[ 72 ] 



THE DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE DATES OF GIFT AND 

 HALL-MARK DATES FOUND ON PIECES OF PLATE 

 BELONGING TO TBINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN. 



By M. .-. DUDLEY WESTBOPP. 



[Bead November SO, 1917. Published Jam aky 2, 191$.] 



A the request of the authorities of Trinity College, Dublin, I made, in 

 June, 1916, a catalogue of the plate belonging to the College. As I proceeded 

 with the work, I was surprised to find that the date of gift inscribed on 

 a large number of pieces was much earlier than that indicated by the hall- 

 marke. 



This, at the time, I tried to account for in twi First.— In former 



days plate received comparatively rough usage and in time appeared unsightly. 

 so that it became a common practice to have a disfigured piece remade, either 

 in the form of the original, or in that of the period in which it was remade. 

 Second. — The donors may have given money at a certain date for a piece of 

 lay do! have been purchased till a later period. 



On April 23rd, 1017, Dr. J. P. Mahaffy, Provost of Trinity College, 

 Dublin, read a paper on the subject before the Academy, in which he rejected 

 these fv es aa beii _ tory, and also he tried to prove that the 



inscribed dates on the .re the ones to be relied on for date of manu- 



facture, and that the hall-marks were of secondary importance. 



In his paper the quotes from a register of Oriel College, Oxford, 



that it was the frequent practice to sell or exchange pieces of plate worn out 

 or ii" longer in fashion, but that the inscriptions were in most cases carefully 

 transferred. Tl. -t also admits that numerous pieces of the College 



plate, such as cups and tankards, wen- in the eighteenth century melted 

 down, and made into more useful articles, but that the names of the original 

 donors were inscribed on the new pieces. An entry of the year 1766, in the 

 Bursar's books of Trinity College, Dublin, records a payment to a Dublin 

 silversmith for the exchange of old plate. These records appear to substantiate 

 in some way my first theory. 



I will now endeavour to show that the date indicated by the hall-marks 



