Not exactly a match - SMP Silver Salon Forums

SM Publications

Silver Salon Forums - The premier site for discussing Silver.

SMP | Silver Salon Forums | SSF - Guidelines | SSF - FAQ | Silver Sales

In this Forum we discuss the silver of the United Kingdom, as well as British Colonial silver and Old Sheffield Plate.

Past British - Irish Sterling topics/threads worth a look.

How to Post Photos

Want to be a Moderator?

SMP Silver Salon Forums
tline

British / Irish Sterling
tline3

Not exactly a match

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

SSFFriend: Email This Page to Someone!

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Not exactly a match
IJP Posts: 326 Registered: Oct 2004	posted 05-12-2005 01:10 PM Occasionally, when I'm searching for details on the origin of pieces of English sterling, I run into some difficulties or uncertainties that become pretty frustrating. I'll browse Jackson through the section for the appropriate town of assay, seeking a date letter to match. Most of the time, I find a perfect match, and I can say with absolute certainty, for example, that such a piece was assayed in Birmingham in 1922-23. But sometimes I'll come across date letters that just don't seem to have a match at all. There may be one or two recorded date letters that are close, but it often comes down to a choice... Do I choose the one that's more like my example in the shape of the stamp, or more like my example in the form of the letter? And really neither one seems very satisfactory. I suppose if I discovered the maker, that would help me decide, but I am not always able to identify the maker (since I am usually hoping that an approximate date would assist me in that quest). Of course, I've considered that the marks in question may not actually be authentic English hallmarks at all, and perhaps they're pseudo-marks, American or otherwise, but upon close re-examination I firmly believe in most of these cases that they are real English marks, and for whatever reason the date letters don't exactly match what I find in my references. Am I alone in feeling this way, or has anyone else experienced this? [This message has been edited by IJP (edited 05-12-2005).] IP: Logged
tmockait Posts: 963 Registered: Jul 2004	posted 05-12-2005 02:30 PM Not at all, but I don't think English Silver provides the worst cases of ambiguous marks. How easy is it to disntinguish between the dozen or so subtly varied versions of the eagle stamped on German silver?! Tom IP: Logged
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 Registered: May 2003	posted 05-12-2005 02:51 PM Remember to check the bottom of the tables in Jackson for footnotes or other indications of variants in shield shapes or in other marks that are known to have occurred. IP: Logged
IJP Posts: 326 Registered: Oct 2004	posted 05-12-2005 04:03 PM Thanks for the advice, swarter. I clearly have not been reading close enough to have caught the footnotes, which might in some instances prove the difference between right and wrong. This time, however, the footnotes give me no further assurance. Dealing with a batch of Birmingham silver from different makers and years (I think early 20th C.), and still puzzled. Anyway, this is not a terribly urgent concern, so I was not planning on uploading photographs for each of the marks. It happens relatively seldom that I run into this kind of confusion, and I suppose I just wanted to consult with the rest of you to see if you've had the same. IP: Logged
Brent Posts: 1507 Registered: May 99	posted 05-13-2005 11:59 AM A few decent rules of thumb: A.) In the absence of a town mark, with all other marks present, it is usually safe to assume a London origin. B.) The shape of the letter will be more important, and more regular, than the shape of the shield. The shields get distorted all the time, but the letter is usually close. C.) It helps to have a good grasp of styles, both of marks and English silver in general. If the marks are small and regularly spaced, it is more likely to be newer rather than older. If you have a fiddle pattern spoon with shoulders, there is no sense looking for a mark match in the 1700's. These are just things I have found to be helpful. There are exceptions to every rule, but with experience you can usually do pretty well. Brent IP: Logged
IJP Posts: 326 Registered: Oct 2004	posted 05-13-2005 12:28 PM Hey, Brent. Thanks for the input. I especially appreciate your feelings on the relative importance of the shield and the letter within it. I'll explain an example scenario, which actually happened the other day: I was looking at an English castor/muffineer, which bore the anchor mark for Birmingham, the lion passant, the date letter, and a maker's mark I was not able to identify. The date letter seemed like a capital "Q" as perhaps in the Birmingham 1940-41 marks, yet the shield was shaped exactly like the 1900-1925 series shields. I considered the possibility that the "Q" may in fact be the "O" of 1913-14 (It could not be the lowercase "q" of 1915-16), but the little queue on the Q was very much there, so I went for the 1940-41 date, shield match or no. Is that pretty sound reasoning? IP: Logged
salmoned Posts: 336 Registered: Jan 2005	posted 05-13-2005 06:55 PM Is that a trick example? The shield shapes for those series are identical, nicht wahr? The question implies there are 3 possibilities to look at [1913, 1938, & 1940], with the decision being made by virtue of the letter alone - not much of an example of letter vs. shield, eh? IP: Logged
IJP Posts: 326 Registered: Oct 2004	posted 05-14-2005 01:11 PM Well, therein must lie my confusion, then! My editions of Jackson (Third edition Jackson's Silver & Gold Marks -hardcover, and 1991/92 Pocket Edition Jackson's Hallmarks -paperback) show different shields for Birmingham 1900-25 series and 1925-50 series. Please excuse any lack of clarity in my following descriptions: The earlier span uses a shield with beveled/chamfered upper corners. The bottom edge of the shield is composed of two rounded lobes, between which lies a downward point. The later shield also features beveled upper corners, but the bottom edge is composed of three downard points, the outer of them formed from the lateral sides of the shield and the beginning arc of a concave depression, and the middle point formed from the meeting of the opposite ends of the aforementioned arcs. Now, perhaps either my editions of Jackson are misrepresenting the shapes of the shields for the span of time in question, or I am reading into the exact shapes of shields far too meticulously, but in any event I can say that some examples of date letters I have come across do not match what I have found in these references. IP: Logged

All times are ET	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a

^1. Public Silver Forums (open Free membership) - anyone with a valid e-mail address may register. Once you have received your Silver Salon Forum password, and then if you abide by the Silver Salon Forum Guidelines, you may start a thread or post a reply in the New Members' Forum. New Members who show a continued willingness to participate, to completely read and abide by the Guidelines will be allowed to post to the Member Public Forums.
Click here to Register for a Free password

^2. Private Silver Salon Forums (invitational or $ donation membership) - The Private Silver Salon Forums require registration and special authorization to view, search, start a thread or to post a reply. Special authorization can be obtained in one of several ways: by Invitation; Annual $ Donation; or via Special Limited Membership. For more details click here (under development).

^3. Administrative/Special Private Forums (special membership required) - These forums are reserved for special subjects or administrative discussion. These forums are not open to the public and require special authorization to view or post.

| Home | Order | The Guide to Evaluating Gold & Silver Objects | The Book of Silver