Jump to content

Found this yesterday on Thames foreshore, what is it ?


Recommended Posts

I'll be heading up to the MoL this week to inform of finding this, as always when I find something interesting, but meanwhile has anyone got an inkling what it is ?!

So far it appears:

- made of pewter or silver (it's tarnished from years of mud).

- 1 inch deep bowl which measures almost 3 inches across.

- ornate (what looks like) handle, the embossed pattern of dots is not perfectly symmetrical, so perhaps hand made/cottage industry/cheap mass produced low quality moulding.

- rear of 'handle' has initial E and W. Regarding this (what I suspect is maker's / owner's mark) it seems old-fashioned because the 'W' is portrayed in the style of two overlapping letter 'V' symbols and the 'E' and 'W' are separated by four dots in a diamond configuration as a spacer (which I've seen in old texts and some church manuscripts).


See pics - any advice welcome !

(no you don't need a mudlarker's licence to just browse legal foreshore without digging!).

KrackersMaracas Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Any chance there could have another handle at one

> time - it looks a little like a quaich (although

> they are supposed to have 2 handles, not one)


Porringer is quite similar to a quaich. Colonial style porringer dishes were more likely to have a single handle, compared to European.


I think you'd have to chase up the stamp for more specific info. It should be listed somewhere. Maybe contact one of the London guilds?

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Possible Edward Wakelin, London 1753..

>

> Googled Edward Wakelin silversmith porringer

>

> This page should be of interest..

>

> https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=edward+wakelin+s

> ilversmith&rlz=1C1AFAB_enGB570GB572&biw=1600&bih=7

> 70&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjmpPmjy63P

> AhUpI8AKHS0NAl0Q_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=edward+wakelin

> +silversmith+porringer

>

>

> Foxy



Damn you Fox, beat me to it! Does look a contender though his hallmark seems usually to have included a fleur-de-lys - early work perhaps? Worth a bob or two if so, let us know what they say at the museum KK.

Yes I agree it's a porringer, which I'd never heard of before Saffron's post (thanks Saffron). The maker's mark I have doesn't match the one for Edward Wakelin but thanks Foxy.

Well I guess that's the question answered, now I know what it is there's loads of similar examples on www, based on which date could be a couple or more hundred years old and if I get to bottom of it I will post here to sdvise.

Saffron Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> KrackersMaracas Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Any chance there could have another handle at

> one

> > time - it looks a little like a quaich

> (although

> > they are supposed to have 2 handles, not one)

>

> Porringer is quite similar to a quaich. Colonial

> style porringer dishes were more likely to have a

> single handle, compared to European.

>

> I think you'd have to chase up the stamp for more

> specific info. It should be listed somewhere.

> Maybe contact one of the London guilds?


every day is a school day it seems! Thanks Saffron and sorry I didn't read your link before posting!

Saffron Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> KrackersMaracas Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Any chance there could have another handle at

> one

> > time - it looks a little like a quaich

> (although

> > they are supposed to have 2 handles, not one)

>

> Porringer is quite similar to a quaich. Colonial

> style porringer dishes were more likely to have a

> single handle, compared to European.

>

> I think you'd have to chase up the stamp for more

> specific info. It should be listed somewhere.

> Maybe contact one of the London guilds?


Ive looked extensively for the E W mark. I even found a reference to a 'Square stamp of 4 dots' but nothing tied up.


Hall marks are made of a single stamp or die. The letters on KK's piece are NOT stamped.. they are raised. Not a Hall Mark ..


So the handle looks to be moulded. ???


Foxy

Couple of pic's of very similar looking, but silver, Porringers in this page.


http://www.collectorsweekly.com/articles/the-huguenot-silversmiths-18th-century-refugees/


Could well be that the initials are not the makers but that of the owner.

Once I've cleaned my one up in will show as either silver or pewter I believe.

Of course, the 'EW' mark may also be a foreign maker. I may try US/European makers when I have a mo.

Either way, good find by the lad (who also found an amazing bottle 1710-1730, according to MOL, a couple of years ago).

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Once I've cleaned my one up in will show as either

> silver or pewter I believe.

> Of course, the 'EW' mark may also be a foreign

> maker. I may try US/European makers when I have a

> mo.

> Either way, good find by the lad (who also found

> an amazing bottle 1710-1730, according to MOL, a

> couple of years ago).



Might be an idea to leave it in un cleaned condition until you receive an expert appraisal

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Thank you to everyone who has already shared their thoughts on this. Dawson Heights Estate in the 1980s, while not as infamous as some other estates, did have its share of anti-social behaviour and petty crime. My brother often used the estate as a shortcut when coming home from his girlfriend’s house, despite my parents warning him many times to avoid it. Policing during that era had a distinctly “tough on crime” approach. Teenagers, particularly those from working-class areas or minority communities, were routinely stopped, questioned, and in some cases, physically handled for minor infractions like loitering, skateboarding, or underage drinking. Respect for authority wasn’t just expected—it was demanded. Talking back to a police officer could escalate a situation very quickly, often with harsh consequences. This was a very different time. There were no body cameras, dash cams, or social media to hold anyone accountable or to provide a record of encounters. Policing was far more physical and immediate, with few technological safeguards to check officer behaviour. My brother wasn’t known to the police. He held a full-time job at the Army and Navy store in Lewisham and had recently been accepted into the army. Yet, on that night, he ran—not because he was guilty of anything—but because he knew exactly what would happen if he were caught on an estate late at night with a group of other boys. He was scared, and rightfully so.
    • I'm sure many people would look to see if someone needed help, and if so would do something about it, and at least phone the police if necessary if they didn't feel confident helping directly. At least I hope so. I'm sorry you don't feel safe, but surely ED isn't any less safe than most places. It's hardly a hotbed of crime, it's just that people don't post on here if nothing has happened! And before that, there were no highwaymen,  or any murders at all .... In what way exactly have we become "a soft apologetic society", whatever that means?
    • Unless you're 5 years old or have been living in a cave for several decades you can't be for real. I don't believe that you're genuinely confused by this, no one who has access to newspapers, the tv news, the internet would ask this. Either you're an infant, or have recently woken up from a coma after decades, or you're a supercilious tw*t
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...