|
|
In this Forum we discuss the silver of the United Kingdom, as well as British Colonial silver and Old Sheffield Plate. Past British - Irish Sterling topics/threads worth a look. |
|
|
| How to Post Photos | Want to be a Moderator? |
|
|
In this Forum we discuss the silver of the United Kingdom, as well as British Colonial silver and Old Sheffield Plate. Past British - Irish Sterling topics/threads worth a look. |
|
|
| How to Post Photos | Want to be a Moderator? |
|
 SMP Silver Salon Forums
 British / Irish Sterling
 Help in identifying makers mark on tray
|
 SSFFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: Help in identifying makers mark on tray |
|
stgeorge Posts: 7 |
posted 08-06-2006 08:14 PM
  
[26-1160] I am trying to identify all the hallmarks on a silver tray I recently inherited. From what I've read, both here and on other sites, the lack of a 5th hallmark may mean a London maker. Is that correct? I think I have the hallmarks identified (left to right) as 1st, 1838; 2nd .925 sterling; and the last possibly Victoria? What, if anything, does the No.7 17:12 mean, and does the griffin on the front have any significance. I just love finding out the history of objects (might have something to do with being a retired history teacher?). Thanks for any help! IP: Logged |
|
Dale Posts: 2132 |
posted 08-06-2006 11:18 PM
These appear to be genuine London marks. Others here are far more qualified to help with them. That is one cool griffith. Generally, these are armorials or heraldic devices. They can indicate a family, a residence, a regiment or something else; they tend to be specific. And frequently these are findable in books of heraldry. Looking them up in Peerage guides and Heraldry almanacs tends to be quite interesting, except I always get sidetracked by the many fascinating devices shown. Again someone more knowlegable, and with a longer attentions span, would help. There are many people like that here. As to the No 7 17:12, good question. We have seen several markings of this type here, and don't have a really clear answer. My own guess is that this sort of thing was used in large houses to keep order amongst the silver. The 7 would indicate when it was to be used. This way a large number of pieces would all get equal usage. The number 7 could refer to either July or Saturday. That is my personal inclination which others will dispute. The 17:12 is another matter. One number could refer to the insert size which would fit into the tray. In former ages, food was cooked in a container, frequently graniteware or ceramic, which was then put into the silver tray for serving. The other number could refer to the size of cover/lid that would go over the food to keep it warm. We really don't know. And as these types of marks seem to refer to household inventories, which are inherently idiosyncratic, we probably never will. Please tell us more about your interest in silver. And how this lovely tray came to you. By the way, what does the piece measure both length and width as well as depth? IP: Logged |
|
PhilO Posts: 166 |
posted 08-07-2006 02:43 AM
Your identification of the hallmarks is not quite correct. The "P" is actually for 1770/1771. Then the lion passant for sterling and then the crowned leopard's head for London sterling prior to 1821. Note that there is no duty mark (monarch's head) as this was not introduced until 1784. The last mark is the maker's mark. If you can get a closer picture of the last mark we may be able to identify the maker even from a worn mark as the shape looks as if it might be fairly distinctive. Phil IP: Logged |
|
feniangirl Posts: 36 |
posted 08-07-2006 03:58 AM
The N:7 on the back refers to this piece as being the 7th in a set, usually 12 or 24, although for serving pieces there may have been only 8. If the particular piece had a lid, and based on the shape of yours it may have, it would have a corresponding number. By matching the numbers the pieces would all remain together, as they were made making inventory in large homes easier. As for the other numbers they usually refer to the original weight at the time of manufacture. Thus 27:12 would mean 27 ounces and 12 dwt. These numbers are quite informative some 200+ years later when the items weigh in at less than they started out. We can then see definitive evidence of how much of the silver has been polished away over the past decades of its service. Also, I looked for your crest of the demi-griffin, regardant, az. supporting a flag erect in "Fairbairn's Crests of the Families of Great Britain and Ireland." There is an exact match in Plate 46 #1; however the symbol in the flag is a crescent, which differs from yours - therefore it would represent different families. Sometimes these are extremely difficult, if not impossible to trace back. IP: Logged |
|
vathek Posts: 966 |
posted 08-07-2006 09:08 AM
How many of us would be happy to own one of these, yet hard to believe there may have been 12 or more, probably different sizes, and that this would have only been a small portion of the overall plate in a house. IP: Logged |
|
stgeorge Posts: 7 |
posted 08-07-2006 09:25 AM
Would you believe I have TWO? The other is marked No. 11 27/33 ! The $64,000 question is -- did my sister get the better deal with the Tiffany tray she took or did I. I think I did!! IP: Logged |
|
Clive E Taylor Posts: 450 |
posted 08-07-2006 03:09 PM
Concerning the numbers on these trays , which could well be "scratch weights " put on by the assay office. There is a popular misconception that the difference in weight now from the original scratch weight indicates the wear and tear of years. (Or more rarely, an increase due to later alteration or repair). This is not the main reason for a difference. Items were sent to the assay office BEFORE finishing. Marked, returned to the maker , who then completed the job. Very often an item like a buckle was sent unpierced for assay as the cost of labour involved in piercing was substantial and would lost if the piece was found less than standard and broken. Very often assay marks can be found that have piercing etc right through them. In particular after 1784 buckles were marked on the bridge (the side cheek welded as a flange to each side to hold the pin ). When Eley chapes became popular , they needed several holes to fix them to the bridges including two screw holes per side. The duty mark of George's Head nearly always coincided with one of these holes and was often obliterated, or make it very hard to see. [This message has been edited by Clive E Taylor (edited 08-07-2006).] IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 08-07-2006 05:43 PM
Scratch weights are literally that - scratches. The weight on this plate looks to be engraved. You can comfirm that this figure is the weight, obviously, simply by weighing it, but remember the weight is in troy ounces. To convert (if you do not have a troy scale), take the weight in grams and divide by 1.555, which will give you the weight in pennyweights (1 pwt or dwt = 1.555 gms); there are 20 dwts to a troy ounce. (1 oz. averdupois = 28.35gms, 1 oz troy = 31.1 gms, a 2.75 gm difference). Scratch weights are not found on every piece - if they were applied at the assay office, either they were not applied to all, or some were obliterated in the finishing process. In America, where there were no assay offices, the weight of a piece on completion was recorded by the silversmith in his account book, and often on or under the bottom of the piece as a scratch weight (price was sometimes also scratched on). These scratch weights served a number of purposes: They served as the smith's guarantee that the purchaser got his money's worth (objects were often made from coins or old plate brought in by the buyer to be remade into the new object); they provided an additional means of identification in case of theft; and they documented the original weight (and therefore cost) of the object. Any change in weight from the original provides a measure of how much use an object has had, or an indication that the object might have been altered or repaired. Weights were a factor used in determining the minimum value of silver objects and were listed in estate lists and estate sales (vendues). IP: Logged |
|
stgeorge Posts: 7 |
posted 08-07-2006 06:24 PM
I have taken a couple of new pictures that will hopefully show the last two hallmarks better. The information you all are providing is just fascinating! Thank you so much! IP: Logged |
|
adelapt Posts: 418 |
posted 08-08-2006 12:14 PM
It would be very unusual for an assay office to engrave a weight on an item of silver sent for hallmarking. There would be no need for that, and would take time and effort. It was though not uncommon for service items to bear their weight engraved or 'scratched' on them, as the weight was directly related to their value in money, and they represented a valuable and readily exchangeable asset. IP: Logged |
|
salmoned Posts: 336 |
posted 08-08-2006 04:09 PM
The second to last mark (from the left) is clearly the crowned 'leopard' head indicating London. If only a clearer, closer photo of the final mark was available, the maker might be determined. IP: Logged |
|
stgeorge Posts: 7 |
posted 08-08-2006 04:20 PM
Where can I go to try and find a value for these. They probably need to be insured, don't they? IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 08-08-2006 07:38 PM
We do not give apprisals on these forums. See the SMP appraisal page for guidance. IP: Logged |
|
ahwt Posts: 2377 |
posted 08-08-2006 10:15 PM
If you position the tray so that the light source is over the makers mark instead of the letter P a clearly image may be obtained. Wonderful trays. IP: Logged |
|
stgeorge Posts: 7 |
posted 08-09-2006 08:26 PM
I have gotten the best pictures I can of the last two marks, and any help identifying them would be appreciated -- especially figuring out the maker. Someone said they had a "close match" on the griffin on the front -- can I inquire as to the name? It could be a family name. Also, someone wanted to know the trays dimensions: they are 14" x 10" x 1" deep. Here is the last try for the hallmark pictures. Hope to hear from someone on them! IP: Logged |
|
Dale Posts: 2132 |
posted 08-10-2006 12:05 AM
feniangirl, what is your source concerning the numbers on silver? We have had a number of posts on this topic and could not reach a consensus. Would be great to finally have some genuine data on this subject. (FWIW my guess on rotation of use comes from linens that were marked for this purpose, reasoning by analogy.) Please tell us the family name with the Griffith, not fair to leave us hanging. Does the flag shown have any particular connection to a war or campaign? Or regiment etc? Is it possible that different family members could have had flags devoted to their own wars and regiments? Really don't know but would like to. Thanks for all the information. IP: Logged |
|
stgeorge Posts: 7 |
posted 08-10-2006 01:47 AM
I am leaning toward agreeing with feniangirl that the numbers may refer to weight. Someone wondered how much the tray weighed, and when we weighed it today, it was 27.40 oz. Ours was done on a digital scale. Pretty close to 27:33 as listed on the the tray we weighed, considering the way it would have been weighed in the 1700's! Still anxious to figure out the makers mark! IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 08-10-2006 01:02 PM
In Fairbairn's, only two names are associated with this particular crest, an unusually small number: Barclay and Foot. The descriptions differ only in the colors assigned to various elements; the flag in each is specifically "charged" with a crescent, and so is not the same as the one on the tray. Somewhere among the 1,935 illusstrated crests may be another that matches, but I did not find it. These crests are distributed among 30,000 listed families, so there is much overlap, although many similar ones are distinguished by minor variations that are described in the text for each associated family name, and many family groups with the same name used entirely different crests. Matching one name with a crest that is not an exact match to the description is not necessarily reliable, even though some engravers working only from a description, and with nothing to copy, could generate an honest but inaccurate image. It is also possible that someone not entitled to use a crest would adopt one with some variation and call it his own. Either of the last two scenarios could be expected to occur in the colonies more so than in England itself. [This message has been edited by swarter (edited 08-10-2006).] IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 08-10-2006 01:14 PM
One of the requirements of the forums is that photographs be left for others to see. Please replace the pictures in your first post; one of the moderators with editing privileges in this forum will delete the two posts with replaced photos of the marks - in the future, you can reedit your earlier posts to replace photos witout starting additional posts. Furthermore, if you are unable to produce an enlarged image of a small object like a mark, try photographing through a magnifying glass; it will not be the best image, but it will be usable. IP: Logged |
|
feniangirl Posts: 36 |
posted 08-12-2006 11:58 PM
Sorry for the delay folks, I've been away from the computer for a while. Swarter pretty well handled the questions regarding the crest. In England this is serious business, unlike the United States where people make up or adopt crests and coats of arms. Arms, including crests, are granted by the College of Arms. According to whom ~ "A crest is a specific part of a full achievement of arms: the three-dimensional object placed on top of the helm." "Women may not use crests as they considered a male attribute" "The Court of Chivalry has had jurisdiction over cases of misuse of arms since the 14th century. It is a civil court, with the Earl Marshal as the sole judge from 1521. The best known medieval action was Scrope v Grosvenor (1385-1390), in which Sir Richard le Scrope was held to have a prior claim to the simple arms azure a bend or. The most recent case was Manchester Corporation v Manchester Palace of Varieties (1954), when a theatre was successfully sued for illegal display of the arms belonging to the corporation." Therefore, it is highly unlikely that inaccurate images or the adoption of crests would have occurred in England. Perhaps the image on the flag differs on your crest from the one in the book as a result of cadency. ("Cadency is the use of various devices designed to show a man's position in a family, with the aforementioned basic aim of reserving the entire arms to the head of the family and to differentiate the arms of the rest, who are the cadets, or younger members.") The cadency mark for the second son was a crescent. This is mere speculation on my part. So are any ancestors called Barclay or Foot? The College of Arms "received the charter under which they now operate from Queen Mary and her husband Philip of Spain in 1555, together with the site of the present College of Arms on which then stood Derby Place. This building was the College of Arms until it burnt down in the Great Fire of London in 1666. The present College building dates from the 1670s." If you are serious about identifying the crest on your tray you can take it to the College of Arms or send an illustration, preferably a photograph. They will then quote a fee for trying to identify the arms. The address is: The College of Arms, Dale, regarding the scratch weight reference - it comes mostly from long established silver dealers in England and Ireland, although I did read an article regarding same years ago - just can't remember where. I imagine the dealers have seen enough of both types, engraved and scratched, to know that these numbers correspond to the weight of the piece on which they reside. I have seen scratch weights actually scratched very crudely into the silver and also engraved, as those on the tray. Perhaps how it was done was determined by whether or not the manufacturer had an engraver in house or the pieces were sent out to an engraver. If they were to be sent out, I would think the maker would scratch the weight in to be sure it was returned the same as it was sent out. If engraving was done in house, it only enhances the piece to have the weight engraved and thus would be a sign of quality. This topic might be a very good research project to undertake. If I can locate any specific print references I'll let you know. I have never seen any reference regarding the assay offices applying scratch weights on any piece of silver. As the laws have always been very strict and quite specific with regard to the operation and duties of assay offices in England, Scotland and Ireland I would then think that every piece of silver would have had to have scratch marks. While scratch marks are frequently seen, they more often not seen. The purpose of the assay was to guarantee the fineness of the silver or gold used, that the maker had a registered mark and that no base metal or excess of solder was incorporated into an item. I can't imagine they would have had the time to individually scratch/engrave a weight on each piece of silver. I feel this is supported by Jackson's comment, Vathek, I know what you mean about "hard to believe there may have been 12 or more, probably different sizes, and that this would have only been a small portion of the overall plate in a house." I recently saw a dozen silver Geo III 9.5" plates sell at auction and they were numbered 62-72!!! Can you imagine the silver in that house? And what about the size of the table... stgeorge, sorry, still can't see the maker's mark. If you can't get a photo through a magnifying glass or loupe, perhaps you could try to do a rubbing of it using graphite and white paper, then take a photo of that. (Of course the clarity will depend on how worn the mark is). BTW, regarding your $64,000 question about who got the better deal you or your sister - in my opinion, you did, especially if you have two! The Tiffany collectors might disagree. Now aren't you all glad I was away from my computer for a while? IP: Logged |
All times are ET | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
|
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a
|
1. Public Silver Forums (open Free membership) - anyone with a valid e-mail address may register. Once you have received your Silver Salon Forum password, and then if you abide by the Silver Salon Forum Guidelines, you may start a thread or post a reply in the New Members' Forum. New Members who show a continued willingness to participate, to completely read and abide by the Guidelines will be allowed to post to the Member Public Forums. 2. Private Silver Salon Forums (invitational or $ donation membership) - The Private Silver Salon Forums require registration and special authorization to view, search, start a thread or to post a reply. Special authorization can be obtained in one of several ways: by Invitation; Annual $ Donation; or via Special Limited Membership. For more details click here (under development). 3. Administrative/Special Private Forums (special membership required) - These forums are reserved for special subjects or administrative discussion. These forums are not open to the public and require special authorization to view or post. |
|
copyright © 1993 - 2022
SM Publications
All Rights Reserved. Legal & Privacy Notices |
