Topic: information request on Georgian Brass Weight.

[Paul S.]

Am assumming its origins were with George the IV, since the date mark is 1826 - although I have to confess to making no effort to find out anything more about what seems a fairly early weight  - too much glass to appraise first          Boot sales turn up quite a lot of the usual flared base/bell shaped butchers/grocers examples, but this flat weight does seem a lot more interesting.    Why should there  be a largish teapot looking object midst the date, unless the piece was in fact used in the tea trade  -  and what is the meaning of the upper case SYC and No. 387.    All marks appear to have been cancelled, by over-marking with crossed lines, so taken out of use maybe.  On the reverse the lead plug appears to show a much later mark of E R., so C20 presumably??    I have carried a couple of pix over, so should be six in all.           thanks for looking, and if there are any brass weight experts out there grateful for any info.

[Paul S.]

and the other two pix..............

[keith]

Hello Paul,welcome to the other side,managed to find some info on your weight,the A stands for 'avoirdupois' the coffee pot symbol is the founders mark along with the shield make it the 'City of London and Guild Company 'Hallmarks',hope that helps

[antiquerose123]

Hi Paul S -- and Welcome   

I have to say those are Great Close up shots , that suggestion really helps....and your Photos Prove it!! 

Keith is so knowledgeable on so many things, too !!   

[Paul S.]

thanks Keith and Rose for your warm welcome  -  not so sure if there is a hidden meaning in 'the other side' -  certainly the emoticons do seem a little lurid and off the wall  -  but I'm only joking of course - I like 'mooning' and 'Neener'  lol  -  and I shall also be able to say....'hello
Sincere thanks Keith for finding out so much already  -  I'll make a point of writing this down so that the information can be stored with the weight for future reference when I do a 'Getty', and donate my entire collections to a museum
I just think that finding pieces like this makes history really come alive  -  and yes Rose, can never thank you enough for sharing that close up technique.
signed    

[keith]

Not so clever just have a little book on weights and pewter measures,also collect pewter.
    

[Anne]

This site helps with the verification numbers on weights:
http://www.antique-metalware.co.uk/verification.html

[Paul S.]

thanks Anne

[Paul S.]

having now checked the Verification No. against the details in Anne's link  -  the data would appear to indicate that No. 387 was used by 'Surrey County' with a corresponding date of 1881  -  hence, I imagine the upper case letters SYC.          So I now have a little more information - many thanks   -  and if only this piece could speak, what tales it might tell!

[Anne]

That's the conclusion I came to as well Paul.  I seem to recall (and I can't find where I saw it) that when a weight was taken out of use the marks were cancelled by means of an overstamp. It's something I read or was told years ago (pre-internet) when I was collecting weights to make up sets to go with old fashioned scales, so can't give you a source for that assertion. It might explain those curious cross marks though...

[Paul S.]

Hello Anne.
Would agree with you regarding the cancellation 'slashes' on this weight, I can't think of any other rational reason why the marks should be defaced so strikingly  -  obviously the authorities felt strongly that pieces needed to be de-commissioned in a very formal way.     Worried perhaps that re-use in an uncontrolled way might endanger the standards of the world of commerce.      Just shows how times have changed.
Turning to the matter of the Uniform Verification Nos. - glad we agree on this also, makes me feel I'm not barking up the wrong tree  -  but.......am I correct in saying this is only half the story.          Reading the details of your link, I would understand it that the other marks on my weight  -  including Keith's reference to City of London and Guild Company Hallmarks - would be termed the pre 1879 Verification Marks  -  to which the text refers.
P.S.    Next up, when I get time, is a pewter tankard with Chinese/Japanese touch marks  -  not remotely old I'm sure.

[keith]

Must see that tankard

[Paul S.]

have just taken the photos Keith  -  posting sometime in the next half hour   ish.

[Tigerchips]

I'm a bit confused as i thought VR stood for Victoria Regina which would make it Victorian?

[Paul S.]

Would agree that it does, usually.     I was simply going with what I had assumed was a date of 1826 (late George IV)  -  but since I really know almost nothing of these matters, perhaps this number doesn't in fact signify a date.     The number sits equally either side of the teapot mark.   I will go and dig it out and look again.     However, the VR marks may well have been added later, in line with requirements of Trading Standards viz a viz the 1879 Verification Marks.

[Anne]

Under whatever act of parliament it was (I forget which one!) I think weights have to revalidated every so often... in the same way as weighting scales still have to be now. I know that each area kept a set of master weights and measures to be used to check them against. Lancaster City Council's redundant ones have been made into an architectural decoration in the shopping centre now, so we can see what they looked like.