# The First Link Is in the Maker's Own Hand
> A maker's bill, workbook or memoir is the only provenance document that fixes date, cost and first owner at once. Where it survives in this archive, and what the record has to do where it does not.
> The Study - 2026-09-15
> Canonical HTML: https://iconotheca.com/study/the-first-link-is-in-the-makers-own-hand/
## Key points
- A maker's own document, a bill, a workbook, a ledger or a memoir, is the only kind of provenance evidence that fixes the date of making, the cost and the first owner in a single line. Six records here rest on one. Four more record its loss and show what the loss costs.
- Chippendale's bill for the Harewood commode gives 86 pounds in 1773. Harewood's own record prints that figure as a cost. It is a maker's charge to a first owner, not a market price, and our record keeps it out of the auction table for that reason.
- George Daniels read Breguet's workbook and found No. 160 finished in 1820 at a cost of 16,864 francs, with Michel Weber paid 7,250 francs for 725 hours between 1812 and 1815. The house's own account gives 1827. Both come from the same firm's books.
- The 2,160 roubles for the Third Imperial egg is in the buyer's ledger, not the maker's: a payment to Faberge noted in the Imperial Cabinet's account books on 18 May 1887 and repeated in a Cabinet list of February 1889.
- Paul Revere's wastebook for 1768 survives at the Massachusetts Historical Society and runs through the year, and the Sons of Liberty Bowl is not in it. The Society's own guide says his early daily records were inconsistent, which is the honest explanation and not a mystery.
## The maker's own paperwork is the one link that fixes date, cost and first owner at once
## Where the paper survives in this archive, and where it does not
## Chippendale's bill gives 86 pounds, and that is a cost and not a price
## Breguet's workbook gives one date for No. 160 and the house gives another
## The 2,160 roubles for the Third Imperial egg is in the buyer's book, not the maker's
## Cellini wrote the document himself, and wrote it long afterwards
## Revere's wastebook for 1768 survives, and the bowl is not in it
## Tompion, Belter and Phyfe: when the book is lost, the object is dated by its absence from it
## How to read a maker's document in a provenance
## Why this archive is free to read
The maker's own paper is the best first link a provenance can have and the easiest to misread. It fixes a date, a cost and a first owner, and it is silent on price, sometimes silent on the object, and usually gone. Read it for whose book it is, label its figure as a cost, treat its silence as a fact about the book and where it is lost, say plainly that the attribution stands on other objects whose paper was kept.
## Questions
**How much did Chippendale charge for the Diana and Minerva commode?**
Chippendale's bill gives 86 pounds for the commode delivered to Harewood House in 1773, and Harewood's own object record prints that figure. It is a maker's cost to the first owner, not a market price; the commode has never been sold.
**Is there a Faberge invoice for the Third Imperial egg?**
The documents Wartski cites are the buyer's: a note in the Imperial Cabinet's account books of a payment of 2,160 roubles to Faberge on 18 May 1887 for an egg with clock, and a Cabinet list of 8 February 1889 entering the same object at the same sum.
**When was Breguet No. 160 finished according to the firm's own books?**
It depends who reads them. George Daniels, working from the workbook, wrote that the watch was not finished until 1820 at a cost of 16,864 francs. The house's own account gives 1827, under Antoine-Louis Breguet. Both readings come from the same firm's records, which were destroyed for 1775 to 1787.
**Is the Sons of Liberty Bowl recorded in Paul Revere's account books?**
No. Revere's wastebook for 1768 survives at the Massachusetts Historical Society and runs through the year, and the bowl is not entered. The Society's guide notes that his early daily records were inconsistent, so the silence is a fact about the bookkeeping rather than about the bowl.
**Why does the Graves Tompion clock have no serial number?**
Because it was made before Tompion began numbering his output to match entries in his ledgers, a practice the Metropolitan Museum dates to about 1682 or after 1685. The clock is dated to 1677-82 partly by that absence. The ledgers themselves are lost.
## Sources
- [1] Harewood House Trust, object page, Diana and Minerva Commode. Read 15 September 2026. Source for the delivery to the State Dressing Room in 1773 at a cost of 86 pounds.
- [2] Harewood House Trust, Thomas Chippendale's Tercentenary. Read 15 September 2026. Source for Chippendale's surviving bills and the house steward Samuel Popplewell's day book of 1769 to 1776.
- [3] Wartski, London, The Third Imperial Easter Egg. Read in a browser 15 September 2026. Source for the Imperial Cabinet account book note of 18 May 1887 recording 2,160 roubles paid to Faberge for an egg with clock, and the Cabinet list of 8 February 1889.
- [4] Quill and Pad, Let Them Eat Cake: The Intriguing Story of Marie Antoinette and Her Legendary Breguet Pocket Watch No. 160, 13 June 2020. Read 15 September 2026. Source for George Daniels' reading of the workbook in The Art of Breguet: finished 1820, 16,864 francs, and Michel Weber paid 7,250 francs for 725 hours between 1812 and 1815.
- [5] Massachusetts Historical Society, collection guide to the Revere Family Papers, 1746-1964. Read 15 September 2026. Source for the wastebooks, the transfer of entries into ledgers and the statement that Revere kept inconsistent daily records in his early years.
- [6] The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Open Access Collection API, object record 209296, the Graves Tompion, and object record 7595, sofa attributed to Duncan Phyfe, as cited in our records for the numbering date and the attribution.