\
\
OLD ENGLISH PLATE.
■ ru
0
SALVI'R (1595) AND JiWKR (1617)
( In the. possession of Her Majesty the Queen at Windsor Castle )
10 ■ ^
©Iti ©ngUsl) ^latr.
ECCLESIASTICAL, DECORATIVE, AND DOMESTIC
ITS
MAKERS AND MARKS.
Bv WILFRED JOSEPH CRIPPS, C.B., F.S.A.,
AUTHOR OF “college AND CORPORATION PLATE,” “ OLD FRENCH PLATE,” ETC.
SIXTH EDITION, REALISED AND ENLARGED.
WITH 123 ILLUSTRATIONS, AND UPWARDS OF 2,600 FACSIMILES
OF PLATE MARKS.
LONDON :
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.
1899.
BY TH E SAME AUTHOR.
OLD FLENCH PLATE. Furnishing Tables
OF THE Paris Date-Letters and Fac-Simii,es of other Marks. AVitli Illustrations. Second Edition, 1893., 8vo. 10s. 6d.
PKEFACE.
In the course of the twenty years which have elapsed since the appearance of the first edition of this Handbook, Old English Plate has attracted a constantly increasing share of public attention. A knowledge of its many points of interest has become more general : and whilst specimens of ancient secular plate are more eagerly sought for than ever before by collector and connoisseur, the preservation of onr old church- plate has become better assured owing to the lively interest now taken by County and Diocesan Archmological 'Societies in what remains of it within their respective districts.
Before these days few persons, whether amongst the clergy or laity, understood the great interest of old English church-plate, or possessed the requisite knowledge to take proper account of it ; and the literature on the subject con- sisted of the papers of the late Mr. Octavius Morgan, upon which the chapter on Ecclesiastical Plate in this volume is founded, together witli the not less valuable notes and observations of the late Sir A. W. Pranks, tlie late Eev. J.
vi Preface.
Fuller Bussell, Mr. J. T. Mickletliwaite, Professor A. H. Churcli, and others. It was not, in fact, till the year 1880, two years after the first publication of Old English Plate^ that the author, by the kind present from the Bev. C. B.. Manning of a copy of his interesting pamphlet on the church-plate of the Deanery of Bedenhall, Norfolk, became aware that he and his earliest coadjutor, Mr. T. M. Fallow, had any fellow- labourer in the work of making systematic local enquiry into the history of old church-plate. Mr. Manning’s work, brought to the notice of the late Bev. H. Whitehead by the present writer, suggested the paper on the plate of the Deanery of Brampton in Cumberland, which led up to the publication, in 1884, of a complete account of the church- plate of the counties of Cumberland and Westmorland forming the Diocese of Carlisle, under the able editorship of Chancellor Ferguson. This admirable treatise drew general attention to the great interest of its subject, and was the means of inducing the late Mr. J. E. Nightingale shortly afterwards to undertake an examination of the old ecclesi- astical plate of Dorset and Wilts. It is not too much to say that the volume relating to Wiltshire church-plate is the model of what such a treatise should be. Since then the late Bev. A. Trollope has written very fully on the church-plate of Leicestershire ; that of the small county of Butland has been catalogued by Mr. B. C. Hope ; Mr. C. Markham has
$
Preface. vii
compiled a good account of the ^N’orthaiits church-plate ; the Suffolk Institute of Archeeology has completed one for that county, edited by the Eev. F. HasleAvood ; and Mr. E. H. Freshfield has devoted three beautifully illustrated quarto volumes to the plate of the churches in the city of London and in the coimties of London and Middlesex. Besides these complete histories, a great deal of material has been collected towards similar descriptions of the treasures in Kent, Northumberland, Durham, Norfolk, Berks, Surrey, and Oxfordshire, chieflj^ in the form of papers in the Transactions of the Archaeological Associations of those counties. A good commencement, and in some cases more than that, has been made in Herefordshire, Devon, Cornwall, Lincolnshire, Derbyshire, Warwickshii-e, Worcestershire, and Gloucester- shire. The Eev. E. H. Bates has described very carefully the plate of several deaneries in the county of Somerset.
Besides the above local enquiries, and following upon an excellent general notice of Scottish communion-plate by Prof. Norman Maepherson, a complete and quite monumental work on the same subject by Eev. T. Burns and Mr. A. J. S. Brook, most admirably illustrated, appeared in 1892, whilst a valuable classification of medimval English chalices and patens by Mr. W. II. St. John Hope and Mr. T. M. Fallow has been contributed to the Archceological Journal. As regards
viii Preface.
secular plate, Corporation plate and insignia have been treated of in a large work hj the late Mr. Llewellyn Jewitt and klr. W. H. St. J ohn Hope ; an account of the curious and rare plate of the Hull Trinity House has been published by Mr. T. M. LaLlow ; and papers on Mazers and Spoons are to be found in recent volumes of Arcliceologia.
It is good evidence of the great interest now taken in old plate, that later writers should devote time to enlarging chapters or sections from the following pages into articles, such as those last named, in preference to spending it upon more original work. The sections relating to Salts. Ewers and Basins, and the like, are as suitable for treatment of this kind as those upon Mazers and Spoons.
It may here be mentioned that a great part of Old English Plate has been reproduced, almost word for word, with many of its illustrations and all its tables of date-letters, in an American work, described in the preface as based upon ” it : and to this it is by no means a satisfactoiy set-off, that the work of a foreign author may be similarly appro- priated by the English book-maker, and with as little acknowledgment, or none at all.
If Old English Plate has been not indirectly the moving cause of these widely spread researches, it is to some of them
Preface. ix
tliat its own pages owe, from time to time, mucii of tlieir fresh information. This is especially the case as regards the late Mr. J. E. E'ightingale’s yolnme on Wilts church-plate, and the great work mentioned above on Scottish Commimion Plate, to the authors of which the present writer is in- debted for many names and dates added to former entries in C1ia])ter VI.
It is plain that if the successive editions of Old English Plate aimed only at being a summary of the literature on its subject, brought up as far as possible to date, they would need all the careful emendation they have re- ceived ; and the author can hardly acknowledge too freely and fully the help in this behalf of the' friends, but especially the Eev. C. E. Manning and Mr. Fallow, whose names have been already mentioned in these prefatory words, and also Mr. Edwin H. Ereshfield, as well as the kindness of many correspondents, amongst them Mr. T. Wainwright, of Barn- staple, the Eev. AY. II. Wayne, the Eev. E. H. Bates, Mr. EobeiT Harvey, of Thorpe, ISiorwich, Mr. J. E. Boyle, of Hull, and Mr. Cecil C. Woods, of Cork, who have favoured him with notes of mucli interest.
To Mr. Thomas Taylor of Cliipchase Castle the author is indebted for nearly all the newer information given about
X Pi'eface.
tlie goldsmitlis of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, in the eighteenth century ; and to the Kent Archa3ological Society for wood-cuts.
From the Memorials of the Goldsmiths’ Company compiled by its learned clerk, Sir Walter S. Prideaux, and privately printed in 1896, it has proved possible to identify the marks of a number of working goldsmiths of the seventeenth century with so high a degree of probability as to amount in most cases to certainty. For the privilege of access to these Memorials^ as well as to the original records, when necessary, the writer of these lines has to thank the Worship- ful Company, which has also done him the honour of giving him its Freedom and Livery. And lastly, by the express and most gracious permission of Her Majesty the Queen, a new and interesting Frontispiece has been provided for the present edition of Old English Plate ^ giving the oldest specimens of Eoglish silver work remaining in the Eoyal Collections at Windsor Castle.
W. J. C.
CiRENCESTEK :
March, 1899.
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I.
PAGE
Preliminary — Gold — Silver — Their alloys — The English standards — The assay — Coloured gold— Frosted silver— A simple test for silver — Care of old plate — Goldsmiths’ weights— Mint prices for gold 1
CHAPTER II.
The mediaeval guilds of goldsmiths in France and England — The Goldsmiths’ Com- pany of London — Eegulations of the Goldsmiths’ Guild at Montpellier — Chartei-s of the London goldsmiths, and early legislation relating to them and their marks — The Coronation Eegalia — The banker-goldsmiths — Legisla- tion from the time of Charles II. — Table of Loudon marks . . . .19
CHAPTER III.
The marks found on plate assayed in London — The leopard’s head — The maker’s mark — The date-letter — The lion passant — The lion’s head erased and figure of Britannia — The Sovereign’s head 48
CHAPTER IV.
The Provincial assay-towns and their marks, prior to 1701 — The Act of 1423 — Historical notes of the goldsmiths of Newcastle and York — The relations of the London with the provincial goldsmiths from time to time — Extinction of the old provincial Goldsmiths’ Companies in 1097 — York — Newcastle-upon- Tyne — Norwich — Chester — Exeter — Hull, Gateshead, Leeds, Carlisle, Lincoln, Taunton, Dorchester, Barnstaple, King’s Lynn, Sandwich, Sherborne — Doubt- ful provincial marks — Table of old provincial marks . . . . .72
CHAPTER V.
The provincial assay-offices and their marks, since 1701 — The Acts of Parliament establishing them — York — Exeter — Chester — Norwich — Newcastle-upon- Tyne — Birmingham — Sheffield — Table of modern provincial marks . .113
CHAPTER VI.
Scotland — Scotch legislation — The Edinburgh goldsmiths — Their marks, deacons, and a.ssay-mastcr.s — Old provincial marks — Modern Glasgow — Table of Edinburgh and Glasgow marks . 13G
XU
Co7ite7its.
CHAPTER VII.
PAGE
Ireland — The Goldsmiths’ Company of Dublin — Cork— New Geneva — Table of Dublin marks . _ ,158
CHAPTER VIII.
Frauds and offences— Old offences— The report to rarliament of 1773— The Acts of 1739 and 181-1 — Cases proceeded against under their provisions — An amateur’s experiences . . . . . . . . . , ,170
CHAPTER IX.
Ecclesiastical plate — Episcopal constitutions relating to church-plate — Church , goods, how affected by the events of the reigns of Edward VI. and Queen Elizabeth — Chalices exchanged for communion cups — Pre-Keformation chalices and patens — Elizabethan communion cups — Modern chalices, com- munion cups and patens — Flagons — Alms-dishes — Candlesticks . . . 181
CHAPTER X.
Decorative and domestic plate — Introduction — Effect of the Wars of the Eoses — Prosperity of the sixteenth century — Great destruction of old plate at various times — Gold Plate — Obsolete vessels — Spoons — Mazers — Salts — Stoneware jugs — Ewers, basins, and salvers — Standing cups and hanaps — Tankards — Smaller cups of various kinds — Plates — Forks — Monteiths — Candlesticks, sconces, etc. — Toilet services — Casters and cruet-stands — Tea and coffee services, kettles, etc. — Cake- baskets and epergnes — Maces and'oars — Eacing-bells, etc. . 231
APPENDIX A.
Chronological List of the Examples used as Authority for London Date-letters
and Makers’ Marks. Part I 365
Part II. ........ . 413
APPENDIX B.
Improved Tables of the Date-letters used by all the English, Scotch, and Irish
Assay-Halls from the earliest times ........ 435
INDEX
. 463
LIST OF ILLUSTKATIONS
Frontispiece — Salver (1595) and Ewer (1617), the Property of Her Majesty
THE Queen.
PAGE
1. PEWTER COFFIN CHALICE AND PATEN, 13tH CENTURY .... 195
2. CHALICE IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM, 13TH CENTURY 196
3. COFFIN CHALICE OF ARCHBISHOP MELTON (D. 131:0) AT YORK MINSTER. 197
1. CHALICE (1479) AT NETTLECOMBE, SOMERSET 198
5. CHALICE (C. 1495) AT COOMBE KEYNES, DORSET 199
6. BISHOP FOX’S GOLD CHALICE (1507) AT CORPUS CHRISTI COLL., OXFORD 203
7. CHALICE (1521) AT JURBY, ISLE OF MAN 204
205
206
208
WORCESTER CATHEDRAL 209
210
211
. - . .212
8. CHALICE (1527) AT TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD
9. CHALICE (1525) AT WYLYE, WILTS
10. PATEN (C. 1200) AT WWKE, HANTS
11. COFFIN PATEN OP BP. CANTELUPE (D. 1266) AT
12. PATEN (1479) AT NETTLECOMBE, SOMERSET
13. PATEN (1527) AT TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD
14. COMMUNION CUP (1570) AT CIRENCESTER .
15. COMMUNION CUP AND PATEN-COVER (1576) AT CHRISTCHURCH, CO. MON-
MOUTH 213
16. COMMUNION CUP (1568), NORWICH PATTERN, 215
17. TWO COMMUNION CUPS (1600, 1622) 216
18. TWO COMMUNION CUPS (1630, 1686) 218
19. PEWTER COMMUNION VESSELS, CIRCA 1640 219
20. COMMUNION CUP (1676) AT ASHBY-DF.-LA-ZOUCHE 220
21. COMMUNION CUP (C, 1510) AT SANDWICH, KENT 221
22. CUP (1535) WITH COVER SURMOUNTED BY THE BOLEyN BADGE USED AS
A CHALICE AT CIRENCESTER 222
23. CUP (1540) USED AS A CHALICE AT GATCOMBE, ISLE OF WIGHT . . 223
24. COMMUNION VESSELS (1707) AT HYATT.SVILLB, MARYLAND, U.S.A. . . 225
25. PATEN (1073) AT ST. CUTHBERT’S, YORK 226
26. COMMUNION FLAGON (1570) AT CIRENCESTER 228
27. COMMUNION FLAGON (1664) AT CANTERBURY CATHEDRAL . . . 230
XIV List of Illustrations.
PAGK
28. SIDEBOAKD OF 1()TH CENTURY 280
29. MAIDENPIEAD SPOON, CIRCA 1540 . . 243
30. SET OF THIRTEEN APOSTLES’ SPOONS (1()2(;) 244
31. APOSTLES’ SPOONS, 16TH CENTURY 240
32. SPOONS OF 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries 249
33. TEA-SPOONS, CIRCA 1760, AT BARBER-SURO-EONS’ HALL, LONDON . 250
34. MAZER (15th century) 256
35. THE SCROPE MAZER (C, 1400) AT YORK MINSTER, AND INSCRIPTION ON
THE BAND 257
36. MAZER (C. 1440) AT ALL SOULS’ COLL., OXFORD 259
37. BOSS OR PRINT IN THE BOTTOM OF THE LAST MAZER .... 260
38. MAZER (C. 1450) AT IRONMONGERS’ HALL, LONDON 261
39. MAZER (C. 1470) AT ORIEL COLL., OXFORD 262
40. MAZER (1532) FORMERLY AT NARFORD HALL, CO. NORFOLK, PART OF
ENGRAVED BAND, FULL SIZE 263
41. MAZER-BOWL (C. 1530 — 40), IN THE FRANKS COLLECTION .... 263
42. STANDING MAZER (1529) AT ALL SOULS’ COLL., OXFORD .... 264
43. SILVER-GILT CUP, WITH ARMS OF THE RODNEY FAMILY .... 265
44. SILVER-GILT CUP OF MAZER FASHION, FORMERLY THE PROPERTY OF THE
DUKE OF HAMILTON 266
45. CUP OF WOOD MOUNTED IN SILVER-GILT, DATED 1492, FROM THE SOLTY-
KOFF COLLECTION 267
46. CUP OF WOOD MOUNTED IN SILVER-GILT, IN THE FRANKS COLLECTION 267
47 THE HUNTSMAN SALT (15TH CENTURY) AT ALL SOULS’ COLL., OXFORD . 270
48. SALT (1493) AT NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD 271
49. SALT (1518) AT IRONMONGERS’ HALL, LONDON 272
50. CYLINDRICAL SALT (1567), IN THE POSSESSION OF THE CORPORATION OF
NORWICH 273
51. SALT (1569) AT VINTNERS’ HALL, LONDON 274
52. SALT (1595) AT HABERDASHERS’ HALL, LONDON 275
53. SALT (1607) AT CHRIST’S HOSPITAL, LONDON 276
54. SALT (1661) AT CLOTHWORKERS’ HALL, LONDON . . ... 277
55. OCTAGONAL SALT (1685) AT MERCERS’ HALL, LONDON .... 277
56. THE EDDTSTONE LIGHTHOUSE SALT (1698) 278
57. TRENCHER SALTS (1629, 1667) 279
58. STONEWARE JUG MOUNTED IN SILVER-GILT (1562) AT VINTNERS’ HALL,
LONDON 280
59. STONEWARE JUG (1581) FORMERLY USED AS A COMMUNION FLAGON AT
WEST MALLING, KENT 281
List of Ilhistrations.
()0. SALVER (1545) AT CORPUS CHRISTI COLL., CAMB
Cl. EWER (1545) AT CORPUS CHRISTI COLL., CAMBRIDGE . . . .
C2. ROSE-WATER SALVER (1597) AT MERCHANT TAYLORS’ HALL, LONDON C3. EWER (1617), THE PROPERTY OF THE CORPORATION OP NORWICH .
64. SALVER (1617). THE PROPERTY OF THE CORPORATION OF NORWICH .
65. EWER (1741), BY PAUL LAMERIE, AT GOLDSMITHS’ HALL, LONDON .
66. COCOA-NUT CUP (C. 1500) AT IRONMONGERS’ HALL, LONDON
6 7. OSTRICH-EGG CUP (1610) AT EXETER COLLEGE, OXFORD . . . .
66. OSTRICH-EGG CUP (1623), THE PROPERTY OF H. WILLETT, ESQ.
69. WASSAIL HORN (14tH CENTURY) AT QUEEN’S COLLEGE, OXFORD
70. MOUNTED DRINKING HORN AT CHRIST’S HOSPITAL, LONDON .
71. THE CAAVDOR HORN (TEMP. HENRY VII.)
72. THE FOUNDRESS’ CUP (C. 1440) AT CHRIST’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
73. CUP (15th cent.) at oriel college, oxford
74. BEAKER (1507) at CHRIST’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
75. THE LEIGH CUP (1499) AT MERCERS’ HALL, LONDON . . . .
76. THE RICHMOND CUP (C. 1500 — 1520) AT ARMOURERS’ HALL, LONDON
77. STANDING CUP (1569) AT CORPUS CHRISTI COLL., CAMBRIDGE .
78. THE CHAPMAN CUP (1580) AT ARMOURERS’ HALL, LONDON
79. PEA-HEN CUP (C. 1643) AT SKINNERS’ HALL, LONDON . . . .
80. DOUBLE CUP (17TH CENTURY) AT VINTNERS’ HALL, LONDON .
81. THE EDMONDS CUP (1613) AT CARPENTERS’ HALL, LONDON
82. THE BLACKSMITHS’ CUP (1655)
83. THE ROYAL OAK CUP (1676) AT BARBER-SURGEONS’ HALL, LONDON
84. THE PEPYS CUP (1677) AT CLOTHWORKERS’ HALL, LONDON
85. TWO-HANDLED CUP AND COVER (1739), BY PAUL LAMERIE, AT GOLD-
SMITHS’ HALL, LONDON
86. CUP (1795) AT MERCHANT TAYLORS’ HALL, LONDON
87. TANKARD (1574) AT THE ASHMOLEAN MUSEUM, OXFORD . . . .
88. THE POISON TANKARD (C. 15G5") AT CLARE COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
89. TANKARD (1618), IN THE POSSESSION OF THE CORPORATION OF NORWICH
90. TANKARD (1634), THE PROPERTY OF THE CORPORATION OF BRISTOL
91. IRISH TANKARDS (1680) AT MERCHANT TAYLORS’ HALL, LONDON
92. TAZZA (1633), FROM THE OCTAVIUS MORGAN COLLECTION.
93. SAUCER (C. 1632) USED K% AN ALMS-DISH AT BREDGAR, KENT
94. BEAKER (1604) AT MERGERS’ HALL, LONDON
95. CAUDLE-CUP (1657) AT CLOTHWORKERS’ HALL, LONDON . . . .
96. CAUDLE-CUP (1670), THE PROPERTY OF KARL BATHURST . . . .
XV
PAGE
283
284
285
286
287
288
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
313
314
315
316
318
319
320
321
322
324
325
327
328
329
XVI
List of Illustrations.
PAGE
i»7. PORIUNGER (l()7-t) 330
98. FLUTED PORRINGER (1G99) 330
99. FORK (TEMP. CHARLES II.) DUG UP IN COVENT GARDEN . . . 335
100. MONTEITH (1702) AT VINTNERS’ HALL, LONDON 337
101. CANDLESTICK (C. 1G70) AT PENIARTH 338
102. CANDLESTICK (1735) 339
103. CANDLESTICK (1773) AT NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD 339
104. TOILET-BOX (1G82) 341
105. FIRE-DOG (C. 1685) AT KNOLE 342
106. JAR (C. 1685) AT KNOLE 343
107. WINE-CISTERN (1734) AT THE WINTER PALACE, ST. PETERSBURG . . 345
108. OCTAGONAL COFFEE-POT (1715), THE PROPERTY OF AUTHOR . . . 347
109. COFFEE-POT (17G4) AT SALTERS’ HALL, LONDON . . . . . 348
110. TEA-URN (1771) AT BARBER-SURGEONS’ HALL, LONDON .... 349
111. CHOCOLATE POT (1777) IN THE SOUTH KENSINGTON MUSEUM. . . 6o0
112. CAKE-BASKET (1731), BY PAUL LAMERIE 351
113. CAKE-BASKET (1749), BY PAUL LAMERIE 352
114. MACES AT WINCHCOMBB, CO. GLOUCESTER 353
115. MORPETH GREAT MACE (1604) 354
116. MACE OF WARD OF CHEAP, LONDON (1625) 355
117. THE “HOWARD” MACE (1671) AT NORWICH 358
118. MACE OF TOWER WARD, LONDON, TEMP. CHARLES II 359
119. OAR-MACE (C. 1690) OP CINQUE PORTS ADMIRALTY COURT . . . 360
120. DOVER water-bailiff’s MACE 361
121. RACING-BELLS (TEMP. ELIZ.), THE PROPERTY OP THE CORPORATION OP
CARLISLE 362
122. COCKING-BELL (1655) 362
OLD ENGLISH PLATE.
CHAPTER I.
PRELIMINARY — GOLD — SILVER — THEIR ALLOYS — THE ENGLISH STANDARDS— THE ASSAY' — COLOURED GOLD — FROSTED SILVER — A SIMPLE TEST FOR SILVER — CARE OF OLD PLATE — GOLDSMITHS’ WEIGHTS — MINT PRICES FOR GOLD.
Gold and silver, the best known of the noble metals, seem marked out by their natural beauty, their cost, and by the facility with which they lend themselves to the designs of the artist and the craftsman, as the appropriate materials for all the articles, whether of utility or ornament, that are specially deY'oted to the service of magnificence and splendour. From the earliest times devotion and luxury have habitually taken expression in their use.
The beauty and rarity of these metals having thus early attracted attention, it is not wonderful that the properties which render them so available to the workman should have long been understood and appreciated. Their malleability, ductility, and the brilliant polish of which they are susceptible, have been known from time immemorial, and valued by every nation that has left any distinct mark upon the pages of history. The Egyptians, Assju-ians, Phoenicians, Greeks, and Ptomans, Yvere all Yvell acquainted with both gold and silver, and high authority places the vessels recently found on the supposed site of Troy and at Mycenae amongst genuine relics of pre-Hellenic or, more indefinitely still, Homeric times.
The eaiiv historical books of the Bible show that even a nomad
4/
tribe in their desert wanderings were able to carry the art of the goldsmith to a high state of perfection fifteen centuries before the commencement of the Christian era. The malleability of gold must have been well understood by him who “ did beat gold into thin plates ” (Exod. xxxix. 3), and could cut it into wires to work it into fine linen with cunning w'ork.” Adorning it with jeYvels must have been a familiar art to those who “ Yvrought onyx stones enclosed in
2
Old English Plate.
[criAp. I.
ouches of gold ” (Exod. xxxix. G) ; and what more like work of some modern artist than the candlestick wrought by the Israelitish smith of old, with its six branches of beaten work, “ his shaft, and his branch, his howls, his knops, and his flowers of the same ; three howls made after the fashion of almonds in one branch, a knop and a flower ; and three howls made like almonds in another branch, a knop and a flower : so throughout the six branches going out of the candlestick” (Exod. xxxvii.).
It is unnecessary to multiply these early Biblical evidences — gold and silver are mentioned on every page ; the fining pot for silver, the furnace for gold, and the refiner’s fire are used as familiar images ; suflice it to say, that from the time of Joseph’s cup of silver and Solomon’s drinking vessels of gold, all the more costly articles of household decoration and use have been made of those precious metals, and that from the time of the ark and the tabernacle, devo- tion has lavished them upon the adornment of its shrines and the fabrication of utensils dedicated to the service of religion.
Turn we to Homer and we find the same ; the Kpariqp, wine bowl of silver, sometimes with brim of gold, sometimes all gilt, stands in the entrance hall on a tripod ; silver wine cups are given as rewards ; gold thread, gold plate, refined gold, gold vessels of every kind con- stantly mentioned ; Greek words compounded of xP^a-6^ (gold) and apyvpos (silver) are to be counted by hundreds.
Roman homes gleamed with silver in the days of Horace — rklet argento clomus (Hor. Od. iv. 11. 6). Cicero speaks of a shipload of wrought and stamped silver ; Pliny of suppers served on pure and antique silver (Plin. Ep. iii. 1. 9) ; Virgil of libations poured out of golden bowls — ijateris libamus et auro (Georg, ii. 192).
Silver and gold have ever since been prized in the same way, and modern nations vie with the ancients and one another in the taste and art with which they apply them, and add to their beauty and value, whether by the aid of jewels or enamels, chasing, engraving, or the exquisite work that may be produced by even the hammer alone, wielded by skilful hands.
Before proceeding to consider the gold and silver plate of our own country, and the makers’ and other marks from which, as we shall find, it is often possible for the expert to gather much curious information, it will be well to note what may seem to be of use to the amateur and collector of old plate, as to the precious metals them- selves and their alloys, and as to the modes adopted from time to time of ascertaining the proportion of pure gold and silver contained in given portions of such alloys, or articles made of them, not forgetting
CHAP. I.]
Gold.
3
some remarks upon the English standards, and the weights used by the English goldsmiths. And first as to gold.
tJOLD.
This is one of the most widely distributed of all metals, being found alike in volcanic rocks and alluvial deposits, sometimes in small masses or nuggets, but more often in a granular form. It is found both in the old and new worlds ; Hungary, Brazil, the Ural iNIountains, Mexico, and Peru, have all furnished large quantities, but none of them anything like the amount supplied by California, Australia, and South Africa in modern times. According to Cer- iiuschi, whilst its production annually up to 1850 was but equal to A‘6,000,000, it was not less than ^36,000,000 in 1852. From 1872 to 1878 it averaged about £19,000,000 ; in 1889 it amounted, according to the Director of the United States Mint, to about 179 tons of the metal, which would be worth something like £25,000,000 ; and in 1896, the latest date available, it had risen to more than £43,000,000.
The British Isles have contributed their share, gold having been found in Cornwall, Wales, Scotland, and in the Wicklow Mountains in Ireland ; we find the Crawford Moor district (Wanlockhead, &c., in Lanarkshire) once yielding no less than £100,000 of gold in three years’ washing ; and Mr. Patrick Dudgeon of Cargen notices a mention of gold in Scotland, in a grant by King David I., a.d. 1125, to the Church of the Holy Trinity at Dunfermline, of his tenth of all the gold found in Fife and some other places.
In M anlockhead nuggets of gold have been found, and gold in grains may even now be obtained by washing. A piece of quartz having veins of gold in it was found there in 1872, and is described by Mr. Dudgeon. An analysis of this gold, made by Professor A. H. Church, gave him the following result, viz. :
Gold 8(V(!0
Silver 12'8i)
Iron -8.5
Other subfitiinces and loss 'OG
A sample of Sutherlandshire gold has given the same analyst a smaller proportion of pure gold, viz. :
(iolll..
Silver
7‘)-22\
20-781
sp. gr. l(i-(»2
To these may be added analyses on the same and other high authority, from each of the other districts mentioned above, and also
B 2
4
[CHA1>. I.
Old English Plate.
one of gold from Ashanti way of comparison. The Wicklow and Wales analyses are by the late David Forbes, F.K.S.
Wicklow.,, Gold U2-82
Silver (id 7
Wales Gold SiO-Ki
Silver y'26
Cornwall... Gold IM)-12
Silver S <)">
Ashanti ...Gold
Silver 9-9-1
It will be observed that in the specimen from Ashanti there was found but:j^QQ part of anything but gold and its invariable companion, silver.
It remains to notice the physical properties of gold, which are the same wherever it is found, — its great • density and weight, its malleability, ductility, its beautiful yellow colour, and the brilliant polish of which it is susceptible. Even in its least dense state, as cast gold, its specific gravity is 19‘25, that is to say, it is 19| times heavier than water, whilst, by hammering or rolling, its specific gravity can be made up to 19'30 or even 19‘40.
Its weight is correspondingly great : a cubic inch weighs 10T6 oz. Troy, and a cube measuring six inches every way will therefore weigh no less than 182'88 lb. Troy, or about as much as a man can lift. Gold is so malleable that it can be beaten into leaves the 200W0 an inch thick, and so ductile that a grain can be drawn into more than 500 feet of wire ; it is these properties that are of such importance to the worker in gold.
SILVEE.
This metal is also very widely distributed ; the chief sources of supply in former days were Hungary, Transylvania, and Spain, but since the discovery of America an enormous quantity has come from thence, and especially from Peru and Mexico ; it also exists in large quantities in sea water. It is, however, veiy seldom found pure, being usually in combination with other substances, often with lead, and it is by separating silver from lead that a great deal of British silver is produced at the present time. A mention of this process is noticed by Mr. Dudgeon in an Act of Parliament of James I. of Scotland, passed in 1424.
It has been estimated that up to 1830 silver was produced in three- fold quantities compared with gold ; the annual production for the ten years ending 1871 being about 4^10,000,000. In 1872 and up to 1875, valued at the same rate in relation to gold, it would be ^13,700,000; and if we assume that the ratio of 1 : 15^ represents the proportion between the value of silver and that of gold, then the
CHAP. I.]
Silver.
5
annual production of both metals for twent3'-four years represents ot‘83,000,000. It is said that the total amount of silver produced throughout the world in 1889 was 3920 tons, which would at 4s. per Troy ounce, represent a value of rather, more than .£25,500,000 ; and, further, that the production of silver in 1896 would he worth about fifty-one millions of money at its coin value in England of 5s. 6d. per ounce. Its intrinsic value would be much less than half of this sum at the market price. A specimen of native Cornish silver (Wheal Ludcott) has given Professor A. H. Church —
Silver
Silver Chloride ... Cold and antimony
1 ron
Loss, &c
1)7
86^
71
•21
•1.0
1-07
-sp. gr. 10-26
Silver is not so malleable as gold, although it may be beaten into leaves no more than the foo;oM thick, and it may be
drawn into a wire finer by far than human hair, such is its ductility.
Its specific gravity differs greatly from that of gold, being from 10’40 to lO’GO according to circumstances, and the weight of atjubic inch is 5 ‘52 oz. Troy, or not much more than half the weight of a similar cube of gold.
ALLOYS.
We have now noted what is necessary as to pure gold and pure silver, and the importance of some of the details recorded, .especially those relating to their specific gravity, will presently be seen. But both these metals when in a state of purity are too soft for the purposes of either coin or plate. It has therefore been found expedient from the earliest times to employ some other metal as an alloy to give them the required degree of hardness without materially affecting their colour.
I^et it be remarked in passing that the word alloy is often said to be derived from the French a la loi, the proportion of baser metal that might be used for the purpose having been from very early days regulated by law. But the word seems more often than not used for the mixed metal itself rather than for the portion of base metal added to the pure gold or silver ; and coupling this with the fact that the French express it by alliaye, there is reason to think that the word may not impossibly be derived from allier rather than a la loi. In mint language the alloy is the base metal added to the more precious one, following the language of successive ordinances down even to
[chap. I.
6 Old English Plate.
the Coinage Act of 1870.* It will he found used in Loth senses in these pages.
Howeyer this may he, the necessity of alloying pure gold and silver is certain, and it is found that whilst silver or copper are the metals which can he most usefully employed in forming such an alloy with gold, copper only can he advantageously used for the alloy with silver.
The admixture of silver alone with gold renders the alloy paler and greener than pure gold, whilst copper makes it more red. Copper and silver, when both present, make it of a yellow hue. In the case of silver it is found that the other white metals render it brittle and not easily workable. The maximum hardness of an alloy of silver is obtained when the copper amounts to one-fifth of the silver, but the colour is scarcely impaired when the alloy consists of equal parts of the two metals, hence a means of committing great frauds.
The proportions found by experience to produce the best results are, for gold twenty-two parts (in technical terms called carats) of fine or pure gold, and two parts of alloy ; and for silver 11 oz. 2 dwts. of fine silver and 18 dwts. of copper in the Troy pound of 12 oz., or in other words, 222 parts of fine silver to 18 such parts of copper. If the quality of silver is given in thousandth parts, as is often the case, our standard silver, which contains in every 1000 parts 925 of fine silver, would be reported as 925' fine, and the higher or Britannia standard, which will be presently mentioned, as 959" fine. Standard gold, expressed in the same way, is of millesimal fineness 916"66 ; whilst 18-carat gold would be represented by 750". It must be added vdth regard to the estimation of the fineness of gold in carats, that originally the Troy ounce was divided into twenty-four carats, and each carat into four grains, but the carat is now only understood to be the 25 part of the metal, and gold of twenty-two carats means a mixture of twenty-two parts of fine gold with two parts of alloy, gold of eighteen carats a mixture of eighteen parts of pure gold with six parts of alloy, and so on.
Some interesting facts about these alloys are to be found in the Report for 1873 of Mr. W. Chandler-Roberts, F.R.S.,f chemist to the Royal Mint. He states that the alloying metal now employed for the English coinage, both gold and silver, is copper only, and that the gold-copper alloys, of one of which “ standard ” gold is formed, are practically homogeneous — that is to say, every part of the mixture is
* See Prof. W. Chandler-Iloberts’ Cantor f Now Mr. W. C. Roberts-Austen, C.l>., Lectures on Alloys used for Coinage. Pro- F.R. S. ceedings of the Society of Arts, 1884.
OllAl*. l.J
7
The English Standards.
of the same quality. They are considered by Matthiessen to be “ soliditied solutions of allotropic modifications of the metals in each other.” The result in the case of standard silver alloy is not so satis- factory. This appears to be a “ solidified mechanical mixture of two solutions, and the cooling of such an alloy is accompanied Avith a remarkable molecular re-arrangement, in A'irtue of which certain com- binations of the constituents of the molten alloy become segregated from the mass, and its homogeneous character is destroyed.” Portions taken from difierent 2)arts of a trial plate of such metal would not necessarily be all of quite the same degree of fineness, though the whole plate as a mass might be of exactly the correct standard. Level is said by Mr. Chandler-Roberts in this Be2)ort to have proved, as the result of a series of experiments conducted in the Mint at Paris, that it is only the alloy containing 71 '893 per centum of silver Avhich is absolutely homogeneous, and that Avhile in alloys containing more silver than this amount, the centre of the solidified mass is richer than the exterior, in alloys of lower fineness than 71 '893 per centum, the centre contains less siBer than the external 2>ortions. Mr. Chandler-Roberts’ own ex2)eriments upon standard silver confirm LeA’oTs statement as to' the concentration of silver towards the centre of the mass ; but they also j)rove that the molecular re-arrangement is comparatively slight if the mass is sloAAdy and uniformly solidified.
THE ENGLISH STANDARDS.
The proportions which have been mentioned above, viz., for gold 22 parts or carats of fine gold and 2 2>arts of alloy, and for silver 11 oz. 2 dwts. of fine silver, and 18 dAvts. of copper, are those AARich form our “standard” or “ sterling” alloys in England, and AAuth small exception this has been so in the case of gold since the Restoration in 1660, and in the case of siRer from far earlier times. They are signified A\ReneA'er the expressions “ standard gold ” and “ sterling sih’er” are used, and they are the standards of the present gold and silver coin of the realm. The Avord “ sterling” is derived, be it said Avith some doubt, from the name by Avhich the inhabitants of Eastern Germany, avIio Avere called Easterlings in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, Avere knoAvn. The i)urity of their money Avas famous, and it is said that coiners Avere fetched from thence to improA'e the quality of our OAvn currency.
In connection with this it may be noted, that a statute of 1343 (17 EdAV. III.), jn-oviding that good “sterling” money should bo made in England, also jirovides that good Flemish money shall 2>ass
8
Old English Plate.
[CUAP.- I.
current, but voluntarily, that is to say, its circulation Avas permitted, without making its acceptance compulsory, nor the offer of it a legal tender.
In many other countries besides our own, legislation on this subject has been found necessary or advisable, but as far as English plate is concerned, it is enough to detail tl;e English standards, and even as regards these it will be convenient to reserve for the next chapter such more minute changes as are found to occur now and then in the course of the legal history of the goldsmith’s craft.
For the sake of clearness the following table is appended, which Avill give at a glance a comparative view of the fineness of English gold and sihmr money, and gold and silver plate from time to time.
Comparative Table of the Standard Fineness op Gold Money and
Gold Plate.
|
Gold Money. |
Carats tine. |
Gold Plate. |
Carats fine. |
|
41 Henry III. . 18 Edw. III. to 1 12 Chas. II. 12 Charles 11. . |
24 carats (pure gold). Varied from 23 c. 3| gr. to 22 carats, but never lower than the latter, except from 37 Hen. VIII. to 3 Edw. VI., when it was 20 carats. 22 carats, at which it has remained ever since. |
28 Edward I. . 17 Edward IV. 18 Elizabeth 38 George III. . 17 & 18 Viet. . |
(“Touch of Paris ”) 19^ carats. 18 carats. 22 carats. 22 carats and 18 carats. 3 lower standards of 15, 12, and 9 carats i respectively added. j 1 |
Comparative Table of the Standard Fineness of Silver Money and
Silver Plate.
|
Silver Money. |
Fine. Alloy. |
Silver Plate. j Fine. Alloy. |
|
oz. dwts. oz. dwts. |
1 oz. dwts. oz. d\rts. |
|
|
28 Edward I. . |
11 2 — 0 18 |
28 Edward I. . ' “ As good as sterling.” |
|
(being sterling silver.) |
8& 9 Will. III. 11 10 — 0 10 |
|
|
34 Henry VIII. |
10 0 — 2 0 |
(New sterling, or “ Bri- |
|
3(5 ditto |
0 0 — () 0 |
tannia” standard.) |
|
37 ditto |
4 0 — 8 0 |
0 George I. . . 11 2 — 0 IS |
|
2 Edward A^I. . |
(50—6 0 |
Being the old sterling |
|
4 ditto |
3 0 — 9 0 |
standard restored : |
|
(5 ditto |
11 1-0 19 |
this and the above |
|
1 Mary . . . |
11 0 — 1 0 |
new sterling have |
|
2 IHizabeth . . |
11 2 — , 0 18 |
botli been legal stan- |
|
P>eing sterling standard |
dards from 1720 to |
|
|
restored, at which it |
, the present day. |
|
|
has remained ever |
; |
|
|
. |
since. |
' |
It must be understood that the standard of fineness remained the same from any one date in the above table, until the next entiy
occurs.
CHAP. I.]
9
The English Standards.
Formerly, the stamlard gold of the English coinage was alloyed with silver as well as coi)per, and it was consequently of the paler yellow colour we notice in the case of old sovereigns, and Australian sovereigns up to recent years. This older mixture contained according to the standard trial plates of 1728 and 1829 respectively, the following proportions of gold and alloying metals :
|
1728 |
1829 |
|
|
Gold |
.... 916-1 |
915-3 |
|
Silver |
.... 50-4 |
37-6 |
|
Copper |
.... 33-5 |
Since 1829 or thereabouts, copper only has been used as an alloy, and the specific gravity has been reduced from about 17'82 to 17‘57 ; whilst more recently even tlie traces of silver existing in the natural gold have been removed. This is eftected by passing a stream of chlorine gas through the molten gold, by a process invented by Mr. F. B. Miller, which purifies it not only from the silver, but from other metals, some of them injurious to the gold if required for coining purposes. This process has been of late years extensively employed for recovering silver from gold, and for toughening the latter metal. The trial plate of 1873 shows gold 916*61 and copper 83*39. The specific gravity of our English standard or sterling silver is 10*30.
The last three Mint trial plates for silver show respectively : —
1728 1829 1873
Silver 928‘9 925-0 924-96
Copper 71-1 75-0 75-04
The remedy or permitted variation from standard has varied from time to time in the case of gold as well as silver. The earliest known remedy for the gold coin, then of 23*3| carats fine, was |-th a carat, or 5*2 thousandths. This was allowed by Edward III., in 1345. The most ancient trial plate now preserved is for this standard, and is of the year 1477. It shows
Gold 993-15
Silver 5-15
Copper, etc 1’35
This, or sometimes ^-th of a carat or 6*9 thousandths, remained the rule till 1649, since which time till 1817 ^th of a carat has continually been the remedy for the 22-carat coinage gold. In this last j^ear an efibrt was made to attain greater accuracy in the coinage, and the remedy was reduced from ^th to -j^yth of a carat, or 2*6 thousandths. It is now 2*0 thousandths. . The silver remedy was 2 dwts. or 8*4 thousandths from 1601 to 1817, when 1 dwt. or 4*2 thousandths was substituted. At the present time it is 4*0 thousandths.
10
Old English Plate.
[CHAI*. I.
THE ASSAY.
Proceeding to consider the modes by which the fineness of the precious metals and their alloys may he tested, we must not forget the old story of Hiero’s golden crown, and how it was referred to Archi- medes to ascertain whether the suspicions of the king that it was alloyed with silver, were well founded. The picturesque account of his hath overflowing on his entering it, thereby suggesting to his philosophic mind a mode of solving the difficult problem, and of his flight home, forgetting even his garments in his haste, that he might set about it at once, may be true ; but certain it is that, well skilled in mechanics and hydrostatics, he used the means with which he was most familiar, and detected the fraud by the aid of what we should call the specific gravity of the metal, instead of by a chemical analysis, at that time not understood.
It will be obvious that a test depending entirely upon the weight and bulk of the object to be examined, as compared with water, can only be usefully applied to a mass of some metal, or of mixed metals, of the same density throughout and free from any hollows, for the occurrence of any foreign substance of a different specific gravity, or of hollow places in the middle of a mass, would render its application useless.
It is, however, not without its value, and especially in the case of gold, owing to the very marked difierence between the weight of equal bulks of gold and of silver or copper, or a mixture of the two. A short table which has been compiled from figures given by a well-knorwn professional assayer,* will show this very clearly : —
1 cubic inch of pure gold sp. gr. 19'2o = 10‘16 oz. Troy.
1 ,, pure silver U)’f7 = 5'52 oz. ,,
1 ., copper 8'72 = f'GO oz. „
1 ,, 11 parts of silver and 7 of copper. - »'16 oz. ,,
(The usual alloy for gold.)
1 „ equal parts of silver and copper == 5-06 oz. .,
The writer now quoted draws attention to the fact that a quantity of the last alloy mentioned in this list is almost exactly half the weight of an equal bulk of pure gold. There are two cases in which these facts can be made of use ; if the quality of the metal be kuown, it can be ascertained whether an article made of it is solid throughout, or hollow ; and again, if it be known to be solid throughout, as for instance in the case of a beaten plate of metal, its specific gravity will
* The Booh of Hall Marks, by A. Lutschaunig, London, 1872.
C1IAI>. I. ] The Assay. ii
readily show 'whether it is formed of pure ^old, or of gold mixed with alloy. Archimedes must have satisfied himself that Hiero’s crown was solid throughout, before he could have founded a decision that it was alloyed with silver on the fact that when immersed in a vessel con- taining water it displaced a certain gTeater quantity of water than was displaced when the same weight of pure gold Avas put into the vessel. It Avill of course be a good test for articles suspected to be plated.
J^ut as these early times do not immediately concern the present inquiry, Ave must pass to the mode used in Avhat are called the Middle Ages, and eA*en in more modern times, of testing the fineness of gold and sih^er by the touchstone, or pierre de touche. King Henry YII. by his AA’ill directs that “ there be made a tomb of stone called Touche sufficiently large both for our dearest late wife the Queen and ourself.” This Touchstone or Basanite is an imperfect black jasper or black flinty slate, originally brought from Mount Tmolus in L}’dia, and therefore called lapis Lijdius ; it is, hoAveA'er, found in various parts of the AA'orld, and indeed any hard black siliceous substance, or eA'en a piece of black pottery, Avill seiwe the purpose. The great Josiah WedgAvood made such, stamped Avith about 1770 or 1780.
This mode of trying the fineness AA^as called “ touching,” and the AA’ord obtained for a long time after the adoption of the chemical assay. The Avord ‘‘touch” seems to have been applied indifferently to the trial, to the quality of the metal tested, and to the mark impressed upon it. A curious mention of the Avord in this last sense occurs in 1536, Avhen it is said that a report was Avidely spread in the north country that everybody Avas to bring in his plate in order that it might have the “ touch of the ToAA^er” struck on it.^ This has, hoAA'ever, in all probability little really to do AAdth our present subject, most likely referring to a matter of taxation, and to Avhat in modern French plate affairs is called a “ receiiseT and not to assaying generally.
For the trial of gold, sets of touch-needles or bars Avere used, one set alloyed with copper, another Avith silver, and in some cases a third set alloyed Avith sih*er and copper mixed, tAA'enty-four in each set, according to the twenty-four carats’ fineness of gold. The streak or touch made on the touchstone Avith the piece under examination Avas compared Avith the streaks made by the needles, these streaks AA’ere also Avashed Avith a(pi(ifortis, Avhich dissolving the alloying metals, left the gold pure, and by the comparison its fineness Avas determined.
For testing silver, sets of needles Avere also used. In Germany the
* State Papers, Domestic, Henrij VJIL (lf)3(3), Vol. XL, No. 7(58, fo. 296.
12
Old English Plate.
[chap. r.
sot consisted of sixteen, after the sixteen loth* according to which the standard of fineness was there computed, ljut doubtless the number varied in different countries according to the computation of the standard. In skilful hands much information could be derived from the sensations of greasiness or dryness, roughness or smoothness, imparted by the stroke ; but this test has been little used for many centuries, and it could never have been a satisfactory mode of ascer- taining the purity of silver, into which so much copper could be introduced without materially affecting its colour, though it is prob- able that the hardness of the alloy aided in the detection of fraud. The “ touch,” however, long continued the mode of trying gold, and indeed is even used at the present day for rough examinations.
The period at which the chemical assay or assay by the cupel was first introduced is not exactly known, but it Avas certainly practised in the thirteenth, century, and, as we shall see, Avas the mode of exami- nation adopted by the authorities in the fourteenth century. In the latter it was practised at Montpellier in France, a city famous for its goldsmiths.
In the following chapter Ave shall come to definite mention of the “ Assay ” in 1300, Avhich is earl}'^ enough for our purpose.
The process of the assay in contradistinction to the toiicli is as follows : — for gold, to a portion of metal scraped off the article to be examined, say about eight grains, after being accurately weighed, is added three times its Aveight of silver, and a proper proportion of lead, the latter by Avrapping the gold and silver in a piece of sheet-lead. The Avhole is placed in a small shallow porous crucible made of bone ashes, called a cupel, and exposed to a bright-red heat ; the metals melt, and whilst the silver and gold combine, the lead and alloying metals become oxidised, and the oxides are absorbed by the cupel, leaving a button of pure gold and sih'^er. This button is then flattened, rolled out into a strip, Avhich is then coiled into a sort of screw, called a “ cornet ” ; this is placed in hot diluted nitric acid, by Avhich the silver is dissolved and the gold alone remains, the cornet is then treated with stronger nitric acid, AA^ashed, and lastly made red- hot : AA^hen cold it is Aveighed again, and the difference betAveen its j)resent Aveight and the original Aveight of the scrapings carefull}’’ determined. For silver the process is much the same : a certain portion, usually about ten or twenty grains, is scraped off the article, some being taken from each separate part : this is Avrapped in lead of proportionate Aveight, and the Avhole heated in the cupel. The result
* The Cologne pound was divided into 2 marks, and eacli mark into 16 loth. The mark = 3608 gr, English,
CHAl’. I.J
The Assay.
13
is the same as in the case of gold, except that the button remaining is of pure silver only ; the diftereiice between the weight of this button and the original weight of the portion operated upon, shows the amount of alloy. The portion of metal taken oli for examination is called the “ diet.”
Of this process a minutely-detailed account was given in a smalt book published more than two centuries ago, called A Touchstone for Gold and Silver JVares* and the process is now carried on at Gold- smiths’ Hall in precisely the same manner as then, even to the mode of folding up the papers to contain the scrapings of the metal to be assayed. If the article examined is found to be of the required fineness, the marks are stamped on it with punches ; but if the metal is not of the proper quality, the article is crushed, and so delivered back to the maker. It is scarcely credible that every separate part of every separate article made of gold or silver (with the few exceptions that will appear later) in this country, goes through this process of examination, either in London or in one of the provincial assay-towns, but such is the fact ; and the public are greatly indebted to the com- panies of goldsmiths, and especially to the great London guild, for the effectual protection afforded by their vigilance against the frauds which prevailed in earlier times.
There is yet another mode of testing silver, an account of which has been partly taken from Brande and Cox’s Dictionary of Science, Literature, and Art, together with some of the notes which follow it. This mode, the assay of silver in the humid way, may be adopted wLere the quality of the alloy is approximately known. The process depends upon the precipitation of the silver by a standard solution of common salt, each 1000 grains of which contain a sufficient quantity of salt to precipitate ten grains of silver, so that supposing the silver and the salt to be pure, ten grains of silver dissolved in nitric acid would be entirely precipitated by 1000 grains of the standard solution. The process is as simple as that of assaying by the cupel. The metal scrapings after being weighed are put into a small bottle and dissolved in nitric acid, to this solution is then added the standard solution of salt, as long as it produces cloudiness ; at the moment when no further change occurs, the number of measures of salt solution used is read off, and the fineness of the alloy determined with great accuracy by the amount of the standard solution of salt which has been required to precipitate completely the silver from its solution ; thus supposing
* The title of the edition quoted is A New Touchstone for Gold and Silva'
Wares, by W. B. , of London, goldsmith, 2 ed. 1679.
14
Old English Plate.
fcHAl*. I.-
we Avere operating upon fine silver, Ave should have used 1000 such measures, but AA’ith the same Aveight of sterling silver, say silver coin, 1)25 only Avould have been required.
It may he that assaying by means of the spectroscope may some day supersede these older methods, but the attempts Avhich have been made as yet in this direction have only served to prove that in the present state of science, little or no practical use can be made of this beautiful instrument for assaying purposes.
Some experiments made by Mr. Chandler-Koberts at the mint Avith Professor Hughes’ Induction Currents Balance seem to shoAv that it is more probable that some day electricity may be pressed into the service of the assayer. A detailed description of this invention Avould be out of place here, suffice it to say, that it is capable of revealing the existence of very minute proportions of gold in silver, and of sih'er in gold, and thus, already useful in the examination of certain alloys of the precious metals, may eventually become of practical value in assaying them. It was thought at first that by its means Avhen combined Avith Avhat Professor Hughes calls a sonometer, and Avith a telephone, the difference might be detected in the sound produced by tAvo shillings both fresh from the Mint, one of which has been rubbed betAveen the fingers and the other not.* This is perhaps rather more than can be said to have been really accomplished as yet, but it will doubtless be achieA’^ed at no A'ery distant day.
Enough has now been said about processes, Avhich after all can only be carried out by expert hands, and we may pass on to a feAV notes of general utility belonging to the chemical part of the subject, referring those Avhom the subject of practical assaying may interest to the standard Avorks on Metallurgy, especially Dr. Percy’s AMume on Silver.
A word AAdll be expected about the “frosted” siHer, and what is called the “ coloured ” gold, that is so often seen in the windows of the goldsmiths’ shops: and first, what is “coloured gold”? It is metal from the immediate surface of Avhich the copper or other alloy has been removed, so as to leave an outer coat of pure gold. An article treated in this Avay has all the appearance of being made of purer gold than it is, but the coating of fine gold is one of almost inconceivable thinness, “not thicker,” says Mr. Lutschaunig, “than the hundredth part of the breadth of a hair. It is the same as if the article Avere gilt or electro-plated, only that in the one instance the alloy is taken out of the gold on the surface, leaAung the pure gold.
* Nineteenth Century Review, October, 1879.
CHAV. I.]
Can of Old Plate.
15
and that in the other the gold is put on. Any gold over nine carats can be coloured by boiling in nitric acid, or other preparation acting in the same manner.” “Frosted” silver is silver similarly dealt Avith. If silver mixed with copper, our own standard silver for example, be heated to a dull red heat in air, it becomes of a black colour from the formation of a film of oxide of copper, and if this be removed by its being dipped in hot diluted sulphuric acid, the silver becomes of the beautiful white appearance called “frosted” silver, owing to a film of pure silver being left on its immediate surface.* We find the celebrated London silversmith of the last century, Paul Lamerie, who died in 1751, directing in his will that all the plate in hand at the time of his death should be “ forthwith finished and made fit for sale by being hoiled and burnished.” New coins owe their brilliancy to this mode of treatment before being struck, the darker appearance of their projecting parts after some wear is occasioned by the alloy showing through the pure surface. Articles of plate may also be deadened, matted, or frosted by being boiled in bi-sulphate of potash, which acts in the same way as the diluted sulphuric acid.
The bad quality of the silver of which base coin or any other article of base metal is made may be detected immediately by the use of a solution of common nitrate of silver. If thirty grains of this salt be dissolved in an ounce of distilled water, and a drop or two of the solution be placed upon the suspected coin or metal, a brown or black film or spongy mass of metallic silver will appear in the case of base metal, and its quantity will form a rough measure of the degree of baseness.
Some interesting directions for the care and cleaning of silver-gilt plate, are preserved with the church-plate of Stinsford, in Dorsetshire, t They are dated June, 1737, and are headed “Directions to keep the Gilt Plate clean from the Silversmith that made it,” the silversmith being none other than Paul Lamerie himself. They run as follows : — “Clean it now and then with only warm water and soap, with a Spunge, and then wash it with clean water, and dry it very well Avith a soft Linnen Cloth, and keep it in a dry place, for the damp Avill spoyle it.” Compare with this extract, the instructions given by the siLer- smith Avho made the plate for Carlisle Cathedral in 1679, for they are equally well worth our attention. “ Be carefull,” he says, “ to wipe it with a clean soft linnen cloath, and if there chance be any staines or spotts that will not easily come off with a little Avater, the cloath being
* In Mint language tliis is called “blanching.” t The Church Plate nf Dorset. Salisbury, 1889.
i6
[chap. I.
Old English Plate.
dipp d therein, and so riibh the flagons and chalices from the topp to the Bottome, not crosswise, hut the Bason and patens are to be rubb'd roundwise, not acrosse, and by noe means use either chalke, sand, or salt.”* These last words cannot be too strongly emphasised. It is sad to see how much damage has been done to beautiful old plate by excessive rubbing and the use of injurious cleaning materials. The simple directions given above by Paul Lanierie and his brother silver- smith are still as good a guide as those can wish for, who value their old silver and silver-gilt plate.
GOLDSMITHS’ WEIGHTS.
In former times the Tower pound, or juns cVorfevres, the old pound sterling of silver, was used by the goldsmiths, and in the earlier inventories, such as those of the Treasury of the Exchequer and in the Wardrobe Accounts, the weight of articles of plate is recorded in such pounds, and in marks, shillings, and pence for sub-divisions. This ancient pound was equal to 5400 grains Troy, and was divided into twenty shillings, and these last into twelve pence or pennyweights ; the mark was two thirds of the Tower pound.
These, however, ceased to be legal mint weights in the reign of Henry VIII. They had long before that fallen out of common use, but in 1526-7 (18 Hen. VIII.) the Tower pound was abolished by royal proclamation. The Troy pound then substituted for the Tower pound is said to have been introduced into England as early as the great French wars of the reign of Edward HI., or perhaps earlier, and its name was no doubt derived from the French town of Troyes, where a celebrated fair was held. It has been used ever since by the trade of goldsmiths for all gold or silver wares in England, but as its sub-divisions are not so commonly known as the avoirdupois weights of commercial life, it will be useful to give in addition to a table of the Troy w^eights, a table by which the weight of plate as ascertained by the ordinary domestic avoirdupois scale, may be easily and quickly converted into the Troy reckoning by which it Avould have to be valued or sold.
TROY WEIGHTS.
24 grains = 1 clwt. (pennyweight).
4S0 grains = 20 clwts. = 1 oz. (ounce).
5760 grains = 240 dwts. = 12 oz. = 1 lb. (pound).
* Old Church Plate in the Diocese of Carlisle, by R. S. Ferguson, M.A., F.S.A. London, 1882.
CHAl*. I.]
Goldsmiths' Weights.
A V0IHDU1‘01S WK [G HTS. 487 J grains = 1 oz.
70UU grains = IG oz. = 1 lb.
The grain is the same in both cases.
o
Comparative Table op Troy and Avoirdupois Weights.
Avoirihqmis. 'Troy.
|
4 oz. |
— 4 dwts. 18g gr, |
||||
|
4 |
M |
= |
— 9 |
93 )) “5 It |
|
|
i |
>• |
— |
— 18 |
)? 02 |
|
|
2 |
:zz |
1 |
oz. IG |
M 11 „ |
|
|
8 |
•y |
2 |
„ 1-t |
» 1«1 „ |
|
|
4 |
yy |
= |
8 |
„ 12 |
„ 22 „ |
|
5 |
jy |
= |
4 |
„ 11 |
„ H |
|
G |
yy |
= |
5 |
„ 1* |
n „ |
|
7 |
yy |
z= |
G |
.. 7 |
„ 1-li M |
A voi r(li(jM)i,'f. 'Troy.
|
8 oz. |
7 |
OZ. |
5 |
dwts. |
20 gr. |
|
|
9 „ |
8 |
1 J |
4 |
yy |
14 „ |
|
|
10 „ |
= |
9 |
yy |
2 |
yy |
7 „ |
|
11 » |
= |
10 |
yy |
0 |
y |
12^ „ |
|
12 „ |
10 |
yy |
18 |
yy |
18 „ |
|
|
18 „ |
11 |
yy |
IG |
yy |
m „ |
|
|
11 „ |
12 |
yy |
15 |
yy |
||
|
15 „ |
= |
18 |
yy |
18 |
yy |
101 „ |
|
10 „ |
14 |
y. |
11 |
yy |
10 „ |
192 oz, (12 lbs. ) Avoirdupois = 175 oz. Troy, being 84,000 gr. each.
The weight of an article of plate was always given in ounces and pennyweights ; thus 5 lb. 5 oz. 5 dwts. would be called 65 oz. 5 dwts., but it is now-a-days given in ounces and decimal parts of an ounce, in compliance with modern legislation on the subject. It will be convenient also to remember that a pound Troy of standard gold is coined in England into 46f§ sovereigns, the weight of a sovereign being 123*27447 gr. A pound Troy of sterling silver is coined into 66 shillings, the weight of a shilling being 87*27272 gr., and of a sixpence 43*63636 gr. New silver coins, therefore, to the amount of 5s. 6d. will weigh an ounce Troy, and could be used at that rate as a substitute for ordinary weights on an emergency. The intrinsic value of plate made of sterling standard silver would be at present (Dec., 1898) prices about %s. 4d. per ounce. It has varied but very little since 1894; having fallen .about one penny halfpenny an ounce in the course of the last three years.
MINT FKICES FOIl GOLD.
Lastly, dividing the number of sovereigns contained in one pound Troy of standard gold by twelve, the value of an ounce of such gold (22 carat) will be found to be T3 17s. 10|d., or 3s. 6^d. for each part (or carat) of fine gold in the ounce weight. The following table gives the value per ounce of all the other qualities of gold that it has been necessary to mention, at this Mint price. No account is taken of the material used for alloying the gold, which would in any case be of trifling value. The alloying metal in an ounce of 22 carat gold, if sterling silver alone were used for the alloy, would hardly be worth 2hd. at the present market price of silver : in other words the silver O.E.P. c
i8
[CIIAJ’. I.
Old English Plate.
in a sovereif^n made of sucli an alloy, would be Avortli less than a single penny.
24 carats (or pure gold) ,
23 car. gr. (old gold coin. Sec table, p. 8)
22 car. (present gold coin and tirst goldware standard)
20 car. (gold coin temp. Henry A^IIl. See table, p. 8). Also an Irish
standard)
19-^ car. (touch of Paris. Sec table, p. 8)
18 car. (second goldware standard)
15 car. (third ditto)
12 car. (fourth ditto)
,9 car. (fifth ditto)
a ft. d.
4 4 1 1 J per oz,
4 4 0] „
3 17 m „
3 10 9i ,.
3 7 IH „
3 3 8J „
2 13 1 2 2 5| „
1 11 lOi „
CHAPTER II.
THE MEDIAEVAL GUILDS OK GOLDSMITHS IN FRANCE AND ENGLAND — THE GOLD- SMITHS’ COMPANY OF LONDON — REGULATIONS OF THE GOLDSMITHS’ GUILD AT MONTPELLIER — CHARTERS OF THE LONDON GOLDSMITHS AND EARLY LEGISLATION RELATING TO THEM AND THEIR MARKS — THE CORONATION REGALIA — THE BANKER GOLDSMITHS — LEGISLATION FROM THE TIME OF CHARLES II. — TABLE OF LONDON MARKS.
There are no articles in the manufacture of which such extensive frauds can he committed in so small a compass as those made of the precious metals, and there are no frauds more difficult of detection by ordinary persons. We have seen, too, that whilst a certain amount of base metal must needs be introduced into all such articles, it is only by a minute scientific examination that the proportion of base metal so introduced can be known for certain, and but few persons can possess either the skill or the means to conduct the necessary operations. The great profit to be made by fraudulent practices, the difficulty of detection, and the consequent probability of escape from it and from punishment, have at all times exposed the dishonest workman to irresistible temptations. In very early times, those who carried on particular trades or handicrafts were accustomed to form themselves into guilds or fraternities for the purpose of protecting and regulating the trade, or mystery as it was called, which they exercised. These were at subsequent periods incorporated by royal charters, which gave them pow'er and authority to carry out their objects more effectually. Amongst such associations, those of the goldsmiths seem to have been early formed in many countries of Europe. In 1260 it became necessary for the provost of Paris to issue a code of statutes for the regulation of the goldsmiths, who already existed there as a corporate body. Not only was gold of an inferior quality substituted for good gold, but articles made of laten were gilt and palmed off for gold, and pewter was silvered and sold for the genuine metal. In these statutes, gold is ordered to be of “the touch of Paris,” and silver as good as “Sterlings” (esterlins), which was the standard of the English coin, as we have seen. In 1300 the mark of Paris was known even abroad, for it is referred to in the English Wardrobe Accounts of that year (28 Edw. I.) in these terms : —
c 2
20
Old English Plate.
[ciiAi'. ir.
“ 8 coclear’ argenti signata in collo sigiio Parisius, scilt. de quodam flore glegelli.”
A second and more extensive code was issued by John II. of France, in the shape of Letters of Confirmation given at St. Ouen in Aug. 1355,* when it was ordered that every goldsmith who was approved by the masters of the craft should have a puncheon with a counter- mark of his own. Amongst other things they were forbidden to work in gold unless it be of the touch of Paris, or better, and the statutes add that this standard is better than all the gold which they work in other lands {en inille terres), and that its fineness is nineteen and one-fifth carats. They are also forbidden to work in base metal, to use false stones or glass, or to put coloured foil beneath real stones. Their silver was to be argent de roy, 11 deniers 12 grains fine,t and jurors (gpmdhommes) were appointed to guard the trade, with power to punish those who worked in bad metal. At Montpellier the gold- smiths in the fourteenth century constituted a fraternity governed by statutes, and they had a standard of their own, which, however, does not seem to have been a high one, since silver might contain one-third part of alloy, or such silver as would come white out of the fire, and gold of fourteen carats fine might be worked. They were expressly forbidden to manufacture articles in gilt or silvered copper or brass, save ornaments and utensils for churches, to mount real stones in jewellery of base metal, or to set false stones in gold or silver. lYe shall presently see how much light the history of the goldsmiths of Montpellier throws upon that of their English brethren.
At Nuremberg and Augsburg, cities most famous for their metal- workers, as well as in many other places, similar guilds of goldsmiths, regulated by statutes, existed.
In England a fraternity or guild of goldsmiths had existed from an early period, for in 1180, the twenty-sixth year of the reign of Henry IL, it was amongst other guilds amerced from being adulterine, that is, set up without the king’s licence. It was not, however, incorporated by charter for nearly a hundred and fifty years after this time, although it had special duties assigned to it, one of the duties of the wardens of the craft being to protect their trade against fraudulent workers by holding official examinations of the above-mentioned kinds, and placing marks upon articles so examined.
* Collection de pieces relatives d Vldstoire de France, par C. Leber, Paris, 1838. Yol. XIX. 348.
f Denier was the term used in France to denote the fineness of silver as carat is for gold. The silver is divided into twelve
deniers, and each denier into two obolcs or twenty-four grains ; hence silver of twelve deniers was pure, and eleven deniers one obole had only one twenty-fourth part alloy. This quality was the Argent de Roy.
cuAi>. II.] Early Goldsmiths' Guilds. 21
Some such marks must have been necessary in order to certify to the purchaser, and for other purposes, a certain standard purity of metal in articles so examined, and the official stamps by which it was certified seem to have been the origin of the marks which are found on the gold and silver plate of most countries.
Every person who is possessed of any article of gold or silver plate, has, most probably, observed a small group of marks stamped upon some part of it. Few, perhaps, have regarded them in any other light than as a proof that the article so marked is made of the metal of which it is professed to be made, and that the metal itself is of a certain purity. And this is, in fact, the ultimate intention of these marks ; hut besides this the archaeologist can often deduce from them other important and interesting information, — as to the year in which any article bearing them was made ; the place at which it was made, or at all events, assayed ; the maker’s name, and other particulars. As regards England, an historical notice of the Goldsmiths’ Company of London and its charters, and the legislation which from time to time has regulated the trade of the goldsmith, will elucidate in its course the meaning of all the marks to be found on English plate.
Some notes of the provincial guilds and assay offices, including those of Scotland and Ireland, and of their respective marks, will he reserved for separate chapters.
Except for the early trace of a guild in 1180, which has already been noticed, we have to wait until the commencement of the thir- teenth century before we come to any definite regulation of the mystery of the goldsmiths of London, and even then their formal incorporation had not yet taken place. However, by this time they were a numerous and powerful craft, for in an affray which occurred in 1*267 between the goldsmiths and the tailors, those trades met and fought to the number of 500 men on each side, of whom some were killed, the dead being, it is said, thrown into the Thames, and others wounded, before the bailiffs of the city could part them and apprehend the ringleaders, some of whom were hanged.* But, truth to say, their turbulence was not their only failing, for the frauds that seemed so common in France had their place also in England, and by the year 1288 were of such extent as to call for a mandate from the king, to he found in the Close Bolls of that year, f This, which is entitled “7M aiiro fahrirando in civitate LondoniariunE commands the
* Chronicles of the Mayor and Sheriffs of London, editefl l>y TI. T. lliley, Lontloii, 1863. Such affrays are also mentioned in
Herbert’s History of the London Livery Companies.
t Close Roll, 22 Henry III., in. 6.
22
Old English Elate.
( OUAI-., II.
mayor and aldermen to choose six of the more discreet goldsmiths of the city, who were to superintend the craft, seeing that no craftsman worked any gold of which a mark was not worth a hundred shillings at least, nor any silver of less intrinsic value than the king’s money —
quod non valeat in se quantum valeat moneta Regis.” They were also to prevent any one working in secret, or anywhere hut in the public street, to see that gold bore no colour but its own, except in the case of gold thread, and that no one put gold upon baton or copper. There are also provisions as to the use of precious and counterfeit stones.
Fifty years later, the first actual statute on the subject, passed in 1300, recognizes these discreet goldsmiths by the name of wardens, and for the first time establishes their powers on a firm basis, ordaining as follows, viz. (28 Edward I., Stat. 3, cap. 20) : — “ That no goldsmith should make any vessel, jewel, or other thing of gold or silver unless it be of good and true alloy, i.e., gold of the standard of the touch of Paris {tuclic de Pargs) and silver of the sterling alloy, or better {argent del alloy de le esterling on de meilleur), and that none work worse silver than money. And that no vessel of silver depart out of the hands of the workers until it be assayed by the wardens of the craft, and marked with the leopard’s head {e q'ele soit signee de nne teste de leojmrt). That the wardens (gardiens) should go from shop to shop {de shope en sliop)e) among the goldsmiths and assay {assaient) the gold, and if they should find any other it should be forfeit to the King. That no false stones should be set in gold, and that all the good towns of England where any goldsmith be dwelling shall be ordered according to this E statute as they of London be, and that one shall come from every good town for all the residue that be dwelling in the same unto London for to be ascertained of their Touch. And if any goldsmith be attainted that he hath done otherwise, he shall be punished by imprisonment and by ransom at the King’s pleasure.”
Here, then, we have mention, not only of wardens of the craft, but of an assay and of a distinct mark for standard metal. Mr. Octavius Morgan notes that the phraseology of this statute more than suggests that such a mark was now ordered for the first time, it being termed une teste.” This is indeed an important step in the history of which we are tracing the course. It is the earliest mention, too, of an assay.
Now that the duty of the wardens is laid down, we have naturally not long to wait for the regular incorporation of a Goldsmiths’ guild in London, and in 1327 it was so incorporated b}’' letters-patent from
CHAP. II.]
The London Goldsmiths.
23
Edward III., under the name of “The Yv^ardeiis and Commonalty of the Mystery of Goldsmiths of the City of London.”
This charter, which is in old French, and is dated 30 May, 1 Edw. III., is given at length, both in French and English, in Herbert’s History of the London Livery Comimnies. It first recites and then grants as follows : — that the goldsmiths of our City of London had by their petition exhibited to the King and Council in Parliament holden at A\'estminster, shown that theretofore no private merchants or strangers were wont to bring into this land any money coined, but plate of silver to exchange for our coin ; that it had been ordained that all of the trade of goldsmiths were to sit in their shops in the High-street of Cheap, and that no silver or gold plate ought to be sold iu the city of London except in the King’s Exchange or in Cheap, among the goldsmiths, and that publicly, to the end that persons in the trade might inform themselves whether the seller came lawfully by it: but that of late both private merchants and strangers bring from foreign lands counterfeit sterling whereof the pound is not -worth sixteen sols of the right sterling, and of this money none can know the right value but by melting it down ; and that many of the trade of goldsmiths do keep shops in obscure streets, and do buy vessels of gold and silver secretly without inquiring whether such vessels were stolen or come lawfully by, and immediately melting it down, make it into plate, and sell it to merchants trading beyond sea, and so make false work of gold, silver, and je-wels, in w^hich they set glass of divers colours, counterfeiting right stones, and put more alloy in their silver than they ought, -vvhich they sell to such as have no skill in such things ; and that the cutlers cover tin with silver so snbtilely and with such sleight that the same cannot be discovered nor separated, and so sell the tin for fine silver, to the great damage and deceipt of us and our people ; we, with the assent of our lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons of our realme, will and grant for us and our heirs that henceforth no one shall bring into this laud any sort of money, but only plate of fine silver, and that no plate of gold or silver be sold to sell again, or be carried out of the kingdom, but shall be sold openly for private use ; that none of the trade shall keep any shop, except in Cheap, that it may be seen that their work be good ; that those of the trade may by virtue of these presents elect honest and sufficient men, best skilled in the trade, to inquire of the matters aforesaid, and that they who are so chosen reform -what defects they shall find, and inflict punishment on the offenders, and that by the help of the mayor and sheriffs, if need be ; that in all trading cities in England where goldsmiths reside, the same ordinance be observed
24
Old English Plate.
ICHAl'. II,
as ill London, and that one or two of every such city or tow'n for the rest of the trade shall come to London to he ascertained of their touch of gold, and there to have a stamp of a puncheon of a leopard’s head marked upon their work as it was anciently ordained.
For some years they were governed by the provisions of this charter, but in 1363 further legislation became necessary, and by an Act of that year (37 Edw. III. cap. 7) it was ordained that no goldsmith, as Avell ill London as elsewhere within the realm, should work any gold or silver but of the alloy of good sterling {alloy de hon esterhing) ; that every master goldsmith should have a mark by himself which should be known by them who should be assigned to survey their work and allay; th.»t the goldsmiths should not set their mark till their work was assayed ; and that after the assay made, the surveyor should set the king’s mark upon it, and then the goldsmith his mark for which he should answer ; that no goldsmith should charge for silver vessel but Is. M. for the pound of two marks as at Paris ; that no silversmith should meddle with gilding ; and that no gilder should work in silver. This brings us another stage, and introduces us to a maker’s mark for the first time in England. We have a standard mark since 1300, and now a maker’s mark dating from 1363.
*
It is pretty clear that in the fourteenth century, owing to the frauds committed, a great move was made throughout Europe wuth respect to goldsmiths, France and perhaps Montpellier taking the lead.
Turn we therefore, by the way, to Montpellier, of whose history the Piihlications de la Societe Archeologique de Mont2)ellier give many interesting particulars, and we find that by 1355 a dispute which had arisen between the consuls of the town and the goldsmiths, in conse- quence of the great abuses introduced into the trade of the latter, led to the following regulations of that year : —
That all vessels and works of silver made by the argentiers of Montpellier must be of the standard of eleven deniers and one obole, or twelve grains, at the least.* The goldsmiths were to make two patterns or trial pieces of silver, of the standard of eleven deniers fourteen grains, marked with the puncheon of Montpellier (for Philippe le Hardi had, in 1275, ordained that each city should have a particular mark for works in silver), after which the goldsmiths should work with an allowance of twn grains. One of these trial pieces should be kept at the consulate, and the other by the warden of the goldsmiths. That a third trial piece shall be made of eleven
* See note, p. 20.
CHAF. II.]
25
Ordinances of Montpellier.
clGiiiers and one obole, also mavked, \vliicli sliould remain ■\\itli tlie consuls for trial with suspected works. l']very master silversmith should mark with a particular mark the pieces of his work, and deliver them himself to the warden. The warden, before marking the piece with the puncheon of Montpellier, should remove a portion ol the silver, called, in the language of Montpellier, “ borihl (a technical term for a portion of metal removed with a buril, burin or graver, for the purpose of the assay), which he should put into a box, keeping a separate box for each workman, and once or twice a year make an assay of these borihls,” and if the standard was found below the eleven deniers one obole they should denounce the worker to the consuls, who should make a second assay, and if they found the fraud confirmed, should deliver him over to justice. Moreover the wardens might break such articles as seemed to them insufficient. In the original documents nothing is said of the method of performing the operation of the assay ; but as it is expressly ordered that in assaying the trial pieces and “ borihls ” the same ashes (probably bone-ashes to form the crucible), lead and fire, should be used, it is clear that the assay was by the cupel.
Nothing had hitherto been done or said about gold ; but though less worked than silver there were equal abuses ; and in 1401 the consuls and wardens of the mystery, assisted by several argentiers, made a regulation in presence of the consuls of the city, by which the standard of gold, which originally was only fourteen carats and had by a subse- quent decree been raised to eighteen carats, was now reduced to sixteen carats ; and there is here a question of the trial of gold by the “ touch,” showing that it was then in use.
In the fifteenth century abuses and frauds in the trade had greatly multiplied. Public clamour was raised against the principal silver- smiths for working below the standard of 1355. A process was insti- tuted against them in 1427. The consuls seized several of their works, had them assayed, found them fraudulent, and made the makers appear before the tribunal. In their defence they pleaded that the ordinances of 1355 were obsolete with regard to small “ orfevreries.” They were condemned to pay a fine of ten marks of silver each, and on appeal the sentence w^as confirmed. They claimed exemption from marking girdles and small works. An inquest was held, and the following ordinances resulted, which were solemnly renewed in 1436 with still stricter conditions, and they show with what care the fabrication of works of gold and silver was regulated. To ensure the legal standard they ordained, besides the ordinary precaution of the box, the “borihls,” the trial pieces, and the name
26
Old English Plate.
[CHAI'. II.
of tlie silversmith, that the name of the warden of the mysterj*, inscribed on the register of the city and on the private hook of the silversmiths, should be followed by one of the letters of the al2)hahet, which should be reproduced beneath the shield of arms (enisson) of the town on each work, in order that it might be known under what warden it was made. These proceedings of the goldsmiths of Mont- pellier are highly interesting, since they not only give us an account of the frauds and the alteration of the standard, together with the particulars of the assay, which in its system with the box and trial- pieces bears a very strong analogy to our trial of the Pyx,* but also give us the date, origin and establishment of three very important marks, viz., the mark of the country or city, the mark of the maker, and the annual letter, two of which we had already adopted in this country, whilst the use of the third, the annual letter, was soon to be established.
If we may turn aside for a moment to see how the goldsmiths put their powers into actual use, we gather that their original charter must have served its purpose to some extent. Proceedings taken against one Peter Kandolfe, a Latoner, are enough to show that it was at all events not a dead letter in 1376, for upon interrogation for exposing two circlets for mazers of mixed silver, we find him promising not to interfere with the goldsmiths’ trade again.!
The names of many of the great London goldsmiths of this generation are known. Thomas Hessey was the king’s goldsmith in 136t5, and Nicholas TwjTord held the same office shortly afterwards; the latter is mentioned in accounts of 1379. The names of John de Chichester
* The imiDortant clutjf of testing the purity of the coinage from time to time has been entrusted for ages to the Goldsmiths’ Company. The ceremony of doing this has been conducted with the same formalities from time immemorial, and is called “The trial of the Pyx.” Such a trial is known to have taken place in 9 & 10 Edw. I., and it has been held at shoit but irregular intervals ever since ; it is now an annual event. A specimen coin, taken foimerly from each ‘ ‘ journey ” or day’s work, but in modern days from each melting of metal, whether gold or silver, is placed in a chest kept at the Mint, called the Pyx. At the proper time a jury of the Goldsmiths’ Company is summoned, who after being sworn and solemnly charged, proceed to an assay of the coins found in the Pyx, and to compare their quality with the standard trial plates in the
custody of the Warden of the Standards.. Their verdict is the deliverance of the authorities of the Mint, who are virtuall}' placed upon their trial. Since the Coinage Act of 1870, the proceedings have been somewhat shorn of their circumstance, owing to the jury being summoned to Goldsmiths’ Hall, and there charged by the Queen’s Eemembrancei’, instead of by the Lord Chancellor himself at Westminster, where the assay was formerly conducted, in au apartment specially prepared for the pur- 230se. The mode of procedure thenceforward to be adopted on these occasions is com- jdetely set forth in the above Coinage Act (33 Viet. c. 10), and in the Queen’s Order in Council of 29 June, 1871.
t Riley’s Memorials of London and London, Life in the XIII., XIV., and A' I . centuries. London, 1868, p. 398.
CHAP. II.]
27
Charters of the Goldsmiths' Company.
and Thomas Roynbam, John Hiltoft and also his executors, all occur in the 'Wardrobe Accounts as enjoying royal patronage between this time and the end of the century. The great goldsmith, Sir Diw Bareiityn, who died in 1415, was a man ol more than civic note.
Here, however, the charter of Edward III. was found insufficient for want of proper persons being named in it ; therefore Richard II. in 1392-3 re-incorporated them by another charter dated 6 Feb. 16 Ric. II., confirming the first and giving them power to choose wardens and other officers.
Edward IV. in 1462 not only confirmed the charter of Richard II., but constituted the Goldsmiths’ Company a body corporate and politic, with perpetual succession, power to use a common seal, hold lands, etc., and by this charter dated 30 May, 2 Ed. IV., invested them with a privilege of searching, inspecting, trying, and regulating all gold and silver wares, in the City of London, and the suburbs thereof, and in all fairs and markets, and all cities, towns and boroughs, and all other places whatsoever throughout our kingdom of England, with power to punish oflenders for working adulterated gold or silver. These powers were continually exercised, and from the records of the Company it appears that periodical progresses through the country were made by the assay-wardens for that purpose. Several kings at various times have given them new charters, enlarging and confirming the older ones. The latest are Insyexiinus Charters of James I. (2 Jac. I) and Charles II. (18 Car. II.), which recite and confirm all those previously granted. The latter of these is recited in the Act of 12 Geo. II., c. 26, and empowered the wardens to commit offenders to prison and to set fines upon them. The guild thus incorporated is now one of the greatest and wealthiest of the City Companies, and one to which the archieologist and antiquary are indebted for the ready information and assistance it has given to those who have from time to time sought permission to consult its records, which, commencing about 1331, are carried down to the present day. They consist of the wardens’ accounts, which begin in that year, and amount to many large volumes, the ordinances, and other books relating to their estates, all of which contain curious and interesting- particulars. The members of the fraternity were originally all gold- smiths, as mentioned in their first charter, and the Company is governed by a Prime Warden, three other wardens, and twenty-one assistants, with a livery of 150 members, exclusive of honorary members and members by special grant. The wardens are now annually elected on May 29th ; previously, however, to the Restora- tion, in compliance with their ordinances, 8t. Dunstan’s Hay, being
28
[CHAl*. II.
Old English Plate.
that of their patron saint, was their proper day of election. On the day of election, when the new Ihirae Warden enters upon the duties of his office, the new punches for tlie mark having been prepared, are delivered by him to the officers of the Assay Office. Formerly the old punches were all preserved, hut not many years ago the accumulation being very great and found inconvenient, it was considered that such a mass of old iron was useless, and they were destroyed. It is much to be regretted that impressions were not taken of them on a copper-plate previous to their destruction, though it is hardly probable that there were any earlier than the time of the fire of London in 1666.
The ordinances or statutes of the Company are contained in a fine MS. on vellum, with illuminated initial fetters. It is therein stated that ‘‘ thys boke was made and ordeynyd by Hugh Bryce, Altherman, Henry Coote, Mylys Adys, and Willyam Palmer, wardens, the xx day of September in the yere of our lorde god mcccclxxviij and in the xviij yere of the Reigne of King Edward the fourth. Humfrey Hay- ford then May re of the Cyte of london, John Stokker and Henry Colett, Sheryffys of the same Cyte.” The index of the same volume is further described as follows: “Thys Kalendar was made and ordeynyd for this boke by Henry Coote, Stephyn Kelke, John Ernest, and Alen Newman, wardens, the last day of August in the yere of oure lorde god mcccclxxxiij and in the ffurst yere of the Reygne of King Richard the thiyd. Sir Edmond Shaa, Knyght, then Mayre of the Cyte of london, Willia Whyte and John Mathew, Sheryffys of the same Cyte.”
It contains first the oaths for the wardens and officers ; and secondly the ordinances for the government of the Company, which chiefly , consist of regulations for the masters of the craft and the taking, keeping and conduct of apprentices ; but also “ for the working of gold and silver to the standard, and how it shall be delivered.” The following may be quoted as examples : —
“Also it is ordeyned that no goldsmith of England, nor nowhere else within the realme, work no manner of vessel nor any other thing of gold nor silver, but if it be of the verry alloy according to the standard of England, called sterling money or better.”
“ That no manner of vessel or any other thing be borne out from the hands of the workers, nor sold till it be assayed by the wardens of the craft or their deputy, the assayer ordained therefore, and that it be marked with the lyperde’s head crowned according to the acts of diverse parliaments, and the mark of the maker thereof.”
No worker was to be a freeman of the Company until he had been
CHAP. II.]
Records of the Goldsmiths' Company.
29
apprenticed seven years ; and the ordinances were to be read publicly on St. Dunstan’s Day. At the end of the book are some additional ordinances of the year 1507, being the twenty- second of Henry VII., by which it was provided that no goldsmith should put to sale any vessel or other work of gold or silver until he had set his mark upon it; that he should take it to the assay house of the Hall of the (Goldsmiths to be assayed by the assayer, who should set his mark upon it, and should deliver it to the warden, who should set on it the leo})ard's head croicned.
Again, in another MS. book on vellum which has the arms of the Goldsmiths’ Company emblazoned on the first page, and contains ordinances dated July 5th, 1513, being the fifth year of Henry YIII., we find that it is ordained that before any work of gold or silver is put to sale the maker shall set on it his own mark, that it shall be assayed by the assayer who shall set on it his mark, and that the wardens shall mark it wuth the leopard’s head crowned.
Here then in both these sets of ordinances we have three distinct marks mentioned : the maker’s, the assayer’s, and the leopard’s head or king’s mark. What this assayer’s mark was wn are not expressly told, but it must almost necessarily be the annual letter, no'w there- fore to be added to the leopard’s head of 1300 and the maker’s mark of 1363. We shall give reasons 'when dealing specially with this mark for attributing its inauguration to the year 1478.
The course of State legislation had proceeded pari passu with the ordinances of the Goldsmiths’ Company, and before passing the ill- omened gulf in the history of English plate w^hich occurs beDveen 1513 and the commencement of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, we must bring it doAvn to the earlier of these dates. And first comes a statute which, but for the fact that it is not found amongst “the statutes” properly so called, and seems therefore to have been only provisional and not confirmed on the assembling of parliament, wmild appear to have crippled the new'-found powers of the goldsmiths’ guild, and to have rendered them inoperative outside the city of London. Indeed, it was only assented that this ordinance should commence at the feast of St. John, and should last till the next parliament, to try in the meantime if it w^ere profitable or not.
It is found ill 1379 on the Rolls of Parliament of the second year of Richard II., No. 30, and would have ordained not only that each smith should put his mark on his work, but that it should be marked with the mark of the city or borough wherein it w^as assayed, and that the assay should belong to the mayors, etc., of the cities and boroughs, Avith the aid of the master of the mint. For the reasons mentioned.
30
[chap. II.
Old English Plate.
this statute was probably not acted upon very generally ; though, as we shall presently see, in the case of York, a recognised touch is mentioned in civic records of 1410.
The next Act, in 1381 (5 llichard II., cap. 2), forbade the export of gold and silver in any shape, or et argent si hien monoie uessell plate* et joialx. These provisions are reinforced in 1402 by another Act forbidding any person to carry gold or silver in money, vessell or plate out of the realm, without the king’s licence.
In 1404 (5 Henry IV., cap. 13), in order to prevent frauds, it was enacted that no artificer, nor other man, whatsoever he be, shall gild nor silver any locks, rings, beads, candlesticks, harness for girdles, chalices, hilts, pomels of swords, powder-boxes, nor covers for cups {jjur lianapes) made of copper or latten, on pain to forfeit to the king € shillings at every time that he shall be found guilty ; but that chalices excepted, artificers may work ornaments for the Church of copper and latten, and the same gild and silver, so that at the foot or ■some other part, the copper and the latten shall be plain, to the intent that a man may see whereof the thing is made for to eschew the deceit aforesaid.
In 1414 (2 Henry V., Stat. 2, cap. 4) it was enacted for that the goldsmiths of England, of their covin and ordinances, will not sell the wares of their mystery gilt, but at the double j)rice of the weight of silver of the same, which seemeth to the king very outrageous and too excessive a price ; the king for the ease of his people hath ordained that all goldsmiths of England shall gild no silver wares worse than of the alloy of the English sterling ; and that they take
* The word “plate” here stands for bar or sheet gold and silver, rather than for articles made of them, which were called “vasa” and “jocalia,” or, in English, “vessel,” until about the middle of the fifteenth century. In the wills and inven- tories of the latter half of that century, the word begins to occur in its modern sense ; to give a single example, one Thomas Brygg, in 1494, bequeathes “ omnia mea vasa argen- tea voc’ le plate,” using the ordinary Latin word and the less familiar term then just ■coming into use in juxtaposition.
In the following statutes of the fourteenth century, “plate” appears to mean merely the wrought or flattened metal, which is a more strictly accurate use of the word, derived as it is from a common origin with the Greek ■nXa.rvs, our own flat, and the Spanish fllata, than its later and secondary application as a general term to vessels
formed of such metal : —
9 Edw. III. Stat. 2. Statute of liloney :
c. 1. “ Argent en plate ne vessel dor ne dargent.”
‘ ‘ IMonoie plate ou vessel dor ne dargent.”
27 Edw. III. Stat. 2. The Statute of the Staple :
“Plate of silver and billets of gold.”
A “plate of ale” is the expression used at Trinity College, Cambridge, for one of the silver tankards purchased by fellow-com- moners for their own use, and left by them as a parting present to the college (Words- worth’s Social Life at the English Univei'si- ties in the 18iA Century) ; and the same term is applied at Queen’s College, in the sister university, to the caudle-cups with ring-handles which arc now used for beer.
CHAP. II.]
Acts of Parliament,
31
for a pound of Troy gilt but 46 sliilliugs and 8 pence at the most ; and of greater weight and less according to the quantity and weight of the same ; and that which shall he by them gilt from henceforth shall he of a reasonable price and not excessive, and if any goldsmith do contrary to this statute, he shall forfeit to the king the value of the thing so sold.
In 1420 (8 Henry V., c. 3) it was forbidden to gild any sheaths or any metal hut silver, and the ornaments of Holy Church ; or to silver any metal hut knights’ spurs, and all the apparel that pertaineth to a baron and above that estate.
A more important statute now follows, viz., that of 1423 (2 Henry YI., cap. 14), by which it was ordained that no goldsmith or jeweller within the City of London should sell any article of silver unless it was as fine as sterling, nor set it to sell before it be touched with the touch of the leopard’s head if it may reasonably bear the same touch, and also with the mark or sign of the workman of the same, upon pain of forfeiture of the double as afore is said ; and that the mark or sign of every goldsmith be known to the wardens of the same craft ; and that the keeper of the touch if he shall touch any harness with the leopard’s head, except it be as fine as sterling, shall for everything so proved not as good in alloy as the said sterling, forfeit the double value to the king and the party. By this statute also it is ordained that the city of Y”ork, Newcastle upon Tine, Lincoln, Norwich, Bristol, Salisbury, and Coventry, shall have divers touches, and further that no goldsmith anywhere shall work silver of worse alloy than the sterling, and shall set his mark upon it before he s'et it to sale, upon the same penalties as if in London. This is the first mention of provincial assay towns, of which more will be said in a succeediug chapter.
Next, in 1477 (17 Edward IV., cap. 1), by reason of the provisions of the Act of 2 Henry VI., cap. 14, having been daily broken by the goldsmiths and other workers of silver, as well in London as else- where, it was directed inter alia that no goldsmith or worker of gold or silver should work or put to sale any gold under the fineness of eighteen carats, nor silver unless it be as fine -as sterling, except such thing as requireth solder; also that no goldsmith work or set to sale harness of silver plate, or jewel of silver, from the feast of Easter, within the city of London or within two leagues {leukez) of London, before it be touched with the leopard’s head crowned, such as may bear the said touch, and also with a mark or sign of the worker of the same so wrought, upon pain of forfeiture of the double value of such silver wrought and sold to the contrary; that the mark or sign of
32
Old English Plate.
[CHAl’. JI,
every goldsmith he committed to the Avardens of the same mysterj' ; and if it be found that the keeper of the touch of the leopard’s head croAvned, do mark or touch any harness Avith the leopard’s head, if it be not as fine in alloy as sterling, he shall forfeit double the value of the silver ; and that the craft of goldsmiths of London shall be ansAver- able for the non-sufficiency of the Avarden. The statute Avas enacted for seven years, and AA^as aftervv^ards re-enacted for twenty years in 1489, and again for twenty years in 1652 by 7 Edward VI., cap. G.
In 1488-9 (4 Henry VII., Pari. 3, cap. 2) it was found that Avhereas in previous times finers and parters of gold and silver had used to fine and part all the gold and silver needful for the mints of London, Calais, Canterbury, York, and Durham, and the fellowship of gold- smiths, under the rules and orders of those mints, but noAv they dAA’elt abroad in every part of the realm, and out of the rules aforesaid, and carried on their trade so that men can get no fine silver ; and it AA’as enacted that the finers and parters should not alloy fine gold nor silver, nor sell anything else, nor to any persons except the officers of mints and the goldsmiths ; that silver be made so fine that it bear 12 pennyweight of alloy in the pound AA^eight, and yet be as good as sterling, and that all finers set their marks upon it.
We have now brought doAvn both the ordinances of the goldsmiths and those of the statute book to the time of Henry VIII., and it Avill presently be seen what a disastrous period in the history of the art has been reached. We have come to the time when the accumulated treasures of the Church Avere SAvept away, and the wealth of lay corporations extorted for the service of the croAvn and state. Monastic and cathedral plate disappears on the Reformation in the reign of Henry VIII., the possessions of the parish churches follow at the end of that of EdAvard VI., Avhilst the “ benevolences ” of Queen Mary ransack the treasure-rooms of the great secular guilds and companies.
A number of goldsmiths’ names occur in the Church inA-entories of Edward VI., and it may be as Avell to give a few of them for the chance of their initials being here and there recognised on A'essels made by them for the reformed use, some of Avhich, as Ave shall see, still remain. One Christopher Terry, is noted about 1515 ; and betAveen 1530 and 1553 maybe found working at their craft in London Thomas Calton, Robert Danbe, John Palterton, Raufe Lathom, John Waberley, Thomas Metcalfe, John Danyell, Robert Re^ms, Eabyaii Wythers, and Robert Wygge — Wigg and Dickson are mentioned in the iuA'entory of St. George’s Chapel, Windsor — and to these must be added the name of a lady, one Margery Herkins, Avho carried on business in Lombard Street. In various accounts rendered by London
CHAl“. II.]
Elizabethan Goldsmiths.
33
cliurcliwarclens, temp. Edward VI. occur : — Jasper ffyslier, George Dalton, William Kelwaye, John Wickes, John Clarke, li. Maynarde, Mr. Hartop, W. Dyckeson, Thos. Miischamp, Thos. Dewey, Eobert Trappes, Eichard Lounde, John 3 [abhe, William South wood and Eobert Danhe. Of these, Jasper tfysher was Prime Warden, and Eobert Wygge and John Clarke were Wardens of the Goldsmiths’ Company in 1566.
In the early years of Queen Elizabeth the names that most frequently occur are those of Eobert Tayleboys, found from 1559 to 1572, Thomas Muschampe, who made a communion cup for Chelms- ford, which is unfortunately not now in existence, and Thomas Turpyn. Mr. Anthony, of the Queen’s Arms in Cheapside, was one of the Queen’s goldsmiths at the beginning of her reign, and it was under the auspices of this respectable tradesman that the first lottery of which there is any record was brought out in 1569 ; a little later one Hughe Kayle held a similar appointment amongst the Queen’s servants.
The pedigrees and coats of arms of no fewer than thirteen gold- smiths were entered at the visitation of London by the heralds in 1568, those of the above-mentioned Dericke Anthony, Thomas Metcalfe, and Thomas Muschampe among the number. In this record Affabel Partridge, Esq., is styled “ Principal Goldsmith” to Queen Elizabeth. The others were George Dalton, Henry Gilbert, John Mabbe, Francis Heton, Christopher Wace, Francis Jackson, Henry Gaynsford, and Thomas Gardiner. Four of these were members of the Court of Assistants of the Goldsmiths’ Company in 1566, Metcalfe-, Mus- champe, Mabbe, and Gardiner. There were sixty-eight goldsmiths living in Cliepe in 1569, besides some twenty in Lombard Street. These were the chief resorts of the craft. It is curiously seldom that the name of the maker can be traced by the sign of his shop forming part of his registered mark, but it may be interesting to record some of them, as the following : —
John Lannyson ... Chri.stopher Wace . Manasscs Stockton
Win. ilartcn
Wm, ffynstwayte..
][y. Gilberd
Pklmund (5oniwall
Hy. Sutton
Nicha. Sutton
Uichd. Howe
Tlioa. iiampton ....
O.E.P.
Goldsmiths
Acorn.
(ircen Dragon.
Kcye.
.. White Lyon.
Mytcr.
Hose.
SquiiTcll.
I’lougho.
Harrowc.
(irition.
Falcon.
in Chei)e, 156‘J.
Ant. Bate
Thos. Gierke
Diricke Antonie Win. Dyxson ... Fras. Jackson ... I Thos. Harrison .
I John Harry son., John Goodrich .
1 Ilobt. Brandon , I ilobt. Durrant .. i Ilobt. ^Icdley ..
St. John’s Head.
Angell.
Queen’s Arms.
Flour de luce.
Black Spread Eagle.
Swan.
Broad Arrow.
Unicorn.
Gyltc Lion.
Half Moon.
Wliite Horae.
D
34
[cii/Vi*. II.
Old English Plate.
(fohlumlths in Clicpc^ 15(51) — cont'imied.
|
Antonie Bate |
|
|
Thos. Hartoppe |
White Cocke. |
|
Nichs. Bartlemewe |
|
|
Affabell Bartvige |
Black Bull. |
|
Aldein. Langley |
|
|
Kobt. Sharpe |
|
|
John Mabbe |
|
|
W. Calton |
|
|
Beereblocke |
Legge. |
|
John Mabbe, s>'- |
|
|
Thos. Metcalf |
Bell. |
|
Thos. Conell |
|
|
Geo. Waren |
|
|
Thos. Gardener |
|
|
Fras. Heaton |
|
|
Bobt. Wright |
|
|
Geo. Gatchet |
|
Hy. Gaynesford |
|
|
Gabl. Newman |
Byke. |
|
Hiclid. Hanberric |
|
|
liobt. Wyggc |
|
|
Stephen Durrant |
Blcwe Bore. |
|
iliehd. Hanberric |
Connie. |
|
Edward Gilberd |
Ship. |
|
Iliehd. Martin |
|
|
liobt. Aske |
|
|
Kichd. Eogers |
Gilt Eagle. |
|
John Ealeston |
White Hind. |
|
Iliehd. Ilogers |
|
|
Christopher Ffulke |
|
|
John Keale |
|
|
John Foxe |
|
|
Geo. Martin |
|
|
Thos. Maye |
In St. JIattlieiu\'i Alley.
|
George Longedale. |
Affabell Bartridge. |
|
Thos. Denham. |
Geo. Warrenson. |
|
John Binfold. |
Wm. Burneye. |
|
North Side of Che])e. |
|
|
Wm. Holborne. |
Andrew Balmer. |
|
Wm. Foxe. |
Eobt. Signell. |
|
Jas. Storke. |
|
|
In Lumhard Street. |
|
|
Thos. Benson. |
Thos. Bope. |
|
Kichd. Sharpe. |
John Wetherhyll. |
|
Wm. Jones, j,. |
Thos. Muschampe. |
|
Eobt. Tayleboyes. |
Umphrey Stevens. |
|
Hughe Keale. |
Kichd. Eobyns. |
|
James Alleyn. |
John Bull. |
|
Wm. Jones, s’^- |
Eobt. Hawkyns. |
|
John Kettelwood. |
Thos. Sympson. |
|
W. Alsoppe. |
Wm. ffeake. |
|
Edward Creake. |
Eobt. ffrye. |
It will be inferred that with the accession of Queen Elizabeth, brighter days succeeded to a quarter of century of plunder and destruction The debased standards of the last twenty or thirt}" years were raised once more to their former purity, and none knew better than the Queen herself the importance of this step, in which she took much personal interest. But it 'was not at first a very popular measure, and the promulgation by royal proclamation was necessary of a “ summarie of certaine reasons which moved the Queen’s majestie to procede in reformations of her base and coarse monies, and to reduce them to their values in sorte as they may be turned to fine monies,” before the public, who saw only the loss that the reform
CHAP. II.]
Queen Elizabeth.
35
would occasion them on the coin then in their possession, realised the great benefit it would bo to the nation. This was dated from Hampton Court on 29 September, 1560, and on 19 February, 1560-61, the base money was called in also by proclamation. The Queen went herself in state to the Mint, and striking some coins with her OAvn royal hand, gave them to those standing about her, ordering that a medal should be struck to commemorate the event. The Minutes of the Goldsmiths’ Company record that the diet tried on 18th June, 1561, Avas “ the first dyett of the newe Standard.”
Stringent measures, too, were adopted to prevent fraud and to preserve the purity of the re-established standard. Twenty-eight goldsmiths were fined in the course of 1566, a not exceptional year in this respect ; and amongst them are some of the leading members of the craft. Legislation also was resorted to, and in 1575-6, on February 8 (18 Eliz. cap. 15), it Avas enacted with this view, that after the 20th of April then next ensuing, no goldsmith should AA^ork, sell, or exchange, any plate or Avare of gold less in fineness than twenty- two “carrects ” (carats), and that he use no sother amell or other stuffing more than is necessary for finishing the same, nor make, sell, or exchange, anyAA^ares of silver less in fineness than 11 ounces 2 penny- AA’eight, nor take aboA^e twelvepence for the ounce of gold or pound of silver “beyond the fashion” (more than the buyer shall or may be allowed for the same at the Queen’s exchange or mint) ; nor put to sale any ware before he hath set his own mark on so much thereof as may conveniently bear the same ; and if after the above day any gold or silver wares shall be touched for good by the wardens or masters of the mystery, and there shall afterwards be found fraud or deceit therein, the wardens shall pay forfeit the value of the thing so marked.
The Goldsmiths’ Company, resuming its good work, seems to have exercised its poAvers even harshly. There are constant entries in the Minute-Books of plate broken and penalties exacted for silver Avork, usually buckles or clasps, but often larger pieces, found on assay to be AA'orse than standard, and goldsmiths of good name and standing are found amongst the defaulters, and Avere dealt Avith as stringently as the rest. Great dissatisfaction was given in 1583 by one Thomas Kelynge, then the assayer at Goldsmiths’ Hall, Avho from over zeal, or baser motives as it was alleged, made himself very unpopular Avith the craft. Amongst the records of the Mint are preserved some ])apers detailing “ the grefes of us poor goldsmiths against our assay master,” one Richard Mathewe and a fellow-craftsman named Henry Colley charging Kelynge Avith breaking their plate unjustly, and
36
Old English Plate.
[CUAI*. II,
stating that 'when they had refashioned a part of the broken plate differently, and sent it in again under another maker’s mark, it passed. Colley describes cutting out part of a condemned platter and making it into a taster 'which passed, and he further complained that out of a nest of howls or of a tankard of no more than thirty ounces, Kelynge took as much as a quarter of au ounce, or at least half a quarter, for himself.*' There were however faults on both sides, and the strict supervision of the Goldsmiths’ Company was still both exercised and needed, as the following entry found among their records testifies : — “ 4th May, 1597 — Edward Cole, Attorney- General, filed an information against John Moore and Eobert Thomas ; that whereas it had been heretofore of long time provided by divers laws and statutes for the avoiding deceit and fraud in the making of plate, that every gold- smith should before the sale of any plate by him made, bring the same first to the Goldsmiths’ Hall for trial by assay, to he touched or marked and allowed by the wardens of the said company of Goldsmiths ; the which wardens did by their indenture in their search, find out the aforesaid deceitful workmanship and counter- feit also of plate and puncheons ; yet the said John Moore and K. Thomas being lately made free of the Goldsmiths’ Compan}-, did about three months past make divers parcels of counterfeit plate debased and worse than her Majesty’s standard 1‘2‘^ and more in the oz. ; and to give appearance to the said counterfeit plate being good and lawful, did thereto put and counterfeit the marks of her Majesty’s Lion, the leopard’s head limited by statute and the alphabetical mark approved by ordinance amongst themselves, which are the private marks of the Goldsmiths’ Hall, and be and remain in the custody of the said wardens and puncheons to be worked and imprinted thereon, and the said John Moore did afterwards sell the same for good and sufficient plate to the defrauding of her Majesty’s subjects, &c.”
It remains to be said that they were convicted and sentenced to stand in the pillory at Westminster, with their ears nailed thereto, and 'with papers above their heads stating their offence to be “for making false plate and counterfeiting her Majesty’s touch.” They Avere then put in the pillory at Cheapside, had one ear cut off, and Avere taken through Foster Lane to Fleet Prison, and had to pay a fine of ten marks. Here Ave have the first actual mention by name of the Lion and an cdplicibetical letter, though both had been long in use, the former for about half a century, and the latter for more than double that time.
\
b
■
' «•
[
■
■
* Public Record Office — Exchequer, Q. R. {Mint. MiscelL), tern]). Elk.
CHAP. II.]
Coronation Regalia of Charles II .
37
There is nothing now to note for a long time except that in 1624 (21 Jac. I. c. 28) certain portions of the earlier enactments of 28 Edw. I., 37 Edw. III., and 2 Henry VI. were repealed, and that a few years later the goldsmiths’ hall marks were fully recognised as a guarantee of the quality of silver bearing them ; for when Charles I. resorted to forced loans for the means of carrying on the war, warrants dated from Oxford in 1643, demanded of the individuals to whom they were addressed so much money “ or the value thereof in plate, toucht plate at five shillings, and untoucht plate at foure shillings foure pence per ounce.”*
Mention is made in the records of 1635 of pewter marked like silver, and of a petition by the Goldsmiths’ Company to the Lords of the Council, pointing out the undesirability of the practice ; and other similar entries occur later.
In these and such like transactions, as well as in other greater affairs, the goldsmiths bore an important part, and that their business was right profitable is attested by the wealthy and notable men that are found amongst them at this time. Who has not heard of George Heriot, goldsmith to James VI. of Scotland, and of the noble hospital founded by him in Edinburgh ? A goldsmith by descent, for his father was an eminent Scotch goldsmith and money dealer, like other- people he removed to London with his royal master on his accession to the English throne, and there constantly increased in eminence and wealth till his death in 1623-4. The Vyners too, and the Jenners both owed their prosperity to the great business which they carried on as goldsmiths in the middle years of this century. The tran- sactions of Sir Tiros. Vyrrer with the Mercers’ Comparry as their goldsmith exteird from 1620 to 1643. He died in 1665.
The name of Vyner must be invoked to justify digressiorr for a little while to a subject of considerable archaeological, indeed rrational, importance. More than fifty years ago Mr. Eobert Cole, F.S.A., read before the Society of Antiquaries a paper! upon some interesting documents that had therr lately come into his possessiorr relatirrg to the Eegalia made for the coronation of Kiirg Charles II. They were two in number, oire of theirr being the order dated 20th June, 1662, for the payment from the Eoyal Treasury to Sir Eobert Vyner, his Majesty’s goldsmith, nephew of Sir Thomas, of the sums of L‘21,978 lid., and i>10,000, “for two Crowns, two Sceptres, and a Globe of Gold, set with diamonds, rubyes, saphires, emeralds, and pearls, St. Edward’s Staff’, the Armilla, Ampull, and other the Eegalia,
* C'lll. Top. ct Crcn., vol. vii., p. 10*2.
t Archwolojia, vol. .\xix., p. 2(52.
3^
[chap. II,
Old English Plate.
all of gold.” Tlie second document was the receipt of Sir Robert 3'yner for part of this money, and it bears the signature of Sir Robert Yyner himself, dated July 1, 1G62. A third and later document, dated Feb. 23, 1684-5, procured by Mr. Cole in the same way and at the same time as the other two, was afterwards communicated to the Society. It contained not only a list but the weights of the articles comprised in the [Regalia, and seemed to have been prepared as a sort of estimate of some of the probable expenses of the approaching coronation of James II., which took place in April, including the providing of articles such as on the former occasion were delivered to the great officers of state for fees. It is of considerable interest, and as the Transactions of the Society of Antiquaries are at the disposal of comparatively few persons, no apology is needed for reprinting it here as follows.*
“A List of y® Eegalias provided for his late Ma^'J'’** Coronation, and are now in y® Chistody of S^’ Gilbert Talbot, Knt., Master and Treas’’ of his Ma^v's Jewells and Plate, vizt : —
|
oz. dwt |
gr. li. s. d. |
|
|
Imprim. Edward's Crowiie |
. poiz 82 5 |
16 |
|
For y® addition of Gold and Workemanship |
• • |
. 350 00 30 |
|
For y® Loan e of y® Jewells returned |
• . • |
. 500 00 00 |
|
One Crowne of Statef |
poiz 72 01 |
00 |
|
For y® Gold, Jewells, and Workemanship |
• • • |
. 7,870 00 00 |
|
Ifii one Scepter with a Dove |
poiz 34 03 |
20 |
|
For y® Gold, Jewells, and Workemanship |
• • • |
. 440 00 00 |
|
It'>i One other Scepter with a Cross .... |
poiz 32 11 |
10 |
|
For y® Gold, Jewells, and Workemanship |
. • • |
. 1,025 00 00 |
|
It“ One S*^ Edward’s Staffe |
poiz 4.-) 08 |
08 |
|
For y® Gold and Workemanship .... |
. t • |
. 225 06 02 |
|
It®^ One Gloobe with a Crosse |
poiz 42 07 |
12 |
|
For Gold, Jewells, and Workemanship . |
. |
. 1,150 00 00 |
|
It™ One Pair of Spurrs |
poiz 12 18 |
00 |
|
For Gold and Workemanship |
. |
63 07 06 |
|
It™ Two Armillas . |
poiz () 12 |
22 |
|
For Gold and Workemanship |
. • |
44 18 06 |
|
It™ One Ampulla or Eglet |
poiz 21 08 |
00 |
|
For Gold and Workemanship |
. . |
. 102 05 00 |
|
It™ The Anointing Spoon |
poiz 3 05 |
00 |
|
For Silver and Workemanship .... |
. . |
2 00 00 |
|
It™ One Chalice and Paten |
poiz (!1 12 |
12 |
|
For Gold and Workemanship |
. |
. 277 06J00 |
|
£12,050 03 05 |
G. Talbot.”
* Proceedings of the Society of Anti- quaries, 1852, vol. ii.. No, 31, p. 222.
t Tlie framework of this crown was taken by Messrs. Runclell and Bridge, in part pay-
ment for a new crown made by them in 1838, and is now in the possession of Lord Amherst of Hackney,
CHAP. H.]
Coronation Regalia of Charles II.
39
A Lirit of Eegtilias provided for his late Mat'^s Coronation, w^'* were delivered for Fees, &e., by Order, and are out of y« Custody of Gilbert Talbot, Knt, Master and Treasr of his Maj'» .Jewells and Tlate, and are now to be provided, &c.
|
Imi)rim» One High Constable’s Staffe |
poiz |
oz. dwt. gr. 15 00 00 |
li. |
s. |
d. |
||
|
For Silver and Workemanship lt“ One Earle Mamhairs Stafl’e .... |
. poiz |
0 |
00 |
00 |
08 |
15 |
00 |
|
For Silver, Gilding, and Workemanship . Six Canopy Staves |
poiz |
180 |
02 |
12 |
07 |
15 |
00 |
|
For Silver and Workemanship It“ One Crown for Garter King at Arms |
poiz |
24 |
10 |
0 |
76 |
11 |
01 |
|
For Gold and 'Workemanship It™ One Chaine and Jewell |
poiz |
5 |
18 |
8 |
116 |
17 |
6 |
|
For Gold and Workemanship .... It™ One Banner and Kod |
poiz |
8 |
18 |
8 |
48 |
06 |
07 |
|
For Golde and Workemanship It™ One Collar of SS |
poiz |
10 |
10 |
0 |
87 |
14 |
03 |
|
For Silver, Guilding, and 'Workemanship It™ Two Coronets |
poiz |
80 |
12 |
12 |
24 |
18 |
00 |
|
For Silver, Gilding, and AVorkemanship It™ Two Collars of SS |
poiz |
34 |
07 |
12 |
22 |
10 |
04 |
|
For Silver and AVorkemanship It™ Six Collars SS |
poiz |
80 |
15 |
00 |
88 |
11 |
10 |
|
For Silver and AA^'orkemansliip It™ Two Ingots |
poiz |
10 |
00 |
00 |
82 |
08 |
00 |
|
For Gold and Workemanship .... It™ One Cup |
poiz |
10 |
07 |
00 |
75 |
05 |
00 |
|
For Gold and AA^orkemanship .... It™ Coronation Meddalls — Twelve |
poiz |
8 |
10 |
16 |
80 |
05 |
08 |
|
For Gold and AA’^orkemanship .... It™ Jewells, 75 for Kid® of the Bath, of w^h seven custody |
are in poiz |
85 |
10 |
12 |
25 |
06 |
08 |
For Gold and Workemanship 483 04 4
£1,067 10 4
Ct. Talbot.”
Interesting as this curious history of the Regalia is in itself, and as showing that none of the old Regalia, not even the Anointing Spoon,* as it tvould seem, survived the Commonwealth, it is not of less import- ance to note the mode in which these and other documents came into ]\Ir. Cole’s hands. The instructive particulars of his acquisition of them shall be told in his own words. He says :
“ It will be in the recollection of the Society that some two or three years ago the then Lords of the Treasury directed the selection and mutilation of many tons weight of Exchequer Records (as they were not improperly called), and which, after being mutilated, were sold as waste paper. It is not necessary for me to make any observations on
* When exhilnted by gracious permission of her Maje.sty the Queen, at tiie rooms of the Society of Antifiuaries in 1890, the
Coronation Spoon was, however, considered by some to be the original one, and of high antiquity.
40
[ciIAi>. II,
Old liuglish Plate.
the propriety or im]:)ropriety of this order for the destruction of original documents, nor on the manner in which that order was executed : the report of the committee appointed by the House of Lords to inquire into the subject is before the public, and to that, and the - evidence taken on the occasion, I would refer the Society. The contractor with the Government for the purchase of the mutilated records re-sold the mass in various parcels, and a portion of about two tons weight came into my hands, from which I selected many very curious and interesting documents, one of them the subject of my present communication.”
In view of any similar wholesale destruction of ancient public records in future, the necessity cannot be too strongly urged of examining them far more carefully and by more expert hands than hitherto, before they are altogether condemned ; and it may help to save some of them to show, by fragments that have accidentally escaped, what curious and interesting historical information may easily be overlooked and destroyed.
Returning to the Vyners and the Jenners, it must not be forgotten that from this time until 1700 or even later the London goldsmiths frequently combined the business of banking with their trade, many of the gentry in those troublous times being glad to adopt the practice of keeping “ running cash balances ” with their goldsmiths for safety’s sake instead of keeping gold in their own houses. This, indeed, is the origin of modern London banking, and in some cases existing firms actually represent ancestors who came in for their business in this way, and gradually dropped their earlier calling for the new one.
Not that the goldsmiths’ craft was thought by any means a despic- able one; they are found resenting association with men of ‘‘meaner trades,” even as dwellers in the same street, and in the time of Charles I., the influence of the king himself was on occasion exercised for the removal of such people from Cheapside, which was then almost exclusively inhabited by the goldsmiths.
An account lately published of Messrs. Childs’ banking house, tells of the apprenticing in early life of the great Sir Francis Child, Lord Mayor in 1699, to his grandfather, William Wheeler the elder, a gold- smith at Temple Bar ; of his marriage with his cousin Elizabeth Wheeler, the only daughter and heiress of his uncle, William Wheeler the younger, and of his succession to the business, which has ever since been carried on at the sign of the Marigold in the same name.
But this brings us a step further towards modern banking, for a list of goldsmiths is given, and it includes Charles Duncomb of the
CUAl*. II.]
The Banker Goldsmiths.
41
Grasshopper, Francis Kenton of the King’s Arms, Thomas Fowle of the Black Lion, J. Heriot of the Naked Boy, and John Mawson k Co. of the Golden Hind, all in Fleet Street, and John Coggs of the King’s Head in the Strand, who prior even to 1700 kept accounts with Childs’ instead of carrying on a joint goldsmith’s and banking business for the benetit of their customers, or even taking care of their own money. The same account gives the names of William Bawson and John Marryott in 1G6G, Thomas Williams of the Crown in 1G77, William Pinckney of the Golden Dragon, Inner Temple Gate, in 1GG3, Joseph Horneby, John Portraan, Kobert Welsted, and Thomas Kowe, all gold- smiths of more or less note in the time of Charles II., besides the better known one of Edward Backwell, Avho died in 1G79, ruined by his dealings with that soA^ereign. In a bill draAvn upon AtAvills, by Francis Tyssen and accepted by Mr. William AtAvill and Company, 23 March, 1703, that Avell-knoAvn banking firm are only called “ Goldsmiths of London.”
But in the midst of more interesting historical remarks, the Avorking goldsmith and his regulations must not be forgotten ; and so far as these are concerned, Ave find that things remained AALere Ave left them early in the century, till in 1G75, for the prevention and redress of great abuses, the Goldsmiths’ Company put forth a notice dated from their Hall on Feb. 23, to the folloAving effect : — That whereas divers small Avares Avere frequently Avorked and put to sale Avorse than standard, and also divers pieces of silver plate sold, not being assayed at Goldsmiths’ Hall, and not marked Avith the leopard’s head crowned, and whereas to prevent such frauds the Avardens had formerly- required all plate Avorkers and small AA'orkers to cause their respective marks to be brought to the said Hall, and struck there in a table kept in the Assay Office, notice Avas by this order giA'en to all goldsmiths in and about the cities of London and Westminster to repair to the hall, and there strike their marks in a table appointed for that purpose, and likeAvise enter their names and their dAvellings in a book, and that AA'orkers and shopkeepers should forbear to sell any gold or silver Avares not being agreeable to standard, gold of 22 carats, and silver of 11 oz. 2 dwts. fine, nor before the Avorkman’s mark be struck thereon, and the same assayed at Goldsmiths’ Hall, and there approved for standard by striking thereon the lyon and Leo^mrd's head croinied, or one of them, if the Avorks Avould conveniently bear the same, and the order concludes Avith a caution as to the penalty for infringing it. Advantage of this order seems to have been sometimes taken in later days for the marking of small Avares, such as teaspoons, Avith the lion passant only.
42
Old English Plate.
[chap, ii.
Passing mention must be made of “ the Plate Lotteries ” of Charles II. before going on to a later reign. These seem to have been a con- trivance for rewarding the fidelity of those who had served the crown during the interregnum, and for raising money at the same time for present needs. The mode of distributing gifts of plate from the Crown as prizes by means of lotteries, probably recommended itself by the opportunity it offered of farming out to advantage the right of setting up and bringing out the lotteries, in various parts of England, and of selling the tickets. Mr. Hone, speaking of this ingenious mode of increasing the revenue, gives from Malcolm’s Manners a public adver- tisement of the year 1669, as follows * : — “ This is to give notice that any persons who are desirous to farm any of the counties within the kingdom of England or the dominion of Wales, in order to the setting up of a plate lottery, or any other lottery whatsoever, may repair to the lottery office at Mr. Philip’s house in Mermaid Court, over against the mews, where they may contract with the trustees commissioned by His Majesty’s letters patent for the management of the said lotteries on the behalf the truly loyal, indigent officers.”
We now come to legislation of a different character. The order of 1675 had had its effect, and it became necessary rather to protect the coin of the realm from being melted down for plate, than to insist on the fineness of the plate itself.
Large quantities of plate had been sacrificed for King and Parlia- ment, or confiscated by one or the other in this disturbed century, and now that quiet times had come again, the rich turned their attention to replenishing their tables and cupboards with the necessary plate, and even tavern-keepers supplied themselves with silver drinking- vessels. We find the grand jury of Middlesex presenting in 1695 that the frequent and common use of silver basons, monteaths, silver tankards, bowls, cups and tumblers of silver in public-houses and taverns have occasioned many burglaries and murders, and praying the Bench to make application to His Majesty’s Council or Parliament or both to find out means to prevent such common use of silver in such places. All classes seem to have resorted to the supply of metal that was nearest at hand — the silver coin of the realm.
In consequence, therefore, of this practice of melting down the coin, legislation for its protection became necessary, and in 1696 (8 & 9 Will. III. c. 8) with this object the standard for plate was raised above that of the silver coinage, so as to make the silver of the coinage less easily available for plate making. It was enacted that on and
* Hone’s Every Day BooTc, ii. 1413.
CUAP. II.]
The Britannia Standard.
43
after March 25, 1697, no Avorker of plate should make any article of silver less in fineness than 11 oz. 10 dwts. of fine silver in every pound Troy, nor put to sale, exchange or sell any article made after that day but of that standard, nor until it had been marked with the marks now appointed to distinguish plate of this iieAV standard. These marks were to be as follows : — The worker’s mark to be expressed by the two Jirst letters of his surname, the marks of the mystery or craft of the goldsmiths, which instead of the leopard’s head and lion Avere to be the figure of a lion’s head- erased and the figure of a Avoman, commonly called Britannia, and a distinct and variable mark to be used by the Avarden of the same mystery, to denote the year in which such plate Avas made. The plate made at this period is often called of “Britannia standard” to distinguish it.
But here another difficulty arose, for this Act mentioning no pro- vincial offices practically deprived them of the privilege of stamping any plate at all, as they Avere not empoAvered to use the marks appointed for the new, and now the only legal, standard. The result of this was that from 1697 until the establishment of certain pro- vincial offices, as AA^e shall see, in 1701, no plate Avas properly stamped anywhere but in London, and what little plate Avas made in the provinces Avas stamped irregularly.*
Leaving, hoAvever, the provincial offices for the present, some further provisions of the Act of 1697 must not be forgotten, for it not only protected the coin b}'- raising the standard, but adopted means for increasing the supply of it. This was effected by providing for the ready purchase by the mint of any wrought plate bearing the stamps of the Goldsmiths’ Company at 5s. 4d. per ounce, and such an offer, no doubt, brought about a further destruction of some of the ancient plate that had escaped previous storms.
From this time foi’Avard, OAving to the re-registration of makers’ marks, Avhich noAv became necessary, considerably more is known about plateAA’orkers’ names than is the case in earlier days. Some of them Avere artists of great merit, and the names and abodes of all those of much note have been entered against their marks in an appendix at the end of this A^olume. The best patronised of them Avill be knoAvn by the number of recorded examples of Avork stamped Avith their respective marks.
In the course of the next tAventy years the object of the last- mentioned statute Avas accomplished, though somewhat sloAvly, and at length the necessity for its continuance no longer existed. Added to this it seems to have been found that articles made of the higher
* See p. 111.
[cjiAp; II.
44 Old English Plate.
qiiality of silver were not so durable nor so serviceable as those of the old standard.
Even as late as 1718, silver coin was very uncomfortably scarce,* and this scarcity was one of the principal matters to which the Parlia- ment of that year directed its attention. Lord Stanhope in his official statement as head of the Treasury ascribed it to three causes ; first, the increasing luxury in relation to plate, secondly, the export of plate or other bullion to the East Indies, and thirdly, to the clandestine trade carried on of exporting silver and importing gold to and from Holland, Germany, and other countries. In 1717 the East India Company had exported three million ounces of silver, which far exceeded the imports, so that large quantities of silver specie must have been melted up to supply the export of the silversmiths. Lord Stanhope also hinted at “the malice of some persons, who by hoarding up silver thought to distress the Government.” However this may be, the “old sterling” standard was restored with its old marks from June 1, 1720 (6 Geo. I., c. 11), and took its place beside the new or Britannia standard, which, with its own special marks, was left a lawful standard for such as preferred it.
Provisions against dishonesty were again found to be necessary, and in 1739, in consequence of great frauds which are detailed in the Act of that year (12 Geo. II., cap. 26), particularly in the use of excessive quantities of solder, the standards were again fixed at 22 carats for gold, and 11 oz. 2 dwts. for silver, though the higher standard was not abolished, and the marks to be used were resettled, the maker’s initials to be those of his Christian name and surname, instead of the first two letters of his surname as was ordered in 1697, likewise the character or alphabet of the initial letters used was to be in each case changed also. The marks to be used by the country assay offices were also dealt with, but, as will be seen in a subsequent chapter, not so clearly as could have been wished.! As before, the general re-registration of marks has stored the books of the Goldsmiths’ Com- pany with a quantity of information as to the names of the goldsmiths of the day.
Except for the lower standards of gold, we have now been carried through all the marks to be found on plate stamped in London, save one only — the mark of the sovereign’s head. This was introduced in 1784 (24 Geo. III., c. 53) by an Act granting a duty from December 1 in that year of 8s. per oz. on gold plate, and of sixpence per oz. on silver. It directed the Avardens or assay master to mark the pieces
Lord Mahon’.s IJidorij of Enjland, vol i., p. 443.
f See Chap. V., p. 115.
CHAP. II. 1
Hall Marks on Gold.
45
with a new mark, viz. the king’s head over and above the several marks already used.
Some further details as to duties payable, articles exempted, and dealers’ licences will he found under the head of the duty mark in the next chapter.
Last of all we come to some quite recent improvements in the system of marking gold, and to the authorisation of the above- mentioned lower gold standards, a step brought about by the use of that precious metal amongst larger classes of society. These pro- visions are the last on our list relating to marks, and are perhaps the least interesting of all from an antiquary’s point of view, however valuable they may be to the purchaser in the every-day dealings of trade. The lower standards, or rather all those below 18 carats, have never been much used nor appreciated by the public, and it will not be necessary to refer to them at any length. The Act, however, is an important one (38 Geo. III., c. G9), which in 1798 authorised the much-used standard of 18 carats fine for gold, and provided for its being marked with a crown and the figures 18 instead of the lion passant; for it had the good effect of giving gold a different dis- tinguishing mark from silver for the first time, a distinction which should have been made long before. It must always be remembered that until 38 Geo. III. there was no special distinguishing mark for gold, and then only for 18-carat gold, and further that it was not until 1844 that 22-carat gold was marked otherwise than as silver would have been. By 7 A 8 Viet. c. 22, s. 15, this last improvement was made, and 22-carat gold has from that time been marked with a crown and 22, instead of the lion passant, to the great advantage of the public.
The still lower standards for gold were legalised in 1854 (17 A 18 I'ict. c. 90), by a provision enabling Her Majesty in Council to allow any gold standard of not less than one-third of fine gold. In pursuance of this, three reduced standards were ordered to be marked as follows, viz. : — 15-carat, with the figures 15 and ‘625 ; 12-carat, with 12 and *5; and 9-carat, with 9 and ’375 — the second figure in each case being the proportion of fine gold expressed in decimals.
The Act called “the Goldsmiths’ Act” of 1844, which has been already mentioned as regulating the marking of 22-carat gold (7 & 8 Viet. c. 22), also regulates the trade as regards forgeries of dies or marks, the selling of plate worse than standard, and other such frauds. But as this is rather a matter of present-day interest than connected with the history of the craft or their marks, a fuller
4^ Old English Plate. [cha)-. n.
consideration of it is reserved for a separate chapter devoted to frauds and offences.
The result of this somewhat long historical and legal notice is that we shall find, on plate made in London, the following marks, or some of them, in accordance with the various statutes and ordinances that have been recounted. Stated for clearness in their chronological order, they are as follows : —
1. The Leopard’s head, from 130U.
2. The Maker’s mark, L'om 1803.
3. The Annual letter, from 1478.
4. The Lion passant, from 154.5.
5. The Lion’s head erased, and figure of Britannia, from 1097.*
0. The Sovereign’s head, from 1784.
The following table gives a summary of what has here been said of the London marks ; and each of them is treated of more fully in the next chapter.
* From 1097 — 1720 used for silver in- .stead of the leopard’s head crowned and lion passant, which were discontinued during
that interval. Since 1720, used, when re- quired, for plate made of the higher standard silver.
Table op the Makes pound upon Plate made in London prom the Earliest Times,
Tabic of London Marks.
47
K
<
Q
w
H
u
o
V
V
’>
o
T3
g
P
S
O 7Zi
ca
7!
C3
O
a
ca
o
o
ID
u-i
O
O JH
o
_l_l u_i
00
0
O
o
1/3
o
o
Xi
V
a
o
•4-»
rt
a
m
a
H
o
tc
V,, ^
bo o
•S
a) c-
(D
Pi
o
O
C/2
O
O
CO
o o
(/3
0
0>
CM M
O O
03
M
O
-M
g
0
0
CM
o
V3
0
O
CO
o
M
3
CO
T)
3
3
3
3
O)
ID
33
O
>
ca
CO O
Q
o
CO
CD
nS
CO
3
o
I,* r— I
rt
o
3
CU
CM
O
W
0
O
d
<
H
m
"d
.xP
*S
M
O
>
o
XI
0
a
o
o
P
a
o
o
a
CO
00
ir^
03
O
X
o
o
o
M
0
W
H
O
k;
o
tc 42
a 0
K» rM
'' a o
^ (M ^
• ■ ^ CO
O t-H
0
■Tj
0)
H
0
<D
0
•M
|
CM 0 |
||||
|
o >M -M |
00 r- |
y3 |
c3 |
|
|
0) > I |
"0 |
0 _o |
0 |
|
|
0 0 0 |
g o M «M |
3 0 |
•M 0 M 0 73 |
0 0 i-M |
|
-< |
0 |
|
i 0 |
||
|
0 |
||
|
~0 |
3 |
|
|
1 |
||
|
I |
, |
3 |
|
<M |
||
|
1 M [ M 1 X |
»o 10 |
M P |
|
j § |
CM |
|
|
<M 0 |
0 0) |
|
|
0 |
M |
|
|
33 |
||
|
1 -2 |
rt |
bJD |
|
! ^ |
O
0
\w/
•M
0
0
iO
y: >0
'J)
C<J
0
0
O
o
Xi
0
0
o
M
O
lO
to
0
0
lO
iO
0
0
iO
t-
cp
n2
0
0
o
o
o
o
|
0 |
-M 0 0 |
|||
|
01 |
: |
a |
(M |
|
|
01 |
-M |
|||
|
cc |
33 |
CO |
||
|
I s |
t/a |
rH B |
||
|
0 |
■ |
0 |
||
|
CM |
0 0 |
M |
0 |
CM |
|
33 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
|
|
3 |
O) |
a |
? |
|
|
p |
3 |
0 |
0 M |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0> |
0 |
0 |
|
3^ |
o
-M
o
•M
-M
p
o
-M
-M
p
o
<M
P
o
-M
P
M
10
0>
tc
M
o
X
Ci
to
o
C/3
0
M
0)
o
0
o
o
(D
o
0
<D
O
.a
*s
d>
c
0
|
P |
is |
1- Oi to |
d |
d 1 |
d 1 |
u 1 |
d 1 |
.d |
|||||||
|
CM |
a |
X |
»o rH |
C<l rH |
|||||||||||
|
0 |
|||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
M |
X |
||||||||||||
|
0 |
OI |
p |
P |
o' |
-H |
0 |
05 |
0 |
iO |
0 |
»o |
o' |
»o |
||
|
0 |
r- |
P |
X |
-M |
X |
•M |
t- |
-M |
X |
-M |
X |
X |
|||
|
w/ |
P |
sM' |
rM 0 |
r— 1 |
<M |
•M |
P-H |
-M |
r-H |
<M |
rH |
<M |
rH |
||
|
X |
0 |
Q |
0 |
P |
P |
P |
CHAPTER HI.
THE MARKS FOUND ON PLATE ASSAYED IN LONDON — THE LEOPARD’S HEAD — THE maker’s mark — THE DATE-LETTER — THE LION PASSANT — THE LION’S HEAD ERASED AND FIGURE OF BRITANNIA — THE SOVEREIGN’S HEAD.
THE LEOPAED’S HEAD.
Though, in all probability, workers in the precious metals bad been, from even earlier times, in the habit of signing their work each with his own distinguishing symbol, the ancient mark of a leopard’s head appointed bj^ statute in 1300 is the first which is mentioned in any law or ordinance regulating the goldsmith’s art in England, In the translation of the original Norman-French of this enactment, as given in the Statutes at Large, the words used are “the leopard’s head,” as if it were some known and recognised symbol, but in the original itself the words are teste de leopart,” and Mr. Octavius
Morgan has suggested that the article “ mie” implies that it was a new mark invented for the purpose. On the other hand, the first charter of the Goldsmiths’ Company, dated 1327, refers to the mark as ordained “of ancient times,” and this would seem a somewhat inappropriate description of a mark instituted within living memory.
However this may be, from 1300, if not before, it was, until the introduction of the lion passant, the king’s mark for “ gold of a certain touch,” and “silver of the sterling allay.” And first, some confusion and error seem to have existed with regard to the term “ Leojmrcl's head,” it being, in fact, a Lion’s head. It will, however, be remembered, that in old French, the language alike of heraldry and of our early statutes, the term “ leojjart” means a lion passant guardant. The arms of England from the time of Henry III. have been three such lions, and in the old French heraldic works they are described as three “ leoparts ” or “ lions leojmrdies.” The leopard’s head, therefore, is properly the head of a lion passant guardant, which, in fact, is a lion’s front face ; and all the early examples of this mark show a fine bold lion’s face with mane and beard, having on the head a ducal crown. It was in all probability, therefore, taken from the arms of the sovereign, and the crown added as a further indication of
CHAP. III.]
The Leopard's Head.
49
its being the King’s mark. It is actually called “ the King’s mark ” in the next statute in ■which it is mentioned, that of 1363. It must here be remarked that although in the Act of 1300, the charter of 13*27, and the Act of 1423, it is only termed ‘‘the leopard’s head,” in the earliest goldsmiths’ ordinances it is spoken of as “the Liberds hede croicnedT "whilst in the Act of 1477 it is described in both ways : later, in the Goldsmiths’ records of 1597, it appears as the leopard’s head only, though it is certainly and always found bearing a crown, upon plate of that period, and as far back at all events as 1478. It may be that it was crowned from the first, and that it is a mistake arising out of the -ft'ording of the Act of 1477, to date the addition of the crown from that year. To set against this two or three spoons of the fifteenth century seem to have an uncrowned leopard’s head within a beaded circle in the bowls ; but as none of them have any mark on the handle, it is not safe to draw any conclusion from them. It is not at all impossible that the crown originated with the date letter in 1478.
It is a very doubtful point too whether the mark should be called, as it often is, the London hall-mark. It certainly was not so origi- nally, except in the sense that in early times the Goldsmiths’ Company in that city were the only authorised keepers of “the king’s touch.” In 1477 it was not used as a London mark only, for the Act of that year, speaking of the prevalent abuse of setting this mark on gold and silver that was not fine, recites as a grievance that the “said touch of the Leopard’s head is oftentimes put on such things by the keeper of the said touch of London and other 'places." Here the “ said touch of the Leopard’s head ” is recognised as the sign of the standard used, as well in London as elsewhere. The right reading of the Acts is that in 1423 it was intended to limit the leopard’s head mark to London, other places in future to use “divers touches ” ; and that it was to carry this into better effect that the Act of 1477 explicitly ordained that within the city of London and for two leagues round, the leopard’s head crowned should be used. When the goldsmiths of Norwich w'ere setting their house in order in 1565, and establishing a proper touch for that city, they adopted as a standard one which they describe as of the same fineness and better than the “ lyberd’s hedde with the crowme.” This practically means that they adopted the national standard, as worked in London and as guaranteed by the mark, which had become very much limited to London since 1423,. and from 1477 w*as expressly so. It had no doubt gained a great reputation, as we gather from the Touchstone* that in the seventeenth
O.E.P.
* See p. n.
E
50
Old English Plate.
[chap. III.
century it was practically necessary to send to London to have the touch of the leopard’s head applied. But this is not quite the same thing as saying that it was the London mark, and in point of fact when the leopard's head crowned was abolished for a time (1697-1720), together with the lion passant, in favour of two new marks, those two new marks were both used under the Acts which, shortly afterwards, established the provincial assay offices ; neither of ■them was reserved specially for the Goldsmiths’ Company, as would qirobably have been the case if its own peculiar hall mark had been abolished, and the inference is strong that at that time it was con- sidered a national standard mark and not the London hall mark at all. Further, upon the restoration of the old sterling standard of silver in 1720, the leopard’s head crowned was resumed in ordinary course by several of the provincial offices for metal of that degree of fineness, and in one such office, viz., Newcastle-upon-Tyne, it was so used until recent years.
It should also be noted that even when the leopard’s head and the lion passant were disused on silver, they still remained in force for standard gold, and it may favour the view of the leopard’s head being a standard mark rather than the distinguishing mark of the London Goldsmiths’ Hall, that it was used at this time on one metal assayed there, but not on the other.
Like the question of the derivation of the mark, this point is, how- ever, rather of antiquarian interest than of practical importance, for even if it were the standard mark until the invention of the lion passant practically released it, if we may say so, from doing duty in that capacity, it may perhaps not unfairly since that date, say from 1545, when found on London made plate, be looked upon as answering the same purpose as the shields of arms used as their distinguishing hall-marks by assay-offices in the provinces.
When we come to consider the London date letter, we shall urge its claim to be the London mark properly so called.
In conclusion, although evidently not always confined to Loudon, the leopard’s head crowned has been used at Goldsmiths’ Hall for whatever purpose from time immemorial on standard gold, and on old sterling silver whenever such silver has been worked.*
The appearance of the stamp has from time to time been altered, and always for the worse. It is found within a circular line from 1478 to 1547. From 1548 to c. 1680 it is on a stamp with its outline following
* Some small waves, especially tea-spoons, in tlie present and last centuries, do not show the leopard’s head, but only the lion passant,
the latter mark being no doubt thought a sufficient guarantee in such cases.
CIIAI'. III.]
The Maker's Mark.
51
that of the crown and the head. The crown is an open ducal one at first, hut at certain periods, for instance about 1515, 1531, and some other years, the crown appears almost as if it had four balls instead of the more open design. This is probably the effect pioduced by using a worn punch rather than of any alteration in the style of the ciown. The size of the lion’s head was somewhat diminished in the year 1729, Avhen he was also shorn of much of his mane and beard, the character of the crown being also altered ; and in the course of the goldsmiths year 1821-2, from the fact, it is believed, of the mention of a simple “leopard’s head” being found in some of the earlier documents and especially in the Act 12 Geo. II. c. 26, without being follow^ed by the word “ crowned,” the form of the stamp was altogether changed ; and the head, deprived of its crown, was made to present an object far more resembling the head of a cat than the fine bold face of former- days, which we would fain see restored to its pristine form.
The wording of 12 Geo. II. c. 26 in this particular was no doubt somewhat a matter of chance : but however this may be, it deserves to be remarked, that in and after 1824-5, but for the omission of the crown, it would be somewhat difficult to distinguish the small Eoman letters then current from those of the former small Eoman alphabet of 1776-1795. Until then the letters would be sufficiently distinguished by the fact that the earlier alphabet, down to the “ i ” of 1784, would be unaccompanied by a king’s head mark ; but this distinction ceasing with that letter in 1784, there would for the rest of the cycle be nothing but a slight difference in the royal portrait to depend upon, were it not for the absence of the crown from the leopard’s head. This consideration seems however to have had nothing to do with the innovation, which accidentally proves so useful.
THE WORKER’S OR MAKER’S MARK.
The next thing to be considered in the chronological series is the maker’s mark. Following closely, as we have seen, on its adoption in other countries, such a mark was first instituted in England by statute in 1363, when it was directed that every master goldsmith should have a mark of his own, known by those who should be appointed by the king to survey the works ; which marks, for which the goldsmiths should answer, should be set on the works after they had been assayed. The Goldsmiths’ Company made similar provisions in their earliest known ordinances, to that which now became the law of the land ; and almost every subsequent statute provides, under heavy penalties, for the marking of plate with the mark or sign of the worker.
I These marks were at first, in many cases, emblems or symbols ;
E 2
52
Old English Plate.
[cnAi‘. nr.
probably often selected in allusion to the name of the maker. In early times most shops had signs by which they were known, and some retain the custom even to the present day, especially on the Con- tinent. This no doubt arose from the fact that, Jis few persons could read, the writing of the name would be of little use, whereas the setting up of some sign, such for instance as the golden ball, which Avas easily understood, gave a convenient name to the shop; it is therefore not improbable that the goldsmiths, in some cases, took for their mark the sign of their shop.
Several of the old goldsmiths’ signs are Avell known, as, for instance, the “ grasshopper ” of Sir Thomas Gresham’s house in Lombard Street, now occupied by Messrs. Martins, and the “marigold” which a century later distinguished the house where the Childs carried on their banker-goldsmith business in Fleet Street. The squirrel, too, which we find on plate of 1599 (see Appendix A), maj'- remind us of the three squirrels still to be seen on the front of Messrs. Goslings’ banking-house also in Fleet Street. The Golden Bottle has always been the distinguishing sign of Messrs. Hoares’ bank, now in the same thoroughfare, but formerly in Cheapside. Neither are there Avanting notices here and there of the signs of more obscure AA'orking goldsmiths, especially in the accounts of parish churchwardens in the reigns of Edward VI. and Queen Elizabeth. In accounts of 1551, one Calton is found working at the sign of “the Purse in Chepe,” and a felloAV-craftsman of the name of Wark at “ the George in Lomberde Strete ; ” another account of 1560 mentions a “Mr. Muschamp, goldsmith of London,” as of “the Byng with the Rube,” also in “ Lumbarde St.” A spoon of 1525 has the figure of a heart stamped thus as the maker’s mark, and many early specimens have similar symbols. Some feAv marks of the earlier goldsmiths resemble those so well knoAvn as merchants’ marks, or the mason’s marks on ancient buildings ; see for example what seems to have been the trade mark of Robert Harding, alderman and gold- smith, who died in 1503, having served as master of the Goldsmiths’ Company in 1489. An engraving of this is
given in the margin.* Another somewhat simpler, A'iz. ^
is found on a small cup of 1599, in the possession of the Armourers’ Company. It has, hoAvever, been previously remarked hoAv very seldom the shop sign of a maker is reproduced in his mark. Some half-dozen pieces of plate alone in the early Elizabethan period, and those somewhat doubtfully, are all that can be attributed to their
n
r
f
y 1
^j[
* Surrey Archoeolorjical Society’s 2'ransactions, a*o1. vi., part i., p. 36.
CHAP. III.]
The Maker's Mark.
53
proper maker by the mark they bear. The fleur-de-lys found on plate of 1.562 may possibly belong to William Dyxson living at “ the Fleur de Luce in Chepe,” in 1569 ; the leg of 1550 to William Beereblocke, of “ the Legge in Chepe,” also in 1569 ; Robert Wright, of “ the Wynd- mylle,” in 1569, may have made a cup bearing that symbol in 1578 ; the covered cup found in 1548 and 1561, may be the mark of John Wabbe, of “ the Cup in Chepe,” in 1569 ; Thomas Bampton, of “the Falcon,” in 1569, may have made plates bearing that mark in 1567. John Harysson, in 1569 of “ the Broad Arrow,” may have made the Tokerys Bowl in 1534. Lastly William Southwood is likely to have made the Communion cup with covered cup for mark at St. Lawrence, Jewry, in 1548. Short as this list is, even fewer goldsmiths can be identified by the occurrence of their initials on articles made by them. Robert Banbe certainly made the Communion cup at St. Peter’s, Cornhill, which bears the maker’s mark of RD in linked letters, for his dealings with that parish are recorded ; and R. Maynarde was probably the goldsmith using for mark the RM found on a Communion cup of 1553 at Great Houghton, Northants.
The Communion cups at the Temple Church were bought in 1609 of one Terry, a goldsmith of note. They bear the mark of FT in linked letters, which may be his mark ; but a workman named Thomas Francis was making goods at this time for dealers who only kept shops, and this mark may denote his work.
In these early days initials were not so often used for workers’ marks as later, but eventually they became the rule ; indeed, symbols and emblems unaccompanied by any initial letters hardly ever occur later than the commencement of the seventeenth century. The examination of a great number of specimens of that century has given us not more than a dozen such marks ; a water-bird in a dotted circle found on an example belonging to the Hon. Society of the Middle Temple of the year 1682, and other pieces down to 1693, being the very last, and except this and a mark of three storks found in 1685, there is nothing of the kind later than 1661, when the Communion- plate at Gloucester Cathedral is found to bear some animal or other not easily to be recognised, on a shaped shield, or a mullet with an escallop found in 1663.
The anonymous author of the Touchstone for Gold and Silver Wares, writing in 1679, makes the following remarks as to the super- vision exercised by the Goldsmiths’ Company over the makers’ marks: — “In this office” (referring to the Assay-Office at Gold- smiths’ Hall) “is likewise kept for publique view a table or tables artificially made of columns of parchment or velom, and several of the
54
Old English Plate.
[chat. III.
same sorts ; in the lead columns are struck or enterecT the workers’ marks {irhich are (jenerally the first tiro letters of their Christian and surnames), and right against them, in the parchment or velom columns, are writ and entered the owners’ names ; This is that what is meant in the before-recited statutes, by the expression of makinej the icorkers' mark knoirn to the surveyors or wardens of the craft; which said wardens’ duty is to see that the marks he idain and of nfit size, and not one like another, and to require the thus entering the said marks, and also the setting them clear and visible on all gold and silver work, not only on every work, but also on every part thereof that is wrought apart and afterwards soldered or made fast thereto in finishing the same. Our law-makers (as I conceive) did think the thus setting the marks on the work, to be the securest way to prevent fraud in this kind ; for if it would not deter from the working and selling coarse silver and gold wares, yet would it be a sure way to find out the offenders and to have the injured righted. But if the marks might be omitted, and the works should pass but into a third owner’s hand, for the most part it would be impossible to discern one man’s work from another, by reason that divers workers make all sorts of work in shape so near alike.”
Much of the information once possessed by the Goldsmiths’ Com- pany as to workers’ names or their places of abode down to the year 1697, is unfortunately lost, together with those tables, and it is only by the examination of ancient inventories and accounts that here and there a name can be put to a mark; as, for instance, when the accounts of churchwardens give the name of the goldsmith from whom Communion-plate was purchased, and it chances that their successors in office are still in possession of the article so procured.
At Headcorn in Kent is a Communion cup of 1562 bearing for maker’s mark the initials WC with a cricket or grasshopper. This is most probably the William Cater mentioned in the books of the Goldsmiths’ Company as follows : — “ Friday the 12th of February 1562. At this Court, William Cater promised to bring in within this month a Communion cup which he made and sold into the countr}^ untouched.”
“ Friday the 26th of February 1562. At this court William Cater brought in a Communion cup according to his promise here made the 12th day of this month, which cup he sold into Kent untouched, and the same at the assay was found good and so delivered to the said Cater again.”*
The only official record now in existence of any of their marks prior
* Note, coiumunicaied by Mr. II. D. Ellis.
CHAJ*. III.]
The Maker's Mark.
55
to 1097, is a copper-plate, preserved in the Assay-Master’s Office, carefully framed and glazed to save it from further harm, which contains a number of impressions in nine parallel columns from the punches used by the makers who were working between 1675 and 1697.
This plate bears the following inscription, viz. : — “ On the above Plate are the Marks from Workmen taken at this Office Prior to the Fifteenth of April, a.d. 1097, of which not any other Entry is to be found.” It was at one time thought possible that it contained the marks of workers for generations past, and its importance in that case could hardly have been over-rated : but it is now clear that it owes what interest it has to being the identical table referred to in the Goldsmiths’ Order of 1675 (see p. 41). Almost every maker’s mark found on plate from 1675 to 1697 is registered thereon, but none of any other period. The book referred to in the same order as appointed for the entry of names, has perished with the earlier tables ; and this one remaining table, interesting as it is as a relic, is therefore but a bare record of certain marks used for those few years only, without any names against them. It cannot be said to possess the value, and is not of the interest, that would attach to a portion of an unbroken series, but all the more important marks upon it will be found in the list of examples given later. From 1697 onwards, impressions of the marks from the makers’ own punches have been taken regularly, and are preserved in volumes with the owners’ names and addresses, apparently in their own handwriting entered against their respective marks. In that year it will be remembered, we came at la^t to an express enactment that the worker’s mark should be the first tu'o letters of his surname, and this must have caused a general change of marks throughout the trade, indeed we can trace it in certain instances ; for example, we may safely assume that the mark of P*H under a crown and two ermine spots found on the copper plate was the earlier mark of the Peeter Harracke who entered his new one of HA with the same accessories in compliance with this Act in the month of October, 1698. A number of working goldsmiths at this time and onwards were foreigners. An entry in the books of the Goldsmiths’ Company records at the admission of Peter Haraske on July 21, 1682, that he had “lately come from France for to avoid persecution.” His mark, like that of one John Chartier and some others, has all the characteristics of French goldsmiths’ marks of the period.
The first letters of the surname were alone used (and on gold as well as silver) as long as the use of the higher standard of silver was com- pulsory, that is to say from 1697 until 1720 ; but on the restoration of the old sterling standard in 1720, makers seem to have thought
56
[CIIAI'. III.
Old English Plate.
themselves at liberty to use their ordinary initials, at all events, on wares of the restored standard ; and from that year till 1739, their practice was somewhat uncertain, for initials are often found in that interval which could by no possibility have been the first two letters of any surname whatever. Many makers in 1720 registered a new mark of their ordinary initials for use on “ old sterling,” and so had two marks, one for each standard; thus Paul Crespin signs his work of the Britannia standard with C!R, but old sterling silver with PC ;
Isaac Callard with CA and IC respectively, and so on. One or two old established smiths brought into use again the old mark they had used on their work before 1697, without entering it afresh at Gold- smiths Hall. This was done by Timothy Ley and Benjamin Pyne, whose marks as found on the copper-plate re-appear on work in and after 1720. This want of uniformity was effectually remedied for the future by the Act of 1739, which came into operation on May 28, ;
and ordered the makers to destroy their existing marks, and to sub- ^
stitute for them the initials of their Christian and surnames, directing in addition, that the new letters should, in each case, be of a different | character or alphabet from those used before. This was no doubt to I further secure the destruction of the old punches. f
The marks of that celebrated silversmith Paul Lamerie illustrate t this course of things throughout. His first registered mark in 1712 •was LA; his second in 1733 P*L ; his third being, in accordance f
with the provisions of 1739, ^ Jo in what may be termed script ; ^ letters, registered in the month of June in that year. >
The initial letters of the Christian and surname have been used from 1739 to the present time. Watch-case makers of the seventeenth ' and eighteenth centuries seldom use an escutcheon ; their initials are merely stamped in without any accessories, except perhaps a crown. ;
It only remains to note that the minute mark often found beside the |
maker’s is a workshop mark to show which particular workman was employed upon the article bearing it. '
The more important London makers’ marks have now been carried | down in Appendix A, part 2, of this volume, to about 1841.
THE ANNUAL LETTEK ; ASSAYER'S OR WARDEN’S MARK.
1
This is perhaps the most interesting of all the marks, for it goes ;
far to enable us to ascertain the precise year in which any piece of M
plate was made. It may seem somewhat of a paradox to begin by -S stating that it is by no means certain when it was itself introduced. M
This is nevertheless strictly true. If nothing is better ascertained S
CHAP. lU.]
The Date Letter.
57
than that the mark must have been in use from the later part of the lifteeuth ceutury, it will scarcely be believed that there is no positive mention of it till 1597, when at last it occurs in the Attorney-General’s information, in which it is styled “ The alphabetical mark approved by ordinance among the goldsmiths” ; and no one has been able to discover the ordinance by which it was appointed, nor any earlier notice of it by name, although the mark itself is plain enough upon plate of generations before that time.
Those who would claim for it the highest degree of antiquity depend upon a supposed mention in 1336 of a “ sayer’s ” mark in addition to the maker’s mark and the leopard’s head crowned in a goldsmith’s ordinance.
No such ordinance is to be found amongst those preserved at Goldsmiths’ Hall, the very earliest of which profess themselves to be in accordance “with the Acts of diverse Parliaments,” and cannot therefore be nearly so early as that year. It is, however, pretty clear how the mistake arose.
Mr. Herbert, in his history of the Goldsmiths’ Company,* gives a summary of the provisions contained in their “ ancient ordinances,” in the course of which all three marks, including a sayer’s mark, and also the “ assayer’s book,” are mentioned, but without any dates. His paragraph proceeds as follows : —
“ The entries as to the assay just given show the practice to have been very early exercised by the company, in addition to the notice of William Speron in 1336 (now five hundred years ago), we find it ordained in 1366 by general assent that none of the fraternity shall go to fairs, to trade without having all the goods of the mystery [gold- smith’s work] first assayed before the wardens for the year ; and in 1444, a member is fined 6s. 8(?. ‘ for withstondyng the wardens in taking of assaie.’ ”
On an earlier page Mr. Herbert had given some extracts from the accounts of the company, and amongst them the following entry of the year 1336, “ Argent bailie, a William Speron, des am^ciam^s cest assaie vi s viij d.”
It is probable that by connecting without any good reason the year mentioned in one sentence with the ordinances referred to in another, a date which referred only to an early mention of the assay itself, has been sometimes attributed to an annual letter as an assayer’s mark. There seems no ground for attaching William Speron’s date to any part of Mr. Herbert’s summary of the ordinances. That summary is an accurate one of all the successive ordinances taken together, but if
Ilerhert's History of the Livery Cohqxuiics, vol. ii., ITTi.
[ciui'. HI.
5^ Old English Plate.
the originals are examined in detail it will he seen that whilst in the earlier of the ordinances the assayer’s mark was the leopard’s head, in those of 1507 and of 1513 another assayer’s mark is mentioned for the first time.
It will he remembered also that, in the ancient Acts of 13G3 and 1423 the mark to he fixed by the surveyor, “gardien,” or Avarden, is ahvays described as the king’s mark, or leopard’s head ; and although all the marks to be used are described in detail in these enactments, no mention AvhateA^er is to be found of any mark besides that leopard’s head mark and the mark of the maker. The terms “assayer” and “ AA'arden ” refer to one and the same officer, for the assay Avas then conducted by the Avardens, or ‘‘ their deputy, the assayer ordained thereto,” to quote from one of the ordinances.
A more moderate, but probably still too high, antiquity Avas assigned to it by Mr. Octavius Morgan, who, thinking that with certain excep- tions he had been able to obtain examples of all the various alphabets used from 1438 but none earlier, came to the conclusion for the reasons Ave are about to quote, that that date AA^as the period of the first adoption of the annual letter.
It has already been seen from the proceedings of the Montpellier goldsmiths that, in consequence of repeated and increased frauds, neAA^ securities Avere iuA'ented from time to time to provide against them, till at last, in the year 1427, it was ordained as a fresh security that, in order to insure the fineness of the articles assayed after that time, the name of the AAm-den of the mystery inscribed on the register of the city should be followed by one of the letters of the alphabet, which letter should be reproduced beneath the arms of the town on the piece of plate in order that it might be knoAvn under what warden it was made, so that in effect he might be held answerable for haA’ing made a fraudulent assay, and suffered bad silver to be sold as good standard. The fact of the Montpellier ordinances giving the specific reason for the introduction of a neAV mark seems very like the origin of it, and it led Mr. Morgan to attribute the first invention and adoption of this mark to the authorities of Montpellier in 1427. When once adopted in one place, it probably soon became a custom in others as an improved security against fraud, and the date of the first alphabet of the English use of which Mr. Morgan thought any trace is to be found, commencing as it does in 1438, very Avell agreed Avith the supposition of that being the period of its first introduction into this country.
Further than this, he observed the curious coincidence that the first Act rendering the wardens responsijble for abuses committed during their respective periods of office is that of 1423, Avhich provides that
CllAl*. Ill ]
The Date Letter.
59
“if it may be foimd that the keeper of the touch touch any such harness with the leopard’s head except it be as fine in allay as the sterling, that then the keeper of the touch for everything so proved not as good in allay as the said sterling, shall forfeit the double value to the king and the party.”
^Miat more probable than that here, as in France, the want of some means of fixing the right offender in each case with the responsibility for his default was soon felt, and that the Goldsmiths’ Compan}'’ in 1438 adopted the practice that had ten years before commended itself to their brethren of Montpellier ? So much for 1438.
It now seems, with some hesitation be it said, a safer conclusion that the real date of the introducing of a date-letter into their system of hall-marking by the London goldsmiths was 1478.
Mr. Morgan was certainly right in considering that the object of our annual date-letter was the same as in the case of Montpellier. The statute of Elizabeth in 1576 again asserts the liability of the wardens, ordaining that if any article shall be touched for good by the wardens, and there shall afterwards be found fraud or deceit therein, the warden shall pay forfeit the value of the thing so marked ; and at last in 1679 the author of the Touchstone * writing of the date letter, says plainly, “The reason for changing thereof is (as I conceive), for that by the aforesaid recited statutes, it is provided that if any silver work that is worse than sterling be marked with the Company’s marks, the wardens and corporation for the time being shall make recompence to the party grieved, so that if any such default shall happen, they can tell'by the letter on the work in what year it w'as assayed and marked, and thereby know’ which of their ow’n officers deceived them, and from them obtain over a recompence.”
If it is true that the wardens w’ere made responsible in 1423, it is much more to the purpose that in the Act of 1477 the craft w’as made answ’erable for the non-sufficiency of the w’arden. It then became an immensely more important thing for the company to be able to know, in the w’ords of the Touchstone, “ w’hich of their ow’ii officers deceived them, and from them obtain over a recompence.”
This w’ould not perhaps in itself be conclusive, but there is the further fact that though in 1478 a date-letter w’as certainly used, no mention of it is lound in the important Act of the preceding year, which says much about both the other marks, viz., the leopard’s head ‘ crow’ned and the maker’s mark, and, as above mentioned, makes tho 'Company responsible for its warden.
See p. 13.
6o
[OHAP. III.
Old English Elate.
It seems very unlikely that the date-letter would have escaped mention here, had such a mark been in use ; hut it seems very likely indeed that the company would then and there institute one. Had it been in existence already, the only way of accounting for its not being mentioned in 1477 would be that the warden’s mark not being one ordered by Parliament, but only a domestic arrangement of the Gold- smiths’ Company, did not obtain recognition by the legislature in the same manner as the leopard’s head and the maker’s mark. This is, however, at best rather a far-fetched explanation, especially as in later days the variable mark is mentioned in Acts of Parliament. It would certainly be referred to in some of the goldsmiths’ own ordinances within a certain time of its introduction, and, so far from being mentioned soon after 1438, it is not till 1507 that any notice of it occurs. In ordinances of 1507 and 1513, as we shall remember, an assayer’s mark, in addition to the leopard’s head and the maker’s mark, is spoken of ; and as the date-letter was then not only in use, but the only mark used except the two others just mentioned, it was clearly the assayer’s mark referred to. If this is so, we can carry back mention of a date-letter from 1597 to 1507, or within a very few years of 1478. The great book of Ordinances and Statutes of the Gold- smiths’ Company was itself commenced in the year 1478 ; and every- thing seems to show that it was a point of fresh departure for the craft. Further than this, there is but one single piece of marked plate in existence, to which there has ever been positively attributed a date earlier than 1478. This is the Pudsey spoon, which has been supposed upon certain historical evidence to belong to the year 1445. Its marks, however, upon careful examination cannot be distinguished from those of 1525, the spoon may have at some time or other been accidentally changed for another in the absence of any inscription or other means of preserving its identity, and it is on the whole much more probable that something of this kind has happened, than that two cycles of date-letters, for which no other evidence exists, should have run their unknown course before the date at which so many circumstances concur in indicating that a date-letter was intro- duced. In the following pages and tables the year 1478 is, for all these reasons, given as the commencement of the London series of alphabets.
It is only fair to say that some consider England to have given the lead to France in these matters. A distinguished writer* remarks that, to judge by dates, “the change from makers’ marks alone to
Quartaii/ Jlevicw, April, 1876.
CHAl*. III.]
The Date Letter.
6i
guild marks preceded in England, by more than half a century, the same change in France ” ; and he cites a letter of Charles V., written in 1376, which seems to speak of a maker’s mark only, as follows :
“ Qnelconqiies orfevres ne porront tenir ne lever forge ne onvrer en chamhre secrete se ilz ne sont approurez devant les maistres chi mesfier et estre temoigner soujfisameut de tenir forge et cV avoir poinqon a con- tresaign et antrement non.”
This hardly, however, precludes the possibility of there being other marks also in use at the same time, and the wording seems taken from earlier statutes, in which the touch of Paris is ordained as a standard, as, for instance, those of King John of France in 1355, which again are themselves only letters of confirmation of still more ancient regulations, taking us back as far as 1260.
The parallel passage from King John’s letter of confirmation provides that he who wishes to be a goldsmith of Paris must either be apprenticed, “ ou qidil soit tel ejiroiive j^cir les maistres et bonnes gens dn mestier estre sonfisant estre orfevre et de tenir et lever forge et cV avoir poincon a contreseing ” ; but a later clause adds that, md orfevre ne j)eut ouvrer eVor a Paris qiCil ne soit a la touche de Paris, on meilleur la quelle touche passe tons les ors dont Von euvre en inille terres.” It must have been long a celebrated touch to be spoken of in such terms, and it is clear that in 1300 the lily was well known and recognised even here in England as the Paris mark ;* add to this that Philip le Hardi had ordained in 1275 that each city should have a particular mark for works of silver. In all these cases the word “ touch ” must be taken to refer to the mark by which the quality of the metal is certified as M^ell as to that quality itself. It is so used in our own early statutes, in which the phrases “ touched with the touch” “bearing the touch,” “touched with the leopard’s head,” occur as well as another set of expressions in which it is used rather to denote the standard of the metal, for instance, “ gold of a certain touch.”
Two “ chargeours de touche London,” are mentioned in the inventory of the goods of Richard de Ravenser, Archdeacon of Lincoln, who died in 1386 ; a quart pot of silver with the “ touche of Parys,” and also dishes of silver of “London makyng ” occur in a will of 1443 ; t “ spones marked with the touche of London ” in a will proved in the Canterbury Prerogative Court in 1463 ; “ peciam dez markes Franeijn ” in 1481 ; and “ spones having the toche of the goldesmyths ” in another will of 1522.
Wardrobe accounts of that year, 28 Edward 1. (sec ji, 10). t Tent. Ehvr. sec note Art, Spoons, cliap. x.
62
'-■HAl'. III.
Old English Plate.
The foregoing remarks, it will be observed, deal with the comparative antiquity of the leopard’s head and the lily quite as much as with the English and French date-letters ; indeed they apply to either pair of marks alike, and have only found a place here rather than earlier, because they follo'wed naturally upon a comparison of the periods at which the guilds of London and Montpellier respectively adopted a warden’s mark.
Some might say, as we have seen, that neither the leopard’s head nor the lily is a guild mark properly so called, but rather the mark of the royal or national standard, each for its own country ; and in the case of England, everything points to the date-letter as the only special mark of the London guild. It is the date-letter which is described in 1597 as the mark approved by ordinance amongst the goldsmiths themselves, whereas the two other marks then used are Her Majesty’s” and “ appointed by statute ” respectively.
It would be somewhat of an anomaly to find that of all places in the world, London should have been the one without a peculiar mark of its own, other than its date-letter, if it were not that in times when the Ooldsmiths’ Company was the only keeper of the national touch, that touch might so easily come to be regarded in practice almost as much the mark of the guild as of the standard. It is a point of no practical importance, at all events since the appointment of a special mark for each provincial assay office ; but to be strictly accurate, we should have to say that London plate is distinguished by the absence of any provincial mark rather than by the presence of any special mark of its own, unless we admit the claim of its peculiar series of date-letters to. that character. These it has undeniably used from 1478, in the form of a succession of alphabets, each consisting of Lventy letters ; J, U or V, W, X, Y and Z, being the letters omitted. From 1560-1 they have, with hardly any exception, been enclosed in regular heraldic shields of various shapes, but till then the letters are surrounded with a line more or less closely following their own outline ; the ends of the punches having been originally of the shape of the letters they bore, and afterwards of a shield shape, with the letter sunk in the centre of the shield. The most notable exceptions to this rule are the letters L of 1726-7, and M of the following year, wdiich are often, if not always, found on a square punch.* From 1678, if not earlier, more than one size of punch is found to have been used, large and small articles having been stamped with marks of different sizes, the smaller ones being often on plain square punches with the corners slightly cut off.
* No doubt the punch in these cases is of the second size.
CUAP. III.]
The Date Letter.
63
instead of in more heraldic shields. Very small letters indeed are found towards the end of the seventeenth century in the inside of watch cases. In certain years also the letters on the punches in use differ a little in form from one another. Two forms of the letter for 1619-‘20 occur; and the differences to he noted at 1567-8, 1575-6, and at 1658-9 are also so marked as to require representation in the tables.
The introduction of a shield in 1560-1, in the middle of an alphabet be it noted, curiously enough coincides exactly with the restoration of the old sterling standard silver by Queen Elizabeth, which has been spoken of in the preceding chapter ; and the probability that an event of such importance to the Goldsmiths’ Company was marked by them in this or some other particular way suggested a careful examination of the journals of the Company, which resulted in the discovery of the following minute for 16 December, 1560 : —
“ Also forasmuch as Mr. Wardens and the Assistants have found that the moneys of our sovereign Lady the Quene conteyne in fynesse (xi oz.) eleven ounces and upward therefore it is by them agi'eed that after the feast of the Epiphaine of our Lord God next comynge the assaymaster and wardens of this eompanie shall touch no plate under the fynesse of (xi oz. ii dwt.) eleven ounees two pennie weight and for a certe knowledge to be had betwene the same plate and other before touched it is agreed that the letter of the yeare shall be grayved round about for a difEerence.”
This positive proof of the reason for the shield lends additional weight to the suggestion which is to be made when the lion passant comes under notice, that its invention in 1545 marks the divergence of the standard of the silver coinage from that of silver plate which then took place. It would be very odd if the degradation of the coinage from the sterling quality maintained throughout for plate, and its subsequent restoration to that standard of purity, were events of two years, in each of which is found to occur a novel feature in the system of hall marking practised by the Goldsmiths’ Company, and if one of the alterations in the marks, but not the other, were connected with the coincident changes of the standard. The fleur-de-lys and pellets which accompany in some instances the letter for 1575-6 no doubt relate to the Act of that year, as in later days the Act of 1739-40 is marked by the adoption of a new shape of shield for the rest of the letters of the then current alphabet.
The variation noted for 1658 is merely due to the usc,of a damaged punch, probably towards the end of the year ; but the annulet under the letter for 1567, and the two forms of letter found in 1619 are ; happily accounted for. In 1567 it appears from the Minute Books ■of the Court of the Goldsmiths’ Company that a long-standing dispute
64
Old Enfrlish Plate.
[CIIAI*. lit.
with the Assay Master Eichard Eogers came to a head. The Company required him to give up his house in Chepe and to come and dwell in the proper apartments for the Assay Master at the Hall, as early as in August, 1566. From that time forward there are constant entries of his delays and excuses until at last in Aug. 1567 he promised to come in to the Hall or yield up his office next quarter-day. It was then found necessary to come to close quarters, and ten days more were given him on Nov. 3, 1567, to make up his mind in. The next entry relating to the matter records that on Dec. 24, he was “ discharged of the office of assayer.” Thomas Keelynge was ai)pointed to be his successor ; and on commencing work he no doubt adopted the annulet under the date-letter for the remaining portion of the year. So too in 1619 the second form of the letters is accounted for by the death of the assayer Thomas Dymock in the month of September, and the appointment a month later of John Eeynolds.
The letters have been annually changed on the day of election of the new wardens, that being St. Dunstan’s Day prior to the Eesto- ration; the new punches •were accordingly handed to the assay- warden for use, on or about May 19 in each year, and were continued to the same time in the year following. Since 1660 the new punches have been first used on the morning of May 30, the new wardens having been elected the day before.
No entry is found of the letter for the year in the goldsmiths’ journals, until the occurrence of some dispute with the officers of the assay, after which the letters were mentioned. Their earliest note is of the letter for 1629, but from that time the notices are sufficiently regular to indicate the character of all the alphabets. For the earlier letters, it was only by the examination of a great many pieces of ancient plate, chiefly belonging to public companies, colleges, corpora- tions, and churches, of which the histories are known, that Mr. Octavius Morgan was able to collect