London silver 1691?

PHOTOS REQUIRED - marks + item
emilgaigns
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:32 am

London silver 1691?

Postby emilgaigns » Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:06 am

Hello. Can someone help me identifying these hallmarks?

I think it is William&Mary period silver.

Seems like a fruit basket , date looks like 1691, but I couldnt find the makers mark.

Thanks


Image

Image

emilgaigns
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:32 am

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby emilgaigns » Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:12 am

Image

MGArgent
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:25 pm

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby MGArgent » Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:26 am

Hi,

Sorry I can't help with the maker's mark but have you considered this might be 1682? To me, this date mark looks similar to a partial "e"

Image

MGArgent
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:25 pm

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby MGArgent » Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:29 am

One more possibility would be 1684.

Image

MGArgent
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:25 pm

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby MGArgent » Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:34 am

The maker appears to be Samuel Hood.

Image

AG2012
contributor
Posts: 3942
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 9:47 am

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby AG2012 » Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:35 am

Hi,
Date letter looks like g for 1684 and Samuel Hood was registered a decade later.
Too good to be true.
Regards

MGArgent
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:25 pm

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby MGArgent » Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:37 am

Sorry for so many replies on this thread, I think next time I will take a few minutes longer to research before posting!

My final opinion on the date mark is London 1695.

Image

emilgaigns
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:32 am

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby emilgaigns » Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:58 am

You are right. Seems more like 1695. Hallmark is definitely Samuel Hood.


AG2012 why do you say it is too good to be true?

MGArgent
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:25 pm

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby MGArgent » Mon Jun 29, 2020 12:10 pm

When a date mark is inconsistent with a maker's registration date, it is often a red flag for forgery. Since I had originally identified the date mark erroneously as 1684 and noting that Samuel Hood wasn't registered until 1694, the inconsistency would indicate the item could be a forgery.

Now knowing that the date mark is actually 1695, the date aligns with Samuel Hoods registration and shouldn't raise any concerns.

emilgaigns
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:32 am

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby emilgaigns » Mon Jun 29, 2020 12:17 pm

I understand.

I forgot to mention the dimensions.

Base is 13cm diameter, upper part is 20cm in diameter.

silvermakersmarks
co-admin
Posts: 1147
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 9:22 am
Location: Hertfordshire, UK
Contact:

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby silvermakersmarks » Mon Jun 29, 2020 3:20 pm

In fact we do not know when Hood's mark was registered as there are no extant records available for pre-1697 registrations. The dates "1694..1695" quoted in the image above, taken from my web site, are meant to indicate dates for which I have seen the mark as I explain on the site's home page.

I am also sure the date letter is "s" for 1695.

Phil

MGArgent
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:25 pm

Re: London silver 1691?

Postby MGArgent » Mon Jun 29, 2020 3:50 pm

Apologies for using images without adding references above. The images I posted are from the http://www.silvermakersmarks.co.uk website.

Maker's mark: https://www.silvermakersmarks.co.uk/Makers/London-SD-SI.html#SH

Date marks:
https://www.silvermakersmarks.co.uk/Dates/London/Cycle%201678-1696.html


Return to “London Hallmarks”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests