Found this yesterday on Thames foreshore, what is it ?

[KidKruger]

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!).

[Earl Aelfheah]

Interesting. I've no idea what it is I'm afraid, but do let us know when you find out.

[Saffron]

Porringer? Possibly a christening gift...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porringer

[DulwichFox]

Do not know what it is but seemed to me to be possib;y connected to the Church..

Perhaps an annointing/ baptising cup.. ??

Foxy

[Forest Hill Billy]

Google 'wine taster silver cup' it looks like it could be that...????

[KrackersMaracas]

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)

[Jeremy]

Surely Saffron has already nailed it?

[uncleglen]

I agree- it looks identical to the wiki one

[Saffron]

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]

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+silversmith&rlz=1C1AFAB_enGB570GB572&biw=1600&bih=770&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjmpPmjy63PAhUpI8AKHS0NAl0Q_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=edward+wakelin+silversmith+porringer

Foxy

[rendelharris]

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.

[KidKruger]

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.

[Jennys]

I thought it might be a tastevin.

[womanofdulwich]

Might it be a Quaich.?

[KrackersMaracas]

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!

[DulwichFox]

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

[ed_pete]

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.

[KidKruger]

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).

[Laur]

A few pictures/prices here too.

https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/229881494/antique-pewter-porringer-bowl-hallmarked?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=shopping_uk_en_gb_b-home_and_living-kitchen_and_dining-dining_and_serving&utm_custom1=ace3c682-1e8e-44fe-805b-0c07ffdb226e&gclid=CNzIh6K1r88CFda4GwodX8gDRA

[KidKruger]

Lila's (Jeweller on LL) kindly confirmed it's pewter.

[Blah Blah]

There is a pewter society who might be able to help. Pewter definitely points to age - circa 1600 to 1800 perhaps. It could have seen the Great Fire! Fascinating if nothing else.

[pipsky2008]

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

[intexasatthe moment]

Yes ,good advice .

[PeckhamRose]

Just a thought, without having read all the above, it looks too perfectly round to be that old. But what a find!

[KidKruger]

PR fair point but it's not perfectly round, or at least it wasn't when I found it !

I've managed to get it a bit nearer true round which is why it may look passable from the side view you can see in the photo.