Posts: 966
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-18-2009 01:19 PM            

---

[01-2735]

This spoon is by Solomon Hougham, 1797. I thought the drop on it was curious as it's barely there. I know it's not from wear as the scratch weight is still clearly visible. I also find the pronounced downturn unusual, but it seems intentional as it's evenly done and I see no signs of stress marks.

Any thoughts appreciated.

IP: Logged

Posts: 602
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 05-18-2009 03:10 PM            

---

Congratulations on a nice find.

I will not swear to it but I doubt that the scratch weight is original. Possibly something was done to it and weight was recorded at that time.

Keep in mind that I am perfect and have never made a mistake. If you believe that then have I got some nice swampland to sell you. If you find out be sure to let us know or perhaps someone here will give a good answer.

IP: Logged

Posts: 966
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-18-2009 03:59 PM            

---

You may be right about the scratch weight, probably no way to ever know for sure.

IP: Logged

Posts: 1652
Registered: Mar 2003

posted 05-18-2009 04:47 PM            

---

I think the clarity of the hallmarks are a more reliable indication of lack of wear, but then all that they mean (or the scratchweight if it is indeed from about the same time as the manufacture) is that there has been minimal wear to that particular part of the handle. Spoons are used for stirring or scooping and that is done mainly by the business end - the bowl. If this spoon were used for scooping something somewhat abrasive for many years one would expect there to be heavy wear to the bowl area and perhaps not so much to the handle.

The downturned end does look to be straight across and it could be the way it was made, but I can't help but think an equal or perhaps even more likely explanation is that the end was used to pry something long ago and this is just a bend. It could be either. Has anyone ever seen any other examples of spoons by this maker and did he incorporate such a bend as a part of his design in his other work?

IP: Logged

Posts: 2920
Registered: May 2003

posted 05-18-2009 06:57 PM            

---

Looks to me like wear on the heel of the bowl, and I agree that the bend is probably not the original configuration.

Also I do not think it ever was the practice for a smith to put a scratch weight on a spoon - it is customary only to put it in a spot normally unseen on the bottom of a hollowware piece where it would not be observed while being handled in normal use. There is no place to hide such a mark on a spoon.

[This message has been edited by swarter (edited 05-18-2009).]

IP: Logged

Posts: 798
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 05-18-2009 07:02 PM            

---

I only have one spoon by Solomon Hougham and it doesn't feature such a pronounced downturn to the stem end. Judging purely by the photo I'd be inclined to think the down turn is the result of some later accident or abuse. However, hand forged spoons do vary in their profile with some having more exagerated features than others so this could well be the original shape.

I quite often come across spoons where the greatest sign of wear is to any decoration on the part of the bowl that makes contact with the table or the bottom of the storage, as in the case of the long drop on this spoon. I think it simply means the spoon has been moved around more frequently (for cleaning, counting or whatever) than it has actually been subjected to heavy use.

IP: Logged

Posts: 1629
Registered: Nov 99

posted 05-18-2009 07:40 PM            

---

Is it possible that the weight of the silver lost because of wear on the drop is just not enough to cause a noticeable change in the scratch weight?

IP: Logged

Posts: 798
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 05-18-2009 07:58 PM            

---

Swarter is right that scratch weights on spoons are unusual. I don't think scratch weights were normally applied by the original silversmith. I may be wrong, but my assumption is that they tended to get added for inventory purposes or sometimes when an item was pawned or passed through a shop as a second-hand item, i.e. they do not necessarily record the original weight when brand new.

IP: Logged

Posts: 1629
Registered: Nov 99

posted 05-18-2009 08:26 PM            

---

Scratch weight is the sort of thing I could imagine a customer requiring of a maker for the sake of control of his "money." It makes even more sense that it was done later though for inventory and for tax assessment.

By the way mid nineteenth century Tennessee and likely other states did not tax silver teaspoons and tablespoons, so holding silver in that form would be a tax free asset.

IP: Logged

Posts: 966
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-19-2009 02:44 PM            

---

I'm uploading 2 more pics. One shows the lip of the bowl still intact with no wear and the other pic the other side of the bend at the handle end. There is a notable lack of any 'trauma' here which I would expect if a soft silver spoon were used to open or attempt to pry something. To exert enough force to bend the end would certainly leave nicks and gouges in the metal but the surface wear is completely even.

IP: Logged

Posts: 798
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 05-19-2009 07:38 PM            

---

Yes. It does look as if the curve at the stem end was intentional rather than accidental.

The drop will never have been very heavy and, although the bowl tip is still in good nick, it looks to me as if there is some wear to the decoration at the top of the stem which I would have thought consistent with what I have said about wear to the drop: a spoon that has been regularly handled and cleaned but not subjected to heavy use.

Anyhow, a nice item to have. I always think there is more pleasure from a piece that promotes a bit of speculation and discussion.

Incidentaly, you probably already know this, but the duty mark on your spoon is also of interest. This cusped duty mark came into use part way through the assay year on 6 July 1797 to mark an increase in the level of duty charged and remained in use until 28 May 1798 after which the date letter changed and the duty mark reverted to its normal oval outline.

[This message has been edited by agphile (edited 05-19-2009).]

IP: Logged

Posts: 966
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-20-2009 08:11 AM            

---

Agphile: I didn't know that about the duty mark. That's the great thing about collecting silver is that there is always something else to know. thanks.
p.s. I do notice that the bent tip does suggest resting it on the lip of a bowl or some other vessel.

[This message has been edited by vathek (edited 05-20-2009).]

IP: Logged

Posts: 798
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 05-21-2009 06:27 AM            

---

There's a pair of 1796 SH tablespoons on the .co.uk version of that auction site. The pictures aren't ideal but it looks to me as if they too may have a fairly pronounced downturn to the stem end. If so it may just be a peculiarity of this maker at around this date. My example without the same downturn is a slightly later teaspoon of 1801.

However, as you say, it may have a practical value in preventing spoon handles from slipping into a bowl or even (less likely) making the spoons easier to pick up for somebody with arthritic fingers.

IP: Logged

Posts: 966
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-21-2009 06:56 AM            

---

Couldn't find those Agphile but did find some other examples which appear to have the same configuration, although I couldn't find any pics from the edge of the spoon.

IP: Logged

Posts: 798
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 05-25-2009 11:36 AM            

---

The seller was only prepared to post within the UK so perhaps the lot would not have got through to an American site?

An afterthought about the scratch weight on this spoon. Is this the set of symbols scratched alongside the lion passant on the back of the stem? I ask because I cannot resolve them as representing a weight. Of course, it may be my eyes or my screen to blame. However, they look to me more like the code a shopkeeper in England might have used when the spoon was up for sale second hand. For example the L/- could be a price code in shillings and pence (or even pounds and shillings) reminding the shopkeeper what he had paid for it or what the minimum selling price was while not giving the information away to a potential customer..

IP: Logged

Posts: 966
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-25-2009 01:25 PM            

---

Interesting thoughts Agphile. As near as I can make them out the scratching on the back reads 2 underlined, under that what looks like P081 (which I took to be pennyweight, but it doesn't come out right) and then what I took to be a -1- but may be an L 1-.

IP: Logged

Posts: 798
Registered: Apr 2008

posted 05-25-2009 03:52 PM            

---

I can't prove it but this makes me more sure that these are a shopkeeper's (or pawnbroker's) code. I would interpret the 2 as meaning there was a pair of spoons, the next bit as some sort of stock reference number and the last bit as the price. In pre-decimal England two pounds twelve shillings and sixpence was written as (£) 2/12/6 and twelve shillings and sixpence was written as 12/6. 12 shillings exact would have been 12/-. This is why I read the last bit as L/- and took it to represent a price.

IP: Logged

All times are ET