www.925-1000.com

About ten years there was a warning that a large number of silver articles bearing eighteenth century English hallmarks were coming from Thailand - and were of very good quality. The main problem with them, I was told , was that unlike most forgers someone with real knowledge of marks and styles was...

Interesting case. 20 supposedly respectable citizens of standing gathered together to discuss their illegal avoidance of compulsory assay and payment of the plate duty as late as 1821! I know duty dodging was rife in the middle of the previous century - but obviously common practise in the Regency. ...

Further information ""At the time [c1775] of my first connection with him [Harrison] he was about 58 years of age [so born around 1717 ,probaby free around 1738]. He had risen from the humblest ranks of life by his industry and sobriety; had been introduced into the business and house wher...

HARRISON, William I (3158-9) Many people will have tongs or nips by this maker and the following quotes from an ex-apprentice, William Winterbotham. may be of interest Of Harrisons wife (who is presumed to be the woman described as the mistress of the house ) “vulgar in her manners and language, ba...

The marking of the piece by the London Assay Office indicates that it was of at least sterling standard. The current absence of other , perhaps Russian assay marks, does not preclude the piece being originally marked by the actual maker. The new sponsor LC may well have removed them when preparing i...

As I understand it the F for "foreign" was only used from 1867 to early 1904 so I believe your dateletter C is for 1898/1899 not 1918. The only other C in that period is 1878/79 but the piece would then still carry Victoria's head as a duty mark, and the style seems more 1900 ish. Incident...

The IS marks are complicated by several bucklemakers marks, some in Grimwade in the bucklemaker section , some unrecorded. Also some may be SI of course. Another problem is IS over IB. This can be either James Stamp and John Baker or James Sutton and James Bult. Grimwade gives the former as with pel...

Very brief tutorial on examining silver. Stage 1 Examine piece and decide what the item is. If say a cigarette lighter than a 20th century date can be presumed. If sugar tongs than any date from around 1700 to modern. Determine likely date of item from style. In the case of the sugar tongs then an a...

It is very important to realise that the "makers mark" is actually a "sponsors mark" (the current legal term I think) . From the eighteenth century onwards the maker and the sponsor got further and furthur apart. In this case 122 Great Russell Street, Bloomsbury indicates that th...

Many thanks Miles
A Happy Christmas to All
.

The whole matter of the IL punch is, like assorted GB's fraught. There are too many virrually identical registered punches, let alone the retailers who overstruck , and those makers who did not bother at times I would give John Lias as the highest probable with a score of 75%, but would not give it ...

Unlikely to be William Bruford. He was, I believe purely a retailer (they as "Brufords" are still retailers in Eastbourne) He never actually made anything, it was all made by other silversmith's but assayed under Brufords sponsorship.If Cox is the retailer, the Bruford would not be the spo...

Maker is almost certainly Dorothy LANGLANDS, the widow of John LANGLANDS II whose business she continued after his death in 1804. Dorothy died in 1845, aged 76, although she had ceased business as a silversmith and retailer around 1814 when her last assays were made. I think you can confidently date...

The answer is I suspect a misprint in Grimwade. See page 363 of the 3rd Edition under GOLDSMITHS MARKS 1773 - 1837. This gives a mark of HO for, wait for it , William Henry Osbourne of 122 Great Russell Street, Bloomsbury, entered 7th December 1821 . I am quite sure that an enquiry to Goldsmiths Hal...

The Lion Passant looks as if it could be provincial.
Silly bit of advise - if baffled I always turn makers marks the other way up - W then becomes M for instance. This one looks equally odd when inverted but ......
Clive
.

Trev - I am very interested to hear you checking Master wtih their apprentices - do you have a data base of these or is there an online source of this information ?
If is it one you've compiled I have a list of silversmith wills I could swap it for !
Clive
.

The Henry Bickerton spoon at Phillips could either be c1780 and not by Bickerton, or Henry Bickerton and c1760. Henry died in 1765, at age of 41. His will was dated 20th February 1765 and proved in PCC 14th October 1765, by Ann Bickerton, his widow, John Bickerton his brother (born 1716 ) and his fr...

Yes - Willmore and Alston registered in late 1773 wheeas Thomas Willmore's sole mark was 1785 - when the duty mark was in force. So Thomas Willmore not really a contender - unless he marked some on a separate account.
The plot thickens.
Yeth !

Thanks - I've never seen the mark. Very rare as his actual Newcastle assayed production was low - less than 500 oz- so these spoons are quite a high proportion of his work ! Not unusual for Newcastle silversmiths - I have a buckle by Patrick Beatch which probably similarly represents about 1% of his...

Mike
I hope you got the Grimwade - it has now gone up to a staggering £150 new on Amazon
.