Hibernia.

posted 09-06-2005 08:28 PM            

The harp was set in an oval punch starting in 1787.

Since my harp is not set in an oval, wouldn't that narrow my date range to 1770-1787?

What do you mean by the spoon not being made prior to 1770?

The style seems rather simple.

Also, I am having a hard time seeing the difference in harp styles. Can you explain more?

posted 09-07-2005 01:09 PM            

This means that every time they make a new punch it differs from those made before in some small way or another - some, for instance, have more strings to he harp.

Another notable difference is the 'balls' on the crown of the harp.

It is the balls that I think answer your query, but more of this in a minute...

The Hibernia's likewise vary, in addition all those from 1770 (X date latter) to 1787 they have an amulet in her skirt - your punch is too worn to help in this matter.

Irish fashions are just a little lagging behind those in London, even in Dublin and The ONLY patterns of spoon that are encountered before about 1770 in the c.18th are Hanoverian pattern (c.1715-1775) and rat-tail (c.1705-45) the 'Old English' and 'Celtic point' arriving about this time (c.1770).

From my notes, added to sleepless night with a sick dog, I have come to the conclusion that the most likely date for your spoon is 1773 (based upon the harp).

This would mean that the spoon is in its original, unaltered, state (which I think it is). I will try and find another version of the harp to post for you, but this may take some time - and even then you may have to allow some artistic license for the wear and tear of the design...

posted 09-08-2005 02:42 PM            

That leaves the third mark to be the maker's mark, but nothing in Bennett has that distinctive notch at the right. There are several marks shown with Bs that could match, but nothing that to my eye sings out as right.

That exhausts what I can do. But at least two sets of eyes have come to similar conclusions....

posted 09-21-2005 07:12 PM            

I checked Jackson's and found for 1774 a Dublin Silversmith, one Ambrose Boxwell. The "B" in his mark and the punch look like what is left of the maker's mark on my spoon.

Could he be the maker?

Does anyone know more about him?

posted 09-22-2005 09:47 AM            

*BUT* Boxwell's mark is rather distinctive, and doesn't seem to match the one on your spoon. Yours is also distinctive, with the indent to the cartouche just right of the B, which doesn't match any shown in Bennett (where the marks are much better drawn than in Jackson, and bigger). Your B could match a number shown in Bennett, but none have that notch (Bennett shows 2 with such a notch, both Thomas Bolton, but his B was in script -- and he's about 50 years too early). Could be a damaged punch, but if so one would need to see a complete example to properly identify it.

posted 09-22-2005 11:01 AM            

This is better entertainment than "History Detectives" on PBS (at least when it comes to silver).

For those of us that are really into silver, the SMP forums provide the detailed information we lust after. Even the casual reader cannot help but find information.

I recomend this sight to all my friends and customers who are interested in knowing more about any aspect of silver.

Scott and June Martin should be thanked
again and again for having the foresight to put up this site. I hope they are enjoying there journey "down under"