.
Apostle spoons mystery
Apostle spoons mystery
Hi I am hoping the experts can help me date this apostle spoon, but the marks are in a poor state. Could it be a late stuart piece or a georgian one, or a modern copy. And of course if someone can decipher the maker - you're brilliant. Weighs about 31 grams (a troy ounce) and measures 14cm (about 5 inches). The maker looks like WC or WG - or certainly W and a letter that curves. Lion passant look guardent so presume either 1680 - 1697 or 1720 - 1784 (no duty mark). Date letter looks like a capital I or small l, but have pictured it from the other side so may have a cross piece at the top - a small t?. The leopards head is not helpful. Have ordered the marks as they appear from the base of the spoon. The last pic may or may not be a mark on the bowl of the spoon. Even if the marks are not decipherable, perhaps if anyone can asses it stylistically and give it a rough period - it would be appreciated. Hope I haven't burdened your system with too many pics - regards Frank.
.
.
I am afraid this is a made-up spoon incorporating the stem from a Georgian spoon. It is not even an accurate copy of an in-period apostle spoon. The finial looks a bit like a seal-top (itself not original to the stem) with an apostle stuck on top of it. I would guess it was all put together in the 19th century as I would expect later attempts to be more knowledgeable about spoon forms. Any apostle spoon appearing to be from the 18th century is extremely unlikely to be genuine.
If it is any consolation, I own one of these made up spoons, fakes in effect, myself. An incautious purchase on the basis of a blurry photo when I thought I was being clever. I have kept it because it seems part of the history of spoon making, collecting, and then faking to oblige the collectors or those who wanted the appearance of owning a bit of history..
.
If it is any consolation, I own one of these made up spoons, fakes in effect, myself. An incautious purchase on the basis of a blurry photo when I thought I was being clever. I have kept it because it seems part of the history of spoon making, collecting, and then faking to oblige the collectors or those who wanted the appearance of owning a bit of history..
.
Many thanks - agphile - appreciate your knowledge.
Must admit thought the spoon to be curious, especially the front of the stem, but not having felt or seen an original Stuart spoon - we see so little early silver here in South Africa - wasn't sure. I can see why the georgians weren't big on apostle spoons, who would be when you have the elegant simplicity and wonderful functionality of a well made Hanoverian spoon. Another good spoon ruined. I too shall keep the spoon as a historical oddity. The Victorian fake of the Stuart original using a Georgian spoon - or even worse - spoons.
If you have the time, would appreciate it if you could post a pic of your spoon and maybe point out the stylistic oddities.
Regards Frank
.
Must admit thought the spoon to be curious, especially the front of the stem, but not having felt or seen an original Stuart spoon - we see so little early silver here in South Africa - wasn't sure. I can see why the georgians weren't big on apostle spoons, who would be when you have the elegant simplicity and wonderful functionality of a well made Hanoverian spoon. Another good spoon ruined. I too shall keep the spoon as a historical oddity. The Victorian fake of the Stuart original using a Georgian spoon - or even worse - spoons.
If you have the time, would appreciate it if you could post a pic of your spoon and maybe point out the stylistic oddities.
Regards Frank
.
My fake Apostle is less fun than yours. Pictures and a bit of a description can be found at the end of the following thread in another forum:
http://www.smpub.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000124.html
It is probably easier to explain the give-aways on yours. The first point is that any apostle spoon with 18th century marks is almost certainly a fake — and I slip in the almost because of the remote possibility that there is an exception somewhere to prove the rule.
17th century London spoons of this form have the leopard’s head mark in their bowls. It only moved to the back of the stem on trefid spoons with the advent of the rattail (to avoid distorting the rattail when stamping the mark) but even then was still punched in the bowl on spoons of earlier forms such as puritans or apostles that continued to be made alongside trefids for a while. A leopard’s head on the stem is therefore the first danger sign. The fakes will often have an unreadable mark in the bowl — a spurious addition to try and create verisimilitude.
As you say, the decoration on the front of your stem is not something found on spoons of the period which typically have plain stems. There are very rare examples of provincial spoons with figural finials and engraved decoration on the stem and the back of the bowl but they look nothing like yours.
The back of the bowl will normally have a short, sharp “v” shaped drop, formed by hammering on the edge of the anvil (this is sometimes missing on early examples). Your spoon has a rather longer drop or rudimentary rattail. I suspect this may have been used to solder a separately made bowl to the stem but cannot really judge from a photograph.
I could grind on about details of proportions, bowl shape and stem cross section but it is actually the finial of your spoon that is the most obvious give-away. You just don’t get an apostle standing on a wide pediment that is shaped like the finial of a seal-top spoon. A spoon of the period would have one or the other but not both. It is this that also makes me describe your spoon as more fun than mine. I could be tempted to think yours is the result of somebody having a bit of enjoyment putting together an imaginative “historicist” assembly of parts rather than the sort of fake deliberately meant to deceive — but perhaps that is being too charitable to the perpetrator.
Most of the fakes on the market (I have seen a few recently on internet auctions) were made by reshaping an 18th century spoon in order to have old marks on the stem and adding a finial that may sometimes have been cast from a genuine original.
I hope this is some help and that it doesn’t read as if I am being disparaging. I think one needs to see and handle a fair number of examples to get a feel for what is right and what is wrong. As you say, there will be limited opportunities for this in S Africa when it comes to spoons of this period.
David
.
http://www.smpub.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000124.html
It is probably easier to explain the give-aways on yours. The first point is that any apostle spoon with 18th century marks is almost certainly a fake — and I slip in the almost because of the remote possibility that there is an exception somewhere to prove the rule.
17th century London spoons of this form have the leopard’s head mark in their bowls. It only moved to the back of the stem on trefid spoons with the advent of the rattail (to avoid distorting the rattail when stamping the mark) but even then was still punched in the bowl on spoons of earlier forms such as puritans or apostles that continued to be made alongside trefids for a while. A leopard’s head on the stem is therefore the first danger sign. The fakes will often have an unreadable mark in the bowl — a spurious addition to try and create verisimilitude.
As you say, the decoration on the front of your stem is not something found on spoons of the period which typically have plain stems. There are very rare examples of provincial spoons with figural finials and engraved decoration on the stem and the back of the bowl but they look nothing like yours.
The back of the bowl will normally have a short, sharp “v” shaped drop, formed by hammering on the edge of the anvil (this is sometimes missing on early examples). Your spoon has a rather longer drop or rudimentary rattail. I suspect this may have been used to solder a separately made bowl to the stem but cannot really judge from a photograph.
I could grind on about details of proportions, bowl shape and stem cross section but it is actually the finial of your spoon that is the most obvious give-away. You just don’t get an apostle standing on a wide pediment that is shaped like the finial of a seal-top spoon. A spoon of the period would have one or the other but not both. It is this that also makes me describe your spoon as more fun than mine. I could be tempted to think yours is the result of somebody having a bit of enjoyment putting together an imaginative “historicist” assembly of parts rather than the sort of fake deliberately meant to deceive — but perhaps that is being too charitable to the perpetrator.
Most of the fakes on the market (I have seen a few recently on internet auctions) were made by reshaping an 18th century spoon in order to have old marks on the stem and adding a finial that may sometimes have been cast from a genuine original.
I hope this is some help and that it doesn’t read as if I am being disparaging. I think one needs to see and handle a fair number of examples to get a feel for what is right and what is wrong. As you say, there will be limited opportunities for this in S Africa when it comes to spoons of this period.
David
.
I realise that my comments in my last post would have made easier reading with an illustration.
This picture shows a seal top spoon and an apostle spoon, both provincial and from c.1630-1640, together with the short “v” heel that is found on 17th century spoons of this form. I hope it might clarify what I was trying to say.
.
This picture shows a seal top spoon and an apostle spoon, both provincial and from c.1630-1640, together with the short “v” heel that is found on 17th century spoons of this form. I hope it might clarify what I was trying to say.
.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests