A Timeline of Exeter Lions

[Granmaa]

Before I begin, I think I should apologize for the messiness of this post and the lack of any thorough research for a topic which both deserves and needs it, but I can't forsee anytime soon when I'll have the free time needed; and I just can't wait to read what suggestions other members will make!

I have counted six different lions from the period 1796-1818 solely on teaspoons, and I have put them in an order; I'd appreciate any disagreements. It would also be very helpful if I knew the dates when the duty marks were cusped.

The first lion in my timeline is what Trev called in a previous post on this subject the "letterbox" lion passant: a fitting name I think. The lion is on this spoon made by William Pearce (I think) whose "latest mention", according to Exeter and West Country Silver, was 1796. I have used this book for all my dates.






1. The "letterbox" lion passant c.1796: very distinctive cartouche and looks like his right paw is coming out of his head.


2. Lion in a square cartouche with a wavy bottom line: note the tip of the tail points upwards now and the right leg looks like it's coming out of the left one. I have attributed this to John Lake and not John Legg. John Lake worked only in 1800 I believe. Also, cusped duty mark which may have begun in 1797 and continued for a few years.


3. Crowned(?) lion in a cartouche with clipped corners: note the tail tip points backwards and the right leg is coming out of the lion's head. I have seen this lion used on an item by Parsons and Crees who worked 1797-1800. Cusped duty mark again.


4. Lion in an oval cartouche: I've seen this on an item by Parsons and Joseph Goss who, I believe started to work together in 1805. Cusping has gone. I think this mark was used throughout most of the first decade of the 19th century, but not before and not after.


5. 1810 and the date letter seems to have been started. The lion moves back into a rectangular cartouche and he again looks like he's wearing a crown.


1813 same


1815 same


6. 1818 and the crown seems to have gone.



I am by no means confident about all these assertions, but I am pretty sure that there is quite a strong pattern. Any comments will be extremely welcome.

Miles

[buckler]

What a useful posting.I am going to edit it onto a Word Document complete with the pictures and add to my Exeter file. Our thanks .

To add to the picture.

All Incuse Head Georges I have seen have been associated with a slightly more square rectangular punched lion, but with a nippled bottom like London. Curiously of the 10 buckles or pairs I have which can be positively identified to Exeter,only one is pre duty and of the other nine, three have the incuse head of 1784/86.

Is this accident or did Exeter use the incuse head for a period than mid 1786 ?
.

[nigel le sueur]

Miles

Thanks, like Buckler intend to keep that, a very good reference document

Nigel
.

[dognose]

Hi Miles,

Agree with Clive and Nigel, it's an excellent reference which unlocks some mysteries.
Thank you.

Regards Trev.
.

[admin]

Dear Members,

Miles (granmaa) has written an expanded version of this post and has graciously contributed it to be published here at -> Exeter Lions

Thanks Miles!

Regards, Tom
.

[dognose]

Excellent Miles, it's another great asset to 925-1000.com

Trev.
.

[buckler]

Many thanks Miles
A Happy Christmas to All
.

[dognose]

Hi Miles,

I recently acquired a set of three teaspoons by Richard Ferris that may be of interest.





Two have identical markings, whilst the other appears to have been assayed somewhat earlier.



As can be seen, the later pair were assayed in 1809, perhaps the first year we find a date letter applied to teaspoons, but these examples are still marked with the tri-cusp duty mark. It will also be noted that some fairly major flaws are present within the Lion Passant punch, most noteably the line running from the lion's right paw to the base.

The earlier assayed spoon is even more unusual.



On this spoon we have the clipped Duty Mark accompanied with the oval Lion Passant, but this lion has a distinct broken tail.

Trev.
.

[Granmaa]

Those are very interesting. After a google search I found a cream ladle with the hallmarks found on your two spoons. The lion mark had the same faults.
It's perhaps not so strange to see a new lion; this was the year when the stub was introduced. Perhaps we can surmise from the rarity of teaspoons with the 1809 N that the date letter and stub were introduced towards the end of the assay year (7th August). Before your spoons and the cream ladle I had only seen one example before, a photo of which I can't seem to find and so cannot use for comparison.

What is surprising is the cusped duty mark. I don't have any reference books, but I don't recall anything that would cause the reintroduction of the same triple cusped mark of the 1797-1804 period.
I wrote in my article that the cusping of the duty mark was to prevent unscrupulous exporters claiming more in drawback than they had already paid.
Taking this into account, is it possible that the assay markers were trying to avoid a silversmith claiming that their 1809 wares were in fact 1786 wares which were marked with an uncusped duty mark and a similar N?
For this to be true, which I'm uninclined to think, the export officers would have to be very ignorant indeed of the marking system.

I hope there's a simple reason which I've simply forgotten; my timeline already contains far to much supposition for my liking.

Your third spoon seems very similar to figure 6 in my timeline. Spoons made in different years were sometime put together in a set, though they aren't usually seperated by more than a year. All in all, a bit of a head scratcher!

Miles

P.S.
It was brought to my attention in the last Finial that there exists in the Exeter City Hall, I think, excellent records for this period listing every item every silversmith brought into the assay office. I'd be interested to know just how willing they are to let somebody with an interest thumb through their books.
.

[JLDoggett]

A wonderful article Miles and a good discussion here of the various uses of the marks.

I have always wondered and been unable to find a good source of information on the making of the punches used to apply the marks. I have seen some marks that appear to have been applied with damaged punches and would like to know when a punch was retired due to serviceability issues.

Trev's spoons appear to have been struck with a punch that was cracked beside the forward paw and a flake of metal missing from the far right edge. The letter date appears to have several cracks running through it. The broken tail is a real puzzle as it suggests something was stuck in the punch.

I know that my maker's mark stamp is well used, and while always applied with a certain care I have had to make several replacements for it over the years. The act of hammering then into a soft metal seems like it would not damage the steel of the punch. However the anvil on which the piece rests does not absorb any of the pressure of the striking blow and so the punch will eventually develops stress cracks. This same issue occurs regularly in the stamping process for flatware and other pressed pieces. When I think of the number of pieces I have marked compared to how many are marked at a hall, I would feel safe to assume they go through quite a few punches in a years time.

The quality of the steel for the punch would also play an important role in the life of the punch. In the marks on Trev's spoons the fine ridges seen in the letter date might have been caused by hairline separations of the layers in the hand-forged steel used to make the punch. The major ridge by the forward paw looks more like a stress crack through the punch. That coupled with the flake off the right edge is indicative of the punch being improperly tempered or possibly having been used to stamp into very thin metal (the thinner the metal the more impact stress that the punch would absorb). The thickness of the silver will also impact how well the punched mark appears. If the metal is thick and annealed you will get a prefect impression with all the detail. Thinner metal will not have the "meat" to fill the punch's recesses and will produce more of a ghost impression. Work-hardened metal will resist filling the punch and will often give a sharp edge but with a poor imprint of the center of the punch.

Something I have noticed is that it appears some punches are “repaired” and pressed back into service. I have seen examples where corners that should, “by-the-book”, be sharp right angles are slightly rounded. Is it possible that someone at the hall tried to get more use from the punch by smoothing a chipped corner with a small whetstone? If anyone can suggest a direction appreciative for further research I would be greatly.
.

[MCB]

Hello JLD,

Thanks for the practical insight into applying a mark and the wear and tear this causes to the punch itself. It's an excellent addition to this already very informative piece.

It would be very interesting to know approximately how many strikes you get from a punch before you consider a new one is necessary.

Regards,
Mike
.

[Granmaa]

Very interesting.
I can't remember where I read it, but I believe the assay offices destroyed (and perhaps still do) punches when they became too worn. You could send an email to the Sheffield, London and Birmingham offices to see if they know anything about it.
The men who made the punches were often employed for quite a few years, to maintain a uniformity I suppose. If there exists a receipt or record of his wages then it might mention the number of punches he made per year.

Miles
.

[JLDoggett]

Mike, it all depends on what I may be making. I once did 250 items for a Masonic convention that wore out a new punch, mostly due to the thinness of the silver used. On-the-other-hand, I have had them last several years. A lot depends on how good a job I do at tempering the punch after it is hardened. My present punch is one I cut several years ago, and other than some minor touch-ups (I prefer the raised letters polished and the depressed background to be mat finished so it will colour nicely) it has been used at least a thousand times without any major issues.

If people re interested I can try to do a thread with photos of how hand made punches are made. I use the same basic techniques that would have been used for centuries, though some of my tools would have been well appreciated by our forefathers.
.

[dognose]

Hi Jim,

That's a great idea, I'm sure it will be of interest to many. The details of making of a punch is certainly something I have never been able to fully understand. I'll look forward to it.

Regards Trev.
.