Shadwell forgeries

• Comment: This appears to be a minor notable subject. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:11, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

---

A Billy and Charley lead seal, Auckland War Memorial Museum

The term Billy and Charley or Shadwell forgery or Shadwell dock forgery refers to one of a series of mid-19th Century forgeries of medieval lead and lead-alloy artifacts. The name derives from two Londoners, William (Billy) Smith and Charles (Charley) Eaton, who were responsible for their large scale manufacture between 1857 and 1870. At the time, some antiquarians were fooled by the forgeries, despite them being crudely made by two individuals with limited skill in metalworking and little knowledge of medieval art,

Today, Billy and Charleys are viewed as examples of Folk art and are sought-after collectible items in their own right. A number of museums hold collections of them; some have been sold for many times more than examples of the medieval originals they purported to be. Because of this, modern fake Billy and Charley are reportedly in circulation.

William Smith and Charles Eaton

Little is known of the lives of William Smith (dates unknown) and Charles Eaton (c.1834-1870) except that when young they were Mudlarks - individuals that made a small living by searching the mudflats of the River Thames at low-tide, seeking any item of value. They lived in Rosemary Lane (now called Royal Mint Street) in what is now part of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.

In 1845 Smith came into contact with an antique dealer, William Edwards; Eaton met Edwards some years later. Edwards came to view the pair as "his boys" and frequently bought from them items of interest they found while mudlarking. In 1857, the two began to manufacture counterfeit examples of some of the medieval artifacts they had previously found and sold to Smith.

Forgeries

A Billy and Charley in the form of a lead plaque with a purported date of "1292", Auckland War Memorial Museum

A lead Billy and Charley medallion, 93 to 113 millimetres (3.7 to 4.4 in) in diameter, 3.3 millimetres (0.13 in) thick and weighing 150 grams (5.3 oz). One side shows the profile head of a man wearing a crown; the other shows the head of a helmeted knight. The medallion is dated "1030". United Kingdom Portable Antiquities Scheme

During their career, Smith and Eaton manufactured many kinds it items, including pilgrim badges, ampulla, statuettes, small, portable shrines and medallions. Initially they were all made from lead or pewter, but later the two also used a copper-lead alloy. The items were cast using plaster of paris molds, into which a design by engraved by hand. They were then given the appearance of age by being bathed in acid. The area in which they worked was notable for having many small workshops, making metals fittings for the ships that used the nearby docks.

The most common type of Billy and Charley were medallions, around 2 to 4 inches (5 to 10 cm) in diameter. These had crude depictions of knights in armour, crowned kings or religious figures. They often carried inscriptions, but as Smith and Eaton were illiterate, these were meaningless. To give the appearance of age, many of the items also carried dates between the 11th century and the 16th century. However the dates were inscribed using Arabic numerals which only came into use in England during the 15th century and so are anachronistic on the "older" items.

Smith and Eaton sold their forgeries to Edwards, selling around 1100 items between 1857 and 1858 for a total of £200.. The two claimed the source of the steady stream of antiquities was the large-scale excavations then taking place as part of the construction of Shadwell Dock. Edwards in turn sold them to another antique dealer, George Eastwood.

George Eastwood bought the 1100 items from Edwards, before bypassing him and buying further supplies directly from Smith and Eaton. Eastwood advertised them as a “A remarkable curious and unique collection of leaden signs or badges of the time of Richard II”, and made a great success from selling them to the public. This success can be explained by the fact that in the mid-19th century, there was great public interest in medieval history, especially amongst the growing middle class. However the archaeology of the period was a comparatively undeveloped field, even amongst the era's leading scholars, making it easier to pass off the forgeries as genuine.

Libel trial

By 1858, Henry Syer Cuming, the secretary of the British Archaeological Association, together with the archaeologist Thomas Bateman, had noticed the appearance of large numbers of medieval artifacts for sale which they suspected to be forgeries from a single source. On 28th April, Cuming delivered a lecture, Some Recent Forgeries in Lead, to the British Archaeological Association in which he condemned them as "Gross attempt at deception". The lectured was reported in The Gentleman's Magazine and The Athenaeum. George Eastwood responded firstly with a letter defending the authenticity of the items he was selling, and then by suing the publishers of the Athenaeum for libel even though he had not been named in their report.

The trial was held at Guildford Assizes on 4 August 1858. The judge was Sir James Shaw Willes, Eastwood was represented by Edwin James QC.

Among the witnesses were William Smith (described in a newspaper report as a "rough looking young man") In his testimony, Smith claimed he had obtained the objects from the Shadwell Dock construction site, by bribing the navvys building the dock with money and drink, and by sneaking onto the site himself after hours. He testified he had sold around 2000 items, making around £400.

The prominent antiquarian and amateur archaeologist Charles Roach Smith testified to the authenticity of the Billy and Charlies. Before the trial, Roach-Smith had stated their very crudity was an argument for their authenticity - he assumed any 19th Century forger intent on deception would simply have done a better job in making them. Under examination during the trial, he stated his belief that they were a previously unknown class of object with an unknown purpose. However, he was confident of their age. The Rev. Thomas Hugo, vicar of St Botolph-without-Bishopsgate and a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, gave testimony that supported Roach-Smith, stating that the items dated from the 15th or 16th centuries. The artist and antiquary Frederick William Fairholt also testified that he believed them authentic.

The Athenaeum had not named George Eastwood in its report so the trial judge directed the jury to find the magazine not-guilty of libel, but it was asked to affirm its faith in George Eastwood's integrity.

Subsequent history

A lead medallion, probably a Billy and Charlie, United Kingdom Portable Antiquities Scheme

The libel trial attracted widespread publicity. Even though George Eastwood failed to convict the Athenaeum of libel, the result gave the appearance of endorsing the authenticity of his stock, and his business prospered.

Roach-Smith reported on the trial in the Gentleman's Magazine, restarting his theory they were of 16th century origin. In 1861, he published volume five of his work Collectanea antiqua. This included a article stating the items were crude, religious tokens, dating from the reign of Mary I of England, that had been imported from continental Europe as replacements for the devotional items destroyed during the English Reformation.

Meanwhile, the businessman, politician and antiquarian Charles Reed had renewed the investigation the artifacts; although he may have been prompted by Roach-Smith's book. He made inquiries in the Shadwell Dock construction site, but could find nobody who had sold items to Smith or Eaton. He gained the confidence of a tosher (one who scavenges in sewers), who confirmed that Smith and Eaton had been selling forgeries. He was introduced the Smith and Eaton, and gained their trust, but paid the tosher to break into their workshop and steal several of their molds; these were exhibited to Society of Antiquaries of London in March 1861 as proof the items were fakes.

Later career of Smith and Eaton

Despite their exposure, Smith and Eaton continued to make and sell forgeries throughout the 1860's. They began using a lead-copper alloy known as cock metal and their work showed somewhat improved craftsmanship. But increasing awareness of their activities made it harder for them to sell their forgeries. In 1867 they were arrested in Windsor, Berkshire after a local clergyman recognized the items they were selling. In court, there was found to be insufficient evidence to prosecute and they were released.

Charlie Eaton died in January 1870 of consumption. William Smith's last appearance in the historical record was in 1871, when he was attempting to sell a copy of a 13th century lead jug. Nothing further is known of him..

Modern Collections

Examples of Billy and Charleys are in the collections of the British Museum, the Victoria and Albert Museum and the Museum of London. Many are held by the Cuming Museum, which includes the personal collection of Henry Syer Cuming.