Several weeks ago I wrote a couple of posts about Mary tins. Basically, in 1914 Princess Mary, daughter of King George V and Queen Mary, decided that she wanted to send a Christmas gift to all British troops on active service on the Western Front. When it was shown to her that she couldn’t afford it, the idea was to have a publicly funded appeal to raise the money to do so which was so successful that, eventually, the gift was given to everyone in the British and Empire armed forces, including nurses. The gifts were presented in a very fetching brass tin and these tins eventually became known as Mary tins.
Now, through a combination of things I have developed an
interest in the First World War. For Christmas 2025 my younger brother bought
me a Mary tin. I absolutely love it. Even without the history behind it I think
it is a lovely object.
So, if you read my earlier posts you’ll know that I did a
bit of research and found out that in 2014 the Daily Mail newspaper did a promotional
offer whereby readers could save tokens to claim a reproduction Mary tin. I
bought two from ebay. There’s still a large number of original tins out there.
I think that lost of people kept them even after the contents were gone, but
obviously they don’t have the same emotional value to the descendant of the
recipients. There’s also quite a large number of the Daily Mail reproductions
out there as well. I don’t think that you’d ever be able to pass these off as
originals. The quality of the embossing on the design is much cruder. The tin
is much lighter and feels more like coated tin than real brass.
Well, there we are, original and replica. I thought that
was it. Only it wasn’t. You see, in the course of my research I found out about
a variation. This was clearly a reproduction, but instead of having the head of
Princess Mary embossed upon it, there is the date, 1914. I felt that this was
strange, but eventually I found a post on a forum that explained it. It said that
tins with 1914 were made as souvenirs of the Great War in the 1920s. The change
in the design was because the Crown forbade the use of the image of a member of
the Royal Family for commercial purposes. These were sold under the name
commemorative tins.
The 1914 tin I had seen was not from the 1920s, but
essentially a reproduction of one. So a reproduction of a reproduction. I
wouldn’t say that it was difficult to get hold of, but I could only find one
supplier. None to be found on ebay. Yes, of
course I bought one. It’s an interesting piece. I mean it’s clearly
based on the design of the original Mary tin. However some of the embossed writing
is not there. Only the lid seems to be barred, and it has a darker colour than
the originals or the Dily Mail reproductions. The lid is not attached by a hinge and its dimensions are slightly larger than the others I have.
The body of the tin has some kind of matt black coating. It’s quite tactile
actually, and it’s pretty heavy. If anything I’d say it’s heavier than the
original.
Well not quite. In the course of finding out about the
reproduction Mary tins I came upon a post that mentioned replicas made by the
Daily Mail and Fortnum and Masons. I dived down this particular rabit hole and
found out that in 2014 Fortnum and Mason’s in London had produced what I
believe is called a Tommy’s tin to commemorate the centenary of the original
Mary tins. Tins were gifted to all members of the Armed Forces serving in
Afghanistan. Based on photographs I found, the tin was very clearly based on
the Mary tin. It seems to have a helmeted head where Princess Mary’s was, and
instead of being flanked by two Ms, the head is flanked by F and M. I did find
one on ebay. This had the original contents, a mini pack of playing cards and
as a result the price was rather more than I was prepared to pay.
Come this morning, I found another, empty F and M tin on
ebay for a much more acceptable price. So I’ve bought it. Watch this space.
No comments:
Post a Comment