posted 02-03-2016 01:46 PM            

It was not long before new silver flatware in the French style was being ordered, what we now call the Trefid pattern.

The picture shows 3 London made Trefids. From the top by John King 1666, Lawrence Coles 1669 and Coles again 1690.The earliest known London made Trefid was hallmarked in 1662. It was by the same maker as the 1666 spoon above and similar to it in its detail. By 1666 the Trefid had largely replaced the Puritan as the pattern of choice in London. Key differences, in addition to the Trefid stem end, were the rattail on the bowl and a step-up between bowl and stem:

The leopard’s head hallmark was moved to the back of the stem because striking it in the bowl might have damaged the rattail. And note that all three spoons have a stem with parallel sides, only widening at the top for the Trefid terminal.

Of course, the provinces were influenced by the new London fashions, albeit with a bit of a time lag, but that does not mean they were followed slavishly as these examples from South West England show.

The top spoon is a Puritan. The exaggerated widening of its stem and its engraved decoration are typical of Barnstaple, though not necessarily restricted to that town. The inscription on the back of its bowl incudes the pricked date 1673. Similar spoons are generally dated between 1660 and 1670.

The next two spoons are what I would call transitional Trefids because they retain so many features of the Puritan. The one in the middle has just an Exeter town mark in the bowl. Its inscription includes the date 1685, but I have seen a similar spoon, similarly decorated, that was pricked 1669.

The bottom spoon is marked with WL conjoined, probably for William Lewis of Wincanton, in the bowl and thrice on the stem. It has pricked initials but no date. I have it down as c.1670.

I think it is fairly clear just from the pictures that, apart from their Trefid stem ends, these two spoons have more in common with the Barnstaple type Puritan than they do with London Trefids. No rattail (so marks in the bowl), provincial looking stem decoration, no step-up from bowl to stem.

You might think this was just because some provincial spoonmakers had not invested in the tools they would need for a proper Trefid, such as a die for the rattail. However, the evidence suggests that the Trefid without rattail was a regional variant that persisted in popularity for the rest of the century alongside “proper” Trefids in the London style. I’ll produce some supporting evidence in a later post when I next find a moment or two.

posted 02-16-2016 01:24 PM            

Asheland: Collecting these older pieces can indeed get expensive. I try to avoid those where the price is so astronomic that one would feel obliged to hire an armed guard to escort them to and from a bank vault. To put it differently, if I find myself hoping my wife doesn’t ask what I paid, I know I have paid too much as far as family priorities are concerned, even if the market has determined it was the going rate.

AHWT: And meanwhile, when I look at your various posts I find myself regretting that I haven’t given more attention to hollow ware. I recall years ago stopping at three cream jugs, for example, on the basis that we wouldn’t use any more or want a display cabinet stuffed with cream jugs. Much the same for other types of hollow ware. Why didn’t I think of cups and beakers as items where multiple examples could be useful as well as attractive? But there you are. I concentrated on flatware, initially because it was affordable and easy to store. As my interest moved backwards in time the price advantage was somewhat eroded but availability came to the fore. Flatware survives in greater quantity than hollow ware.

Now to try and round off my little essay on transitional trefids. I hope I haven’t given the impression that the London styles did not reach the South West. They did. Herewith two examples of so-called laceback trefids, a variant that appeared in London around the mid 1670s and not too much later than that in the provinces.

The spoon on the left is by Robert King, London, 1678. The provincial example on the right is unmarked but a spoon by Gabriel Felling of Bruton has been noted with its decoration from the same die. The date 1689, pricked on its stem, is the likely date of manufacture.

Provincial transitional trefids continued to be made alongside such more standard patterns, sometimes plain and sometimes with engraved decoration quite unlike that on any London spoon.
The tulip like decoration is on a spoon marked X (presumably for Exeter) in the bowl and on the stem. The other is on a spoon marked with a flower head in a dotted circle (unattributed), again in the bowl and on the stem. They both probably date from around the 1680s.

Finally, a couple of examples without any stem decoration.


The top spoon is by John Avery of Exeter, maker’s mark only. He was only made free in 1689 so it is reasonable to date this spoon to the 1690s. incidentally, by now there are only stem marks and no bowl mark on either of these spoons.

The lower spoon is by Thomas Foote (maker’s mark only). Its inscription includes the date 1694. Foote became a freeman of Exeter in 1697 but had probably earlier completed an apprenticeship in Southampton. Either this spoon was made in Southampton or he was making and marking spoons in Exeter before he became a freeman there.

The lower spoon is also a rare example of an engraved rattail. It has a semicircular drop rather than the normal “v” heel of transitional trefids. This has been a feature of every engraved rattail I have seen. The combination is a distinct variation indicating that the engraved rattail was intended from the outset rather than a decorative afterthought.

The dates of these last two spoons support my thesis that the transitional trefid was a popular local form from the late 1660s through to the end of the century