posted 06-12-2010 07:22 PM            

At the risk of boring you all with my personal enthusiasms I thought I would share some examples of early English spoons. Somewhere around the 13th century English spoons acquired a distinctive form, the main difference from spoons made on the continent being that English stems have a hexagonal cross-section. The spoon with an acorn finial at the top of the picture can be dated reasonably confidently to the early 14th century on the basis of its form: in particular, the top and bottom facets of the stem are much narrower than on later spoons.

The second spoon with a diamond point finial is a bit of a puzzle to me. The top and bottom facets are even narrower (and not too clearly distinguishable in my photo, I fear).In fact, the stem appears to be transitional between a diamond-shaped and a hexagonal cross-section. This would suggest the spoon is earlier still. However, I suppose it could have been made with a diamond cross-section, the apparent top and bottom facets the result of wear and polishing over the years. If so, it is more likely to be a 15th century continental spoon and a cuckoo in my nest of early English spoons. I like to cling to the hope that it is, however, English and 14th century or even earlier.

Neither spoon carries any maker's or town mark which is quite normal at this period.

posted 06-12-2010 10:30 PM            

quote:

---

At the risk of boring you all with my personal enthusiasms I thought I would share some examples of early English spoons.

---

posted 06-13-2010 09:03 PM            

Thanks for sharing these and feel free to share more.

posted 06-14-2010 12:00 AM            

I love that acorn finial.

posted 06-15-2010 06:56 PM            

Polly: The diamond and acorn top spoons are both 6.1 inches long. The maidenhead is 6.4 inches.

FredZ: Early diamond point and acorn top spoons were actually made in one piece. The separate casting of the finial started when other forms of finial appeared. I’m afraid the picture of my maidenhead spoon, copied from my catalogue, came out rather small. However, I think you can still see the solder mark on the stem just below the back of the maiden’s head in the relevant detailed view.

I’ve taken another picture of the maidenhead, not very successfully I fear, alongside a child size so-called “Moor’s Head” by Daniel Carey, London, 1620, as a start to showing more examples of early spoons.

It doesn’t take much to get me going. Actually, the ”moor’s” head is that of a child, probably meant as the infant Jesus, appropriately enough for a child’s spoon.

After the acorn and diamond fell out of fashion the most common finial was the seal top in one form or another. My picture shows three examples.

From top to bottom: provincial, late 16th century, maker HW (unidentified); late 16th century, Gladstone and Utting, Lichfield; circa 1619 (date pricked on seal), unknown maker, Beccles. They are respectively 6.5, 6.4 and 7.2 inches long.

The Beccles spoon has had the misfortune to pass through the collection of the Marquess of Breadalbane. He had the regrettable habit of stamping his name on the stems of his spoons.

I think it doubtful that the benefit of the provenance outweighs this vandalism a hundred or so years ago – his collection was sold at Christie’s in 1926.

Incidentally, the last picture again reveals the solder line where the finial was spliced to the stem. Wear over the centuries can make this more apparent than it would have been when the spoon was new.

posted 06-15-2010 09:39 PM            

quote:

---

I think that exhausts me, and perhaps any readers, for a single post.

---

Doesn't exhaust me - keep them coming!

Lord Bredalbane didn't stamp his name on every spoon he owned - here is an example (posted 7 years ago - how time flies) of one bearing only his crest (One that didn't get away).

posted 06-16-2010 06:47 PM            

If I seem hesitant about coming back with more and more spoons, it is partly because I have known eyes to glaze over when I wax too enthusiastic about them and partly because even those who do not collect these early spoons may well have better pictures of better examples in their reference books.

I have tended to gather examples of the various finials rather than concentrate on makers or towns of origin and, apart from the moor’s or child’s head I have already illustrated, don’t own any of the rarer ones. However, this spoon is less common if not actually rare.

Made by Richard Chandler of Plymouth circa 1639 (date pricked on back of bowl), the spoon is a type that was in the past called “Buddha” by dealers and collectors because of the oriental appearance of the finial. In fact, the finial is clearly a female figure. Coming from a harbor town, it may have been inspired by the figureheads of ships.

posted 06-17-2010 07:47 AM            

Of course, you did not have to have a finial. The slip top was a common pattern. The name derives from contemporary inventory entries as “slipped in the stalk”, i.e. cut across the stem. The table spoon here is by Daniel Carey, London, 1615, and the child size spoon by Edward Hole, London, 1631.

posted 06-18-2010 05:27 PM            

The top spoon is marked AB conjoined. This unidentified maker has been placed in the Salisbury area. Stylistically I would have dated the spoon to the late 16th century but the experts seem to think AB was a 17th century maker so maybe I should settle for early 17th century (unless there were two generations of AB).

The lower spoon, also provincial and circa 1630, has an unattributed fleur-de-lys mark.

Apostle finials were typically cast in three parts: the figure itself, its nimbus (halo) and a symbol to identify the Apostle. The top spoon has lost its symbol and the lower spoon never had one – it was left off some 17th century finials, allowing the Apostle to be whichever you wanted.

The top apostle is a pretty crude casting, perhaps from a very worn model, but the nimbus is reasonably sharp.

This rayed nimbus is one of the reasons I was tempted to give the spoon an earlier date though the main factor was the form of the spoon. Note the difference in bowl shape between the two spoons for example, but I suppose some makers could persevere longer with old fashioned forms.

The second spoon has a Holy Dove nimbus.

In the 16th century this nimbus tended to be reserved for the Master (Christ) finials but by the 17th century it was commonly used for all the Apostles.

The finials on these spoons were generally gilded, as often was the whole spoon. Traces of the gilding remain but these two examples have been spared the re-gilding that often occurs.

posted 07-18-2010 05:24 PM            

~Cheryl

posted 07-18-2010 05:31 PM            

agphile,

If you are up to providing the image & text then I will do the back office slide show stuff.

What about it?

posted 07-19-2010 01:39 PM            

I could have a go if you are sure. It would just be one person's collection rather than a comprehensive overview and would be light on the rarest or best examples.

My skills as a photographer are pretty erratic. Will the sort of pictures I have been showing in this thread be adequate? And would I need to work out how to do it in powerpoint, or would a text in Word 2007 plus separate pictures be OK?

posted 07-19-2010 01:55 PM            

Great!

quote:

---

...It would just be one person's collection rather than a comprehensive overview ...

---

A Collector's View®
It seems as if there is a collector for everything. It takes a collectors view to discover the unique, interesting, bizarre and fascinating aspects of everyday objects.

• A Collector's Eye - Insects & Spider Motifs (click here)
  
• A Collector's Eye - Antique Buckles & Pins (click here)
  
• The Wonderful World of Sterling Ring Boxes (click here)
  
• My Calling-card cases (click here)
  
• Lily of the Valley Spoons(click here)

quote:

---

The sort of pictures I have been showing in this thread be adequate?

---

quote:

---

would a text in Word 2007 plus separate pictures be OK?

---

posted 08-07-2010 11:55 AM            

Just to let you know there is a first draft of a presentation. The the second draft is in the works. agphile and I have our distractions... but it is coming along.

posted 08-16-2010 12:10 AM            

See: A Collector's Eye - Early English Spoons.

posted 08-16-2010 02:01 PM            

If you are using Firefox as your browser, please note you may zoom in on the images (larger or smaller) just by holding down the CTRL key and scrolling the wheel on your mouse.

If you don't have a wheel mouse:

posted 08-16-2010 06:28 PM            

With regard to Bascall's point, I did wonder about restricting each slide to a single spoon. This would have allowed a larger image of the spoon but made comparisons more difficult. I guess it would be possible to re-work the slide show or to add further slides with single images of particular spoons if there was a general feeling that this would be helpful though, as Scott has said, it should be possible to zoom in and magnify the existing images.

posted 08-17-2010 11:27 AM            

If Yes, please start a new thread in the most appropriate associated forum.

posted 06-07-2012 09:04 AM            

Scott: How easy would it be to change the text of Slide 14 to take account of this? I would suggest the following as the new text:

“By about 1630 a completely new pattern of spoon began to appear with a simple, flat stem. This may be linked to the shift to laying the table with flatware for your guests rather than expecting them to have their own. It is now known as the Puritan because of its simplicity and because its peak popularity coincided with the Commonwealth when Puritanism was at its strongest in England.

As can be seen, the date letter is again at the top of the stems because the spoons have no finial. The three examples here are, from top to bottom:

• Jeremy Johnston, London, 1661, 7.4 inches
• Steven Venables, London,1651, 5 inches
• purportedly by IV (Joseph Vaughan or John Vaughton), London, 1631, 6.5 inches – but this one almost certainly a forgery.

I should have realized that the 1631 spoon was “too good to be true” when I bought it years ago. A 1632 fork in the Victoria and Albert Museum is the earliest genuine example of the Puritan form that I have actually seen. The hazards for the collector of early spoons include complete forgeries like the example here, later spoons that have been re-shaped and genuine early spoons that have been “improved” by the addition of a new finial, typically converting a seal top to a potentially more valuable Apostle spoon.”

On a more cheerful note, I have acquired just a few more early spoons which I don’t believe to be fakes. I might share them in a separate post.

posted 06-07-2012 10:12 AM            

quote:

---

On a more cheerful note, I have acquired just a few more early spoons which I don’t believe to be fakes. I might share them in a separate post.

---

That would be great.

I made the requested changes to slide 14.

posted 06-07-2012 12:05 PM            

There have been just four additions to my group of early spoons over the last couple of years, adding examples of different finials or stem shape. Here they are in date order.

Baluster Knop, Francis Jackson, London 1560. This is a rare finial found on mid 16th century London spoons and, in a slightly different form, on later Barnstaple spoons. This spoon has been re-gilded and had a later crest (for Fitzgibbon, I think) engraved in the bowl. In more nearly original condition it would certainly have cost more than I would have been prepared to pay.

Hexagonal Seal Top, unidentified maker, London 1576. Most seal tops are crowned by a round “seal”. The hexagonal version is rarer. Its origin lies in the earliest versions before the finial was cast separately and soldered to the spoon. A very simple seal top would be shaped to follow the hexagonal cross-section of the spoon’s stem. Some separately cast seal tops, as here, continued in this tradition.

Hexagonal Seal Top by AB, Salisbury area, early 17th century. A later example with a more modest, but attractive, finial.

Stump Top, London, c. 1630. This is another rare form. The marks on this example are too worn to identify the maker or be confident of the date – I think it might be 1632 from what remains of the date letter. The top of a stump top’s stem takes the form of a pyramid or dome rather than the slanted cut-off of a slip top spoon. They have an octagonal cross-section to the stem rather than the normal English hexagonal stem. The wear on this example makes the cross-section look a bit more like a square with rounded corners. Despite the wear, which made it affordable, this is perhaps my favorite among the recent acquisitions. I like the simple shape and am a little surprised that it doesn’t seem to have been as popular as the slip top.

posted 06-08-2012 09:42 AM            

Was the finding of a similar spoon to your Puritan spoon the reason you suspect it was a fake? Would it not be expected that the silversmith made more than one alike? Or is that you have just seen so many that you know something is wrong?

I think in some sense finding fakes must be an art that is only acquired after long experience in a particular field.

posted 06-08-2012 11:46 AM            

If I had only seen the spoon for sale now I think I would have been suspicious from the outset, but I bought it at a time when I knew less. It was before the Ashley-Russell trial (get PDF: ashleyrussell.pdf) and I wonder whether he had also turned his hands to puritan spoons before he was caught.

David