Featured Minton Plates Questions

Inherited from my mother. I thought these plates had no marks until I noticed the Minton stamp on the “Apple” plate and looked more closely at the others, where I found impressed marks: MINTON CHINA 3-65 on apple & plum, MINTON CHINA 3-64 on pear. The stamped mark was used 1951+ . (My mother collected most/all of her English china in 1970, when my parents lived in Shropshire, so I assume this is the terminus ante quem.) There are also two similar plates with floral centers and dark red rims with the same ornate pattern in gold, one with MINTON CHINA 3-65 and the other without a mark. (Should I post pic of these in this thread?)

However, when I used Google Lens I found other plates with the identical center design by different US & UK manufacturers (Salem, Homer Laughlin, Johnson Bros). In some cases, the fruit patterns were signed M. Langbroek. I wondered if my plates could be fake Minton, but that did not seem plausible. Why create a fake Minton and use only incised marks that are barely visible? If creating a fraudulent stamped mark, why use one from a recent date? (I tried to open 1950s+ pattern catalogues on the online Minton Archive, but I found that beyond my meager computer skills. Maybe they do not open online & researchers must travel to the physical location?)

Would Minton use a pattern identical to other manufacturers? Which came first? The ones with signatures? Minton copying or vice versa? (Isn’t that illegal?) Why do so many manufacturers use these designs?

Qs about the stamped mark: Why is a MADE IN ENGLAND plate stamped with the German ges. gesch. (gesetzlich geschützt). If the design is “legally protected,” why are other manufacturers using it? To what do the other words & numbers refer? B-1468 WHITE MONARCH looks like a pattern number/name, but scarcely describes the multicolored fruit, floral, colored/gilt rims. "Shape Rd. des. No. 909,105": Shape design number? What is "Rd."?

What do the impressed numbers (3-65 and 3-64) mean? At first, I thought they were the specific pattern, but when I found 3-65 on apple, plum, & flower centers I discarded that theory. I would have thought it was the general design of the gold festoon patterns on the rims, but then why does the pear plate have a different number (3-64)? Why does one floral plate lack a mark? Can the impressed marks be dated? I assume they share the same date as the stamped mark, but is that correct?

 

And this looks like a German manufacturers registration #? Or am I misinterpreting?

 

More info: White Monarch is a pattern, but not the fruit, flower, ornate gold on colored rim pattern. Replacements shows it as a plain white plate 1964-70. So I infer that these plates use the WM shape.

 

Yes, gesetzlich geschützt = “legally protected,” which its driving me nuts. Why German on a plate "MADE IN ENGLAND"?

Hmm.. speculation here... Could it mean that the fruit designs (signed M. Langbroek on a Homer Laughlin plate with the pear design) are by a "legally protected" German artist, but that Minton had permission to use it? But Langbroek seems more Dutch (Nederlands) than Deutsche.

A "Worthpoint" entry says plates in a very different style/subject are "by well known Dutch artist M. Langbroek," but if s/he is so well-known why not give his/her first name? I suspect there are a lot of plates signed with that name. Which does not solve the problem of a German legal protection notice on a British plate.
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vtg-langbroek-well-known-dutch-artist-517758352

 

To my completely untutored eye, the decoration looks very 'Bavarian'. Minton blanks, German decorator?

 

It’s the shape which is registered not the decoration. British manufacturers sometimes registered in other countries as well as the U.K.

 

There is a Dutch artist Maarten Langbroek, but I only know etchings of views of Dutch towns by him. Very different style and subject from the Langbroek painted porcelain pieces.

Typical Maarten Langbroek etching:

https://www.kunstveiling.nl/items/maarten-langbroek-ets-prinsengracht/549199

Signature:



I did find a few Staffordshire porcelain pieces painted in Fragonard style signed M. Langbroek, Amsterdam - Holland.
This is one of them, with a double stamp on the back, but no Ges. Gesch., dated by the seller as 1950s:

https://www.etsy.com/nl/listing/1586302915/midwinter-fragonard-m-longbroek?ls=s&ga_order=most_relevant&ga_search_type=all&ga_view_type=gallery&ga_search_query=fragonard+langbroek&ref=sr_gallery-1-3&pro=1&sts=1&content_source=e55a3e27-38bd-461b-b4bf-1f637e1b78b6%3ALT28459032ab3bfb685c02c4b593a91797d1c53957&organic_search_click=1&logging_key=e55a3e27-38bd-461b-b4bf-1f637e1b78b6:LT28459032ab3bfb685c02c4b593a91797d1c53957

Looks like a woman's hand, and different signature, so not by Maarten (Martin) Langbroek.

 

Good to know. But the plate seems to be the Minton "White Monarch." Could that be derived from a

That makes sense. But why so many duplicate fruit (& floral) images? Why are some signed M. Langbroek (Nederlandish name)? The borders usually have different gold patterns (although I found one with dark red/maroon rim with the same pear & gold pattern.) Do you think these were widely distributed decals? Why do the other manufacturers' plates not include the German registration? (I love a historical mystery, but the fictional ones generally supply a solution at the end. These seem to involve more Qs.)

 

The fruit center was a popular design in the 60s. Maybe the plates were sold in more than one country?

 

OBB has it -- registered in another country for export of pattern/shape protection (like copyright).

 

Yup. That way no one else would copy it. Countries that didn't recognize the British registration would pay attention to the German one (i.e. Japan) and not copy the plates themselves. I was referring to the fruit decoration.