Thank you for any help,
Joseph
.
Mark ambiguity on set of fiddle and thread spoons
Mark ambiguity on set of fiddle and thread spoons
This site has been a helpful reference to me, and I now have a question. The hallmarks on this spoon are confusing to me, in that there is no town mark. However, since the King's head is partially obliterated by overstruc maker's mark, I was wondering if that could be the reason for no town mark? I have six, and the maker's mark position varies only slightly on each spoon. In addition, the date mark would seem to indicate an earlier date than the style of this spoon (or are the marks on this spoon simply spurious?).
Thank you for any help,
Joseph
.
Thank you for any help,
Joseph
.
-
georgiansilver
- contributor
- Posts: 415
- Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 5:50 am
- Location: Gainsborough, Lincs
As Mike says, it was assayed in 1797 which was before London started marking teaspoons with its town mark.
It is quite early for a Fiddle-and-Thread but not too unusual.
What most surprises me is the maker's mark (which was stamped first by the silversmith) on top of the duty mark. I have seen the duty on top of the maker, but never vice versa.
Miles
.
It is quite early for a Fiddle-and-Thread but not too unusual.
What most surprises me is the maker's mark (which was stamped first by the silversmith) on top of the duty mark. I have seen the duty on top of the maker, but never vice versa.
Miles
.
Hi,
I agree with Mike that it is the mark of George Smith, but presumably he was not the maker of these spoons. As Miles states, the maker's mark is struck pre-assay, and clearly GS's mark has been struck post-assay and probably was only the retailer of these spoons as his mark must be overstriking that of another.
This could be an aged George Smith II, as GS III has a distinctive mark, and GS IV did not enter his mark until 1799. GS III and GS IV were known spoonmakers and probably no relation to GS II.
Of course as an overstrike we cannot be sure of the date when this mark was applied, so bearing in mind the similarity between GS II's mark and that of GS IV, this now brings GS IV into play.
GS II was known to be in partnership with his former apprentice Thomas Hayter as from 1792 until at least 1796, but probably until 1805, when Hayter entered his first mark alone. Grimwade suspects GS II died sometime between 1802 and 1811.
In summary I think these spoons were overstruck by GS II or GSIV sometime between 1799 and 1807 at which date GS IV went into partnership with Richard Crossley.
Or have I managed to confuse myself (and everybody else)!
Trev.
.
I agree with Mike that it is the mark of George Smith, but presumably he was not the maker of these spoons. As Miles states, the maker's mark is struck pre-assay, and clearly GS's mark has been struck post-assay and probably was only the retailer of these spoons as his mark must be overstriking that of another.
This could be an aged George Smith II, as GS III has a distinctive mark, and GS IV did not enter his mark until 1799. GS III and GS IV were known spoonmakers and probably no relation to GS II.
Of course as an overstrike we cannot be sure of the date when this mark was applied, so bearing in mind the similarity between GS II's mark and that of GS IV, this now brings GS IV into play.
GS II was known to be in partnership with his former apprentice Thomas Hayter as from 1792 until at least 1796, but probably until 1805, when Hayter entered his first mark alone. Grimwade suspects GS II died sometime between 1802 and 1811.
In summary I think these spoons were overstruck by GS II or GSIV sometime between 1799 and 1807 at which date GS IV went into partnership with Richard Crossley.
Or have I managed to confuse myself (and everybody else)!
Trev.
.