Featured Irish sterling basket and a Lebanese bowl

What a day at the thrifts.

I think I have this right but the shape of the punches have me wondering a little. This 14" long basket has marks I think are Dublin 1809 made by I think James Scott and retailed by William Law. Or so I'm guessing.

The second bowl on pedestal is 9½" dia and only marked HABIS so I think it's Lebanese. It isn't obvious that it's silverplate but so far I don't see any additional marks though I haven't cleaned it yet. Would Lebanese solid silver have a purity mark?

Anyway here they are, sorry for the poor photos.

 

The Irish marks look OK, but I am taking your word for the date letter. Do not worry much about exact punch shape. No idea on the other piece, but it looks worth taking a chance on.

The Irish piece is a real score.

 

I sure didn't expect to see the Irish piece that's for sure and I was hoping no one heard me gasp in the store.

 

At the thrifts....?
The bowl is stunning.................SO......How much...if I may be so bold as to ask !

 

(mmmmm....really really cheap and both on sale.) Edited just because someday I might decide to sell and it'll probably come up on google search

 

Gasp.....Choke......Cough, cough............

You da Man !!!!!!

Take me shopping ....will ya???......Please !!!!!

 

Or da wo Man I wish I had days like this all the time but no.

 

Whoa! You dun gooooooood!

 

Ya...I know you're female..........BUT....You Still Da Man !!!!!

 

That basket is to die for! Oh how I wish I knew what you paid,Im all about the $10 and under scores!

 

((GLORP)) I'd have jumped on that like three hyper kids on a trampoline too. As the Brits have been known to put it, it had a Come Buy Me price on it.

 

Just joining the chorus... wow! There is a chance the first punch is the reigning monarch head of George III used from Dec. 1, 1784, through 1785. The bottom edge of that punch looks straight with possibly clipped corners that would create a sort of octagon punch. All the other duty marks are on ovals/circles.
Scroll down to the duty marks.
http://www.925-1000.com/british_marks.html

Now if that is the duty mark for 1785, then the date punch "N" would be for 1785 rather than 1809.
http://www.925-1000.com/dlc_dublin.html

With an earlier date, the maker's mark of "IS" is probably for John Stoyle.
http://www.silvermakersmarks.co.uk/Makers/Dublin-FI.html#IS
http://www.925-1000.com/dlDublin3.html#M

All of the above hinges on whether the 1st punch is the monarch's head duty mark with a straight bottom edge. Even if it isn't, you still have a prize!

--- Susan

 

The first punch is the King's head. Next the harp, next seated Hibernia.
The wear lookks just what you'd expect.

 

Thanks for the help

I've been reading that the monarch head wasn't required on Irish silver until 1807 but that's just from some googled sources. The head sure seems to be looking right so that at least would fit an 1809 date. Can anyone confirm?

 

Ummm , no......but if you send it to me I will do research on all markings of this type...& get back to you with my findings !!!

Make sure you're return address is clear and readable......my eyes ain't what they used to be !!

Oh......& please mark the box as ' Gift ' so customs will not look at it...!

 

So kind!What an offer! (I'll get back to you on that.)

I did a light cleaning and found two more marks on the handle, one a head facing right and the harp.

 

According to the info on the following page it appears you are right when it says "Statue 47, Geo. III, c.15 (1807) that required the additional stamp of the King's Head Duty mark on Irish silver." It seems there were problems with the provincial (not Dublin) silversmiths of Ireland of not officially registering with the Dublin assay office and having their silver assayed and hallmarked.
About the 6th paragraph down, paragraph starts with "It was until 1784..."
http://www.925-1000.com/IrishProvincial_OV.html

As to looking left or right, I couldn't tell for sure. I was just going on a possible?? shape of the punch.

Another thing that helps back up the date of 1809 with James Scott as opposed to 1785 with John Stoyle is on the following page with the mark "LAW" for the retailer William Law. It lists "Corresponding Silversmiths." "James Scott" is listed and not John Stoyle.

No doubt you already saw all of the above that brought you to your conclusion - the right conclusion of 1809 & James Scott.

--- Susan

Edit: Just now seeing the latest pics. Good show S_I_S!

 

And here I thought I was doing well to find a Turkish (fairly sure) ring today in a freebie bin.... Yowza.

 

Susan I hadn't seen that page as I never looked beyond the Dublin makers. It's interesting reading and I think all the signs point to the 1809 date. I'm thrilled to have it and with all the Irish blood in the family it might be something I'll see if my children would like someday.

Evelyn I'd love to find a freebie Turkish ring any day! Yeah for you! I wish there was a way to find another "find" but of course I usually just find the normal ho hum stuff

 

Fine photo's SIS !!!