German Parian marks+Victorian or no?

I was wondering what these marks indicate - I'm no great judge of porcelain, so it could easily be brand new. But I do think it's beautiful, relaxing just to look at.

But I don't have my books on hand. Any suggestions?

Now that I look at the bottom image, I don't see wear. Also, it may have been repaired, judging by the larger child's left foot(!). I didn't notice when I saw it IRL.

(Hi, Thelma, Shiloh, Messilane and anyone else I knew on the old boards!)

 

Hi Scoutshouse, great to see ya here.

 

I looked a bit but my eyes blurred

https://www.google.com/search?tbm=i...k4GgAw&ved=0CAkQ9C8wAA&dpr=1&biw=1024&bih=625

 

After “Babes in the Woods” (1846) by John Bell
http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/21903369_english-minton-parian-porcelain-babes-in-the-woods

I think the original marble is at Norwich castle, but note that those figures are reversed and the position of the upward bent leg is slightly different.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Collections_at_Norwich_Castle_Museum_and_Art_Gallery

I did see an engraving of this online that looks like the figurine, which, if used as a source, might account for the differences.

 

Hi,
Looks like the Minton sable mark. It is quarter to six AM I need coffee before I answer.
greg

 

According to Godden, after 1842, impressed marks, "appear in sets of three: month letter, potter's mark and the year cypher."

Based on that, I'd say the circle cluster is the potter, the "S" is for September, and the 3 dots are for 1851.

I suppose the No 2 might suggest that it was produced in different sizes. I don't know.

Yes, it looks like there is a repair to the toes of one foot. That will affect the price, but I wouldn't mind having it.

 

And here it is, indeed: http://www.tooveys.com/lots.asp?WEBLOTID=241053&LOTID=1410

That's about $350. They're not rare, but the quality sells them.

 

Thanks so much, you guys - I was going down the wrong road with this one. Love the dirt under the fingernails - sweet.

I think that's a backward "S" for 1854?
Can't figure out the smallest one.
I was reading the three dots/slashes be one symbol as on the table for Parian wares c. 1845-1860. It's close, but not exact.


Interesting range + condition:
Toovey's: $60 8/13 - No cipher+loss on bird's tail
J S Evans: $350 11/13 - No cipher+minor faults
Skinners: $1000 7/12 - Cipher+Missing bird by child's head (!) that's kind of a biggie

Is that because of venue, you think?

 

You're misreading the Toovey's, I'd say, it sold for about $360! It's a British figurine so I'd expect a higher price in the US, due to rarity.

 

Sorry Ownedby:

I meant Jeffrey S Evans + no cipher, minor faults = $60
http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/21903369_english-minton-parian-porcelain-babes-in-the-woods

You can't give a link a shorter name? and no preview?

I was really surprised Skinner's piece did so well even w/o the bird. Makes no sense.

Anyone remember the scene in Pride and Prejudice where Kiera Knightly is walking through Darcy's statuary. Made a big impression on me... so beautiful.

Well, we'll see if it's still there tomorrow! I'm pretty sure it'll be under $50, if not lower. Thanks, for the warm welcome!

PS Greg'sGlass: I googled sable mark - it made sense along with the Ermine mark, but couldn't find anything. Typo?

 

Hi,
Meant to say ermine mark not sable, geesh. I told you I needed coffee.
greg

 

I thought those looked like Minton date marks, but second-guessed myself because they looked so big, LOL! Anyway, the Liveauctioneers one that sold at $60 is 4 1/2" high, 6" x 11 3/4" long.