www.925-1000.com

Hi!

London 1730? Maker?

Best,
Thomas

I would think Edward Feline, 1730, but later decorated.

Although I would tend to agree that it is Feline, have a look at Grimwade 604 - George Ellis 1721. He later changed his mark, but doesn't establish when.
Just an idea.
Regards
John

Just realised why it can't George Ellis!
Schoolboy error!

Just a thought, when did Moses Eden cease producing, has his mark been seen after Grimwade's note of his insolvency in 1725?

Martin

Martin

I don't know about Eden's working life but his ME sterling mark does not resemble the mark on this piece. The ED mark was for Britannia standard.

David

Could be very well ED for Mose Eden. Certainly looks like Grimwade 563. Gets my vote anyhow !
This mark was almost certainly not confined to Britannia standard. Not a legal requirement to change until 173, see below

To clarify one should refer to J.S. Forbes " Hallmark" , an often overlooked but vital source on the London Assay Office

There were two stages in the return to Sterling Standard affecting marks 1719 and 1738

The Plate Duty Act of 1719 "made no reference to the style of the maker's mark bit it was assumed that for sterling standard it would revert to the initials of the Christian and surname " . Many makers accordingly registered new marks in this form " (Forbes p.185)
It was only the Plate (Offences) Act of 1738 which, inter alia, "required all workers to register new makers marks consisting of the initials of their Christian and surnames but of a character or alphabet different from their former marks" (Forbes p.204) .
Hence the new registers for both large and smallworkers started in 1739

Without a legal requirement to change style of mark in 1720, many goldsmiths doubtless decided not to bother abandoning their old marks until they wore out !
Even after the 1738 Act some makers ignored the legal requirement. CLARE , RCox and E BILLS being examples seen on buckles .

Close examination of Grimwade's illustrations of Feline's 1720 mark (#576) and Eden's 1719 mark (#563) shows that the Feline star is 6-pointed and the Eden star is 5-pointed. Grimwade seems to get that sort of detail right so, as the mark in question here is 6-pointed, Feline gets my vote.

Thanks for the reference to Forbes's "Hallmark". I've just ordered a copy and look forward to reading it - well, dipping in at least.

Phil

I think it also worth remembering that Eden entered his sterling mark in 1720. I would expect him to have used it when appropriate thereafter (though of course exceptions can occur).

Forbes " Hallmark" is rather an unfairly neglected book.
When you get your copy Phil you'll find it very readable. And so useful.

Like me, I suspect that you'll skip the first few centuries , and most of the very technical stuff on assay processes . But the information on the Goldsmiths' Company , the legal side and above all the marks information is truly easy to find, easy to read , and above all very relevant and useful to us silver freaks .

Forbes is now dead, but I was lucky enough to have some correspondence with him, and a charming man he was ( although he was apparently a bit of a Tartar)
The only caveat on this book is that he was a "Company Man" through and through and as this book is in some measure a biography of the Goldsmiths' Company, he tends to favourably shade the story slightly . Certainly he had far more information than appears in the book , especially that which reflects in any badly on Goldsmiths' Hall. My query on a specific man who worked as a drawer , got the information that rather than resigning , he was actually fired " for passing work that was never assayed , and still obtaining the Companies marks " We believe he went back to his prior job as a bucklemaker !

I've rather plugged this book because I think it deserves to be alongside Grimwade and Jackson on everyones bookshelf.