Staffordshire Figures 1780-1840

Seems to me that luck is in the air...at least for the top bidder on eBay auction 350297890464, because his/her bid was FAILED to meet the reserve. Unsold was this pair of sheep.

The sheep are described as "antique Walton sheep figures" and indeed they bear a WALTON mark on the rear.

Trouble is that the sheep bear no resemblance to the work of the Staffordshire potter, John Walton, who potted in the early 19th century. The mark is a reproduction mark. The sheep were made long after John Walton was dead and buried--and I have yet to see a bocage like this on any other figure. Strictly speaking, the seller's description is correct: The sheep are "Walton" because, although reproduction Walton, they still bear a Walton mark; they were possibly made in Staffordshire; and they may even be antique--all depending on how you define the word. However, I would not want these sheep for my collection because I don't believe they are The Real Thing. The bidder who failed to meet the reserve after bidding to a whopping $264.95 got lucky.

Another lucky person is the seller of eBay auction 270507400367. He describes his 'treasures' thus:
Early Staffordshire Figures. Vintage antique items, circa 1820's. Made by Isaac Walton. Both figures have been very well restored. In both cases the boccage has been reconstructed as has the yellow breeches boy's hand.

And why is this seller lucky? Simple: he can't see Ugly. If he thinks these figures are lovely--and to be starting the auction at GBP850 he must judge them of merit--surely he must only see beauty everywhere? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I shudder as I look at the massive restoration on these early 19th century objects. I don't believe I have ever seen uglier work. The figures were not made by Isaac Walton, but the seller probably got confused with John Walton. However, this model is NOT the traditional version of Scuffle and Contest that John Walton made. But ignorance is bliss, and so our seller is a blissfully lucky person. And if he gets even a fraction of his suggested opening bid, he will have hit the jack pot.

Another lucky seller got GBP286 for this reproduction New Marriage Act. Sold on eBay auction 300378085324.

This figure group is not an early 19th century version, and the seller did not represent it as such.  But the seller got lucky when the buyer paid GBP 286. Ouch! I guess in this case Luck was a zero-sum game.

BTW, John Hall shows a similar blue and white New Marriage Act in his book Staffordshire Portrait Figures. He dates it as 1822, made by Sherratt. Wrong on both accounts. I am not sure when this group was made but it is NOT early 19thC and is probably a 20thC creation. John Hall's little book is one of my favorite books of yesteryear, but like its contemporaries, it has its inaccuracies.