I found the same mark in Jackson's who recorded it being found on a marrow scoop. I'd be grateful if anyone knows why Archer changed his mark to this design which is, as far as I know, unlike any other British maker's mark.
Miles
.
Rare Andrew Archer Mark
Rare Andrew Archer Mark
I bought this marrow scoop yesterday in the hopes that the unusual mark (A in a wreath below a crown) would turn out to be something quite rare. After scanning through Jackson's and Tardy's I gave up and directed my efforts to identifying another spoon. I opened Grimwades, and there was my mark: no.1 Andrew Archer.
I found the same mark in Jackson's who recorded it being found on a marrow scoop. I'd be grateful if anyone knows why Archer changed his mark to this design which is, as far as I know, unlike any other British maker's mark.
Miles
.
I found the same mark in Jackson's who recorded it being found on a marrow scoop. I'd be grateful if anyone knows why Archer changed his mark to this design which is, as far as I know, unlike any other British maker's mark.
Miles
.
Hi Miles,
Andrew Archer, as I'm sure you know, entered this mark on the 11th August 1720. This new mark was entered because he wished to work with the restored Sterling standard, his old mark 'AR' registered on the 27th October 1703, would have only been allowed for use with the Britannia standard.
I don't have the exact wording of the Act that restored the old standard to hand, but I think there was much confusion with the registering of the new maker's marks, especially as many of the older silversmiths who were working pre-1697 wanted to revert to using their old marks. It was not until the Plate Act of 1738, that came into force in 1739, that the situation was finally resolved, the Act ordered that all previous maker's punches were destroyed and new marks, being the initial letters of the forename and surname were registered.
Another example of a single letter mark is that of Thomas Peirce (Grimwade 2116) entered in 1730.
Regards Trev.
.
Andrew Archer, as I'm sure you know, entered this mark on the 11th August 1720. This new mark was entered because he wished to work with the restored Sterling standard, his old mark 'AR' registered on the 27th October 1703, would have only been allowed for use with the Britannia standard.
I don't have the exact wording of the Act that restored the old standard to hand, but I think there was much confusion with the registering of the new maker's marks, especially as many of the older silversmiths who were working pre-1697 wanted to revert to using their old marks. It was not until the Plate Act of 1738, that came into force in 1739, that the situation was finally resolved, the Act ordered that all previous maker's punches were destroyed and new marks, being the initial letters of the forename and surname were registered.
Another example of a single letter mark is that of Thomas Peirce (Grimwade 2116) entered in 1730.
Regards Trev.
.
Heal, in his section on London Goldsmiths shop signs gives Andrew Archer's shop sign as ROD & CROWN. 1710 - 1725
Heal was obviously uncertain as to the meaning of ROD, which he probably found on a letterhead saying " at the sign of the ROD & CROWN ". He suggests it could be a version of ROSE, although this seems on the face of it to be a little unlikely.
The OED gives no meaning to Rod thats fits the strange sign below the crown (?) on the maker's mark. My first thought was that the central object was a bell, but it seems to me more likely to be a flower
I wonder if it's a stylised flower head and circular bent stem of a plant known as a rod . Or a meaning not recorded by the OED as "flower stem " . The problem is that the language and spelling have changed so much , and the 18th century had very strange sense of humour with their puns. Which were, like much of Shakespeare in a previous century , almost unintelligible to us .
.
Heal was obviously uncertain as to the meaning of ROD, which he probably found on a letterhead saying " at the sign of the ROD & CROWN ". He suggests it could be a version of ROSE, although this seems on the face of it to be a little unlikely.
The OED gives no meaning to Rod thats fits the strange sign below the crown (?) on the maker's mark. My first thought was that the central object was a bell, but it seems to me more likely to be a flower
I wonder if it's a stylised flower head and circular bent stem of a plant known as a rod . Or a meaning not recorded by the OED as "flower stem " . The problem is that the language and spelling have changed so much , and the 18th century had very strange sense of humour with their puns. Which were, like much of Shakespeare in a previous century , almost unintelligible to us .
.
-
StewartMcI
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 8:03 pm
- Location: California
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest