Hello. How do you date this tea urn? Is that Old Sheffield Plate or EP/EPNS?
2 Likes
Any other hallmarks, markings, symbols?
I suggest you gently clean the base of the vessel, especially around the legs.
Lion and “B” monogram.
AI:
Regency-era Sheffield items (roughly 1811–1820) are often Old Sheffield Plate (fused plate) rather than solid sterling silver, and they typically lack official assay hallmarks, featuring instead maker’s marks or pseudo-hallmarks.
Regency Era Characteristics & Marks (c. 1810s):
- Lack of Official Marks: Unlike sterling silver, Old Sheffield Plate items from this period often do not carry the crown (Sheffield town mark) or lion passant (sterling).
1 Like
No, no others. Only those.
1 Like
We will probably limit ourselves to common findings since there is no specific data for identification… Which doesn’t change the fact that you own a beautiful antique. Feast your eyes on it!
1 Like
Sir “Jack” Croft, Baronet was a spy for Wellington in the Napoleonic wars and a scion of the famous Port liquor family in Portugal. He died in 1862.
His badge was "A lion passant gardant per pale indented gu. and erminois, the dexter fore-paw resting on an escut- cheon arg., charged with a representation of the star of the Order of the Tower and his motto “Esse quam videri.”
The silversmith here has shown the star without the shield surrounding it.
In 1814 the Portuguese Regent awarded him the Order of the Tower and Sword, four years later he was awarded a baronetcy
Letters and documents confirming this history are contained in the archives of The Fladgate Partnership, Portugal and the Croft family records, as well as in the Factory House.
Having said that, I cannot explain the gothic initials “JR”. Well the "J"I can but the “R” does not fit.
So this dates 1820 to 1864 if it was indeed his. The style is Regency to Early Victorian. so 1840.
We can see the copper on the feet. Electroplating starts about 1840.
The matter is further complicated by the Croft Family having another, much earlier coat of arms, again with a lion with his paw on a shield, but this shield not featuring the Portuguese Star award but another lion passant.
Here it is on an earlier Croft residence:
CRWW
2 Likes
Yes, I know, I’m stupid, I’m ignorant. I’m blazing a trail so others can shine… Seth, forgive me for being snarky.
Ah, I found a patent number on the spirit burner. It seems that urn was produced around 1912. Is that possible it is edwardian replica?
2 Likes
Robert, I’m pleased with your discovery. I won’t comment on this matter any further – I’ll leave that to those wiser than me.
" The base is stamped “PROV PATENT 1758/12” alongside a bird hallmark. This designation refers to a British Provisional Patent , indicating the design was officially registered in the early 20th century. Such markings add historical significance and authenticity to the piece."
“PROV PATENT 1758/12” is a mark found on antique English silverplate, specifically on items like tea urns, indicating a British Provisional Patent granted in 1912 (number 1758). This stamp was used to protect the design during the early stages of registration, often accompanied by a bird hallmark or manufacturer mark.
Key Details regarding this mark:
- Meaning: “Prov Patent” stands for Provisional Patent.
- Date: The number indicates the year 1912 (1758th patent of that year).
Vintage Alcohol Oil Lamp Prov. Patent 1758/12 Silver Plated Made in England | eBay Robert, you are absolutely right.
2 Likes
These spirit burners, designed for what the British then called methylated spirits and we call denatured alcohol or more accurately methyl hydrate, were sold separately and most used for double deckers entree dishes.
I have two of them under an 1835 London entree dish
Here’s someone on facebook selling them separately for $35 each
In the exhibitor’s case someone at some point has used one to replace the whale oil burners of an earlier date.
The ebay seller cited had followed the Goodmans Auctioneers’ lead and presumed, absent any other mark on the Egyptian revival early 19th century water heater, the patent on this separate item dates the entire urn. Not true. The patent is limited to and specifically fo a burner not a replica of a 18th century urn which in any even would not be patentable. AI, of course, has adopted this as gospel and is repeating it.
This is a classic example of why humans with our ability to look at a wider array of data and information not limited to the last 20 years of the internet are still fairly useful in the antique business.
The following information is accurate. The provisional patent application was not for a 20th century copy of an 18th century-invented water heater but specifically for the burner.
By the first world war the hot water jug included in tea sets had completely replaced the old cumbersome, difficult to cart around, servant-requiring water heaters of the previous century.
Auctioneers have a tendency to rely on assignor information usually to their benefit. In this case it is to the benefit of the buyer who is being told he is bidding on a WWI era or later copy of an Egyptian revival water heater rather than a 19th century water heater with the whale oil burner replaced.
So if all this is true why bother replacing the burner in the first place? The short answer is fossil fuel-sourced oils were replacing the whale oil, those wretched animals having been decimated by the trade to the point where whale oil was somewhere between expensive and impossible to find and drilling for oil especially the the southern US and the Middle East was providing massive amounts of fuel requiring different systems of ignition.
I suppose if we had never found fossil fuel to replace whale oil ,WWI would never have happened, the Americans wouldn’t have used debt to take over Europe and we wouldn’t be having the current discussions about Iran which unlike Persia is not a country but what Mssrs. Picot and Sykes decided in 1917 was the best way of partitioning the middle east so as to render it least likely to cut off supplies of cheap oil to warring post colonial European nations.
CRWW
1 Like
Thank you for comprehensive explanation. I was aware that the patent applies only to burner. Yet, the burner is the same style as the urn. It looks like they belong together and were produced the same time. There are numbers 1735 on the spirit burner base and on the inner side of the lid of tea urn. Maybe the urn is a close copy of early XIX century urn? I read that old urns were copied in the Victorian era. Or you maintain your opinion that burner is a later replacement part while the urn is older? Thank you in advance.
(post deleted by author)
The scratch mark on the lid and on the detactable part holding the patented burner, which is different to the patent number, was not put there by the manufacturer of the urn. That would have been stamped or incised. These marks are typical of scratch marks by jewellers undertaking the job of retailing, repairing or evaluating items. In this case most likely the jeweller who was asked to add the later burner or, if a retailer, who took it in to stock for resale and added the burner.
If the urn has been duplicated in the 20th century it would have had makers marks all over it.
It doesn’t and it wasn’t.
These burners, just the works not the pot holder surrounding it in which it sits and on which the number is scratched if I understand you correctly, were patented and the patent only applies to the burner not the tea urn.
And finally I do not know of any 20th century silversmith or plater mass reproducing Egyptian revival tea urns of the previous century like this and those that were producing duplicate pieces were stamping them.
For instance Empress N.Y.S. Co (New York Silver Co.) was an American manufacturer active around the late 19th and early 20th centuries (circa 1890–1900s), known for producing silver-plated and brass household items, including chafing dishes, teapots, and servers.
Their items are all marked with a crown, “Empress,” and “N.Y.S. Co”.
All this clear. What is not clear about is if this is Old Sheffield plate, that is to say earlier than 1840 or electroplate. We know the burner is electroplate because it says so in the provisional patent description but that does not help us with the urn it sits under.
I am also not clear that the Initials and the crest are for the same person. I am clear the crest is a lion with its paw resting on a star and that the only registered mark even vaguely similar to that is for the Croft family reflecting the award given to them by the King of Portugal for charitable work done in his country after the end of the Peninsula Wars, but the initials with it don’t fit for the family and may well have been added later.
CRWW
2 Likes
Thank you. Do you mean that spirit container/vessel was manufactured together with tea urn and only the works witch sits on alcohol vessel is later? Or spirit vessel and the works belong together as a burner made in 1912?
I bought that tea urn on eBay and the seller told it was purchased Gump’s. The label telling that urn was made circa 1790 was added.
