www.925-1000.com

Please help me in identifying the maker's mark on this Sterling Silver Pitcher (4" TALL). As you can see from the other marks. It's British Silver, London in 1783. I've looked on all websites I can find to identify the "Hd" and I can't find anything even close.

Please check out the photos and let me know what you think.

Thanks!

http://gallery.me.com/appleeyephoto/100033
.

Hi,
The letters on your creamer are HB, give those a try here -> http://www.925-1000.com/dlLondon2.html#M

Regards, Tom
.

Are you sure? I realize in the close-up photo it's a bit of a blur, but look at the photo of all four marks. It's a lowercase d. I've tried looking at it to see either a rubbed off uppercase B or see how it could be a backwards b, but it isn't. It's clearly a lowercase "d."
.

Hi,
Yes, I am sure it is the HB mark registered to Hester Bateman, the right side is somewhat rubbed, but it is her mark. Even were the second letter completely unreadable, the "H" is distinctive to Hester's mark alone.
Regards, Tom
.

Thanks Tom. Can you direct me to a version of her mark that looks like mine? I appreciate the time you've been taking to respond to me. Thanks again.
.

Hi,
Unfortunately, I can't direct you to a source that is likely to satisfy you. To find a mark that looks exactly like yours is akin to finding a needle in a haystack. Of the fifteen or so images I have of Hester Bateman's mark, the two clearest are at http://www.925-1000.com/dlLondon2.html#M

There are some underlying factors in the British marking system and the life of a piece of silver that have to be taken into consideration when evaluating a maker's mark.

Firstly, the marks are hand stamped, when the die is struck with the hammer the pressure is rarely, if ever, perfectly dead center, so the mark is usually more well defined more towards one edge, or corner, than another.

Secondly, the pieces were marked in an unfinished state before being sent to the assay office for hallmarking, on their return they were then given their final polishing, an abrasive process that often has negative effect on the clarity of the mark impressions.

Thirdly, over the lifespan of a maker's mark diestamp, it evolves. Each instance of use wears it down, so an impression from a stamp used in 1780 will be markedly different from the impression the same diestamp leaves in 1788, how different depends on the use it has had and the care taken of it.

Finally, in the 220 odd years since the creation of your piece, it has been polished 50, 100, 200 or more times. Each time the further abrasion of polishing has had a deleterious effect on the maker's mark, changing it even more.

What this all boils down to is that even though the same maker's diestamp may have been used over its lifespan to mark 1000 or 5000 pieces, every one of the impressions it made is truly unique and unlike any other. This is one of the things that make researching silver marks far more interesting then the pastime may seem at face value.

Hope this helps and BTW, I'll eat my hat (an acquired taste, but I'm beginning to get used to it) if that is not a Hester Bateman mark.

Regards, Tom

.

There is no doubt that it is Hester Bateman..... the only mark that may really be confused with it is Henry Baileys... but there are distinct differences. Your hat can protect your head for a bit longer!!!!!
Best wishes, Mike.
.