Featured Help identifying English piece

Assuming this is 19th century but confused if the marking says 67 or 1667

 

The Victorians loved the 17th century. This seems to be an unusually faithful homage, but I would date it to ca. 1890-1900.

 

That is beautiful!

 

I agree, a Historic Revival piece, the date is a reference to the style. Great carving.

 

I rotated and lightened a bit though not sure it's helpful. Since there are initials GR and BR with a year 67, could it be a marriage piece I wonder. (Assuming GR is not meant to be Georgius Rex)

 

That would be right at home in Hearst Castle ...... Neat piece

 

Don't think this is a marriage.

 

Love the glass inserts . I bet it weighs a ton !

 

Not thinking a marriage of furniture if that's what you mean, a marriage of people. GR loves BR and they got married in 1867, that sort of thing.

 

By marriage piece here is meant a fine piece of furniture to commemorate a real marriage, as in a union between a man and woman, am I right? Not two pieces of furniture from different eras stacked on each other, or?

Having said that, and by no means being an expert on anything except maybe a few languages and fonts, I venture that the SEVEN in 67 may actually be a ONE. Old European numerals featured a "flagged" numeral 1, and a "crossed" numeral 7. Therefore it's possible that the two numerals could combine to make 61, not 67.

That is neither here nor there EXCEPT if anyone good at research in the British royal and/or aristocrat annals can establish that a binding union as in a marriage took place between two individuals with the initials GR and BR in either 1861 or 1761, it might lead to a provenance, somewhere.

Only a flight of fancy but then, that's my specialty. A truly lovely piece. I am voting for 19th century, not 18th. Unless the mirror glass is a replacement, it looks too clean and fresh to be 18th cent.

 

This would not be made in the 18thc. - style is 17thc and 19thc revival as stated above.

 

How about 1761 then. As in,
September 8, 1761 – Wedding of George III and Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz in the Chapel Royal of St. James’ Palace, London
or a different kind of commemorative piece:
September 22, 1761 – Coronation of George III
Source: http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/cu...-marriages-deaths-and-other-important-events/

Thanks to:

 

The 17th century is the 1600's not the 1700's.

 

As said before, this is a 19th century Historic Revival piece of furniture. It is not 18th century in style or manufacture.
And although it is a quality piece, it is by no means of royal quality.

 

The British do not use ones which resemble sevens. That's a seven.

I agree it's late 19th. I suspect someone had it commissioned for an anniversary rather than the actual marriage: 1867 would be too early for it. The Victorians had a bit of a thing for slightly muddled mixes of styling and hommage pieces. That fad reached a screaming crescendo in the 1880s and 90s. This one is a bit of a mad confusion of Tudor and Jacobean, anyhow.

Court cupboard. Which has nothing to do with royalty.

I agree on the mirroring too: it's machine rolled silvered glass.

17th C mirrors were wavy rippled pieces, and typically wall hanging. They aren't found set in furniture. Your family of quality would have had wall ones or small hand mirrors.

This is a real 17th C one with a glorious patina:

 

Absolutely a revival piece & the carving is rather crude, I suspect the oak was dried in the manner of modern boarded cabinetwork and, at that point oak is HIDEOUSLY hard and difficult to work.
Unlike period 17th century pieces, the oak was riven (split) from the tree, it was worked while green (wet) which carves wonderfully, almost like butter with sharp tools.
I see 1671 as date on OP cupboard, that's a fantasy of course but it was in the Victorian age where whimsy was fashionable.

 

I would add I am positive I have never seen a period court cupboard neither in USA or UK that had glass mirrors, it just wasn't done in that era.

 

That close up is useful - I agree, 1671 is the purported date. The reason mirrors weren't done is they were both expensive and not flat.

 

Are you sure it was riven?

 

Interesting discussion... Welcome to Antiquers, @Robert daugherty !