Page 1 of 1
tea pot 1800 William bayley
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 5:52 pm
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 6:10 pm
No one can tell you if it is silver or not from looking at photos. What I can see is that the marks look correct and the piece appears to be hand made and of the proper period.
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 6:22 pm
My question is whether even the silver foil can remove it may is sterling silver?
thank you and kind regards
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:01 am
I believe your question is in regards to whether your item is sterling silver? the answer is yes (at least according to the guarantee mark which is the lion). See here: http://www.925-1000.com/british_marks.html
All the marks seem to be authentic for the maker and time period that you mentioned, crongratulations! nice piece.
Best regards- byron
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:21 am
Agree with Tom's comments.
It must be remembered that silver is a soft, ductile metal and any harder, sharp object that strikes the surface, can produce a shaved, lifting effect, giving the appearance of, perhaps, a coating.
As Byron remarked, the marks do look authentic, but I'm not at all sure of your attribution to William Bayley, it is a difficult one and it would be good to hear the thoughts of other members.
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:01 am
Maybe William Bennett, though Grimwade says he chiefly made trays and salvers.
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:46 am
Arthur Grimwade's book on London Goldsmiths (page 435) notes the Parliamentary Report of 1773 records Bayley as a bucklemaker. Also that Heal records Bayley active only until 1783. There's nothing conclusive in either of these points but it seems that Bayley's career might not have included teapot making and over before 1800.
As Miles says Grimwade records William Bennett as principally a tray and salver maker. In my personal records however I've noted Bennett having been attributed as making sauce tureens and a coffee pot.
Again from my records it seems the only other candidate is a William Bryceson. Grimwade records him as a registered smallworker but I've seen a jug attributed to him.
The attributions may not be wholly accurate but, on balance, Bennett seems the more likely candidate for maker.
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:33 pm
Another point to bear in mind is the size of the mark. Grimwade usually notes when marks are submitted in more than one size. With this in mind I did wonder if Wilkes Booth (Grimwade 3027) might be a candidate. Although entered as a snuffermaker, he was in business some years, so who knows what skills he may have aquired over time, but my reasoning is really only based on the size of the mark when compared with the Hallmarks that would have used on something the size of a teapot.
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 5:13 pm
thank you, you are fantastic an with a lot of experience.
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:14 am
Can I suggest you take a look at this:-[url]http://www.silvercollection.it/englishsilvermarksXW3.html
It suggests that William Bayley and William Bennett are both attributed to the same mark[/url]