Please visit our other websites: Ganoksin Jewelry Making Resource | Orchid Jewelry Making Forums | International Gem Society | IGS Gemstone and Gemology Forums

Silver Collector Forums

Queen Anne Porringer

The marks, although rubbed, show, up to, 1712. My question is, should the maker’s mark raise any eyebrows & my blood pressure? Or is it ‘just’ Timothy Ley?
Regards
John
prr3.jpg
prr2.jpg
Prr1.jpg

I’m not convinced about Timothy Ley, John. His mark was LE in conformity with the law requiring the first 2 letters of the surname to be used. I prefer Nathaniel Lock (Grimwade no 1948). This has a key above which may well have been lost over time on your porringer. I would also go for 1713 as the date, but I always have difficulties with this cycle as it’s not immediately obvious what the letter is supposed to be.

As far as wow factors go I think that at that age they are all much of a muchness, unless it’s Lamerie of course!

Phil

No, I’m going to change my mind about Nathaniel Lock; the key in his mark is too close to the LO not to be seen on your mark and the symbol below the letters is not as much like a cross as in your picture. Having said that I can’t find anything else in Grimwade which matches…

Well my Lamerie thoughts have eased … slightly :confused:
That said … what chance?
Thanks Phil