Page 1 of 1
My knowledge of Early Sheffield is a little week No Marks
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:39 am
by MBASE213
Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 11:31 am
by paulh
Looks like O.S.P. to me. The marks are not the makers marks. They appear to have been scratched in rather than punched. From the style I would date it somewhere around 1810-20.
Paul.
Thanks
Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2007 10:37 pm
by MBASE213
Thanks Paul, I'm not sure what the initial are. I"ve heard 2 or three different opinions. But either case, I don't think that's going to lead me to the manufacture. Correct me if I'm wrong, but back in that era, they didn't require or record a lot of the silversmiths work. Some would do it if they wanted notority, but others just put out product.
Thanks again,
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:32 am
by paulh
The marking of O.S.P. was never specifically regulated. It was more a case of what was permitted rather than what was required. A Parliamentary Act of 1784 said that materials plated to resemble silver made within 100 miles of Sheffield were permitted to be marked with certain marks, which should contain the name of the manufacturer together with any symbol which did not resemble a silver mark used by any of the assay offices. (Such as the Sheffield Crown).
These marks were registered with the Sheffield Assay Office from 1784 the first one being W. Green & co registered on the 8th of September. But having said all that, it was still not compulsary (and it still isn’t) to mark silver plated wares. There must be a conflict of interests here, as with your kettle. If I had made a piece that good I would want people to know that it was me that made it. However, the customers would probably prefer no markings, so that the O.S.P. would be easier to pass off as solid silver.
Paul.
Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:24 am
by MBASE213
Makes sense. especially for those social climbers that couldn't afford the solid silver. Thanks for the info on O.S.P. I wasn't aware of it's significance.
Mark