ID on Ancil - Picasso - plates - 2 - originale de ancil 1956 & 1962 Terry

We purchased these 2 plates from the same seller in 2003. We have not been able to really identify the potter/company. We believe they are of European origin, but are not even certain of that. One is slightly smaller than the other by .2 cm. The largest being 28.3 cm. The C# on each plate back is our collection # and is not a reference of the plates. Any and all thoughts are very welcome. Many thanks in advance.

I think that the marks on the back are there more to confuse than inform. It looks to me if they are interpretations of Picasso work by someone called Ancil Terry but have no connection to Picasso other than that. I haven't been able to find out anything about Ancil but the wording suggests that they were made in France. That may be part of the desire to confuse though, as Ancil is a Yiddish name.

I agree with SP tho I'm not sure there is a desire to confuse it seems clearly to state that this is a 1/1 that is a unique and origional example by Terry Ancil copying a Picasso Edition .It is even showing that it is not a copy of an origional picasso but of an edition.I would suggest a student or conceptual artist playing with the idea of what is a n origional Ive produced similar pieces - screenprints not ceramic

I also believe it was by a Ancil Terry, who made these plates, based on his inspiration of Picassos' work. I also was thinking French. I don't think that they were made to confuse or to make a counterfeit item. That is unless there appears more identical plates labeled the same way, which is always possible. The person we purchased them from didn't give us any information at the time, or at least we didn't record any, but that was 8 years ago. And with my memory abilities, that is a very long time ago. Studio-pots' thought that Ancil is a Yiddish name is a definite clue, which I will pursue. Thank you for looking and providing your thoughts.

My point about the information being there to confuse is that some of the work produced by the Madoura Pottery in Vallauris with the agreement, backing and input of Picasso have similar types of marks and the words "Edition Picasso".

Most interesting. Do you think they were both produced at the same time, only with different dates? The initials in the lower right of both, look mostly the same but different. If produced at different time frames, then do you think there are others out there?

I can't see why they weren't manufactured over a period of time.

I was basing the time frame due to the dates on the pieces. But thinking since they did come from the same seller, the one who purchased them originally, that they may have purchased them at the same time, they might have been done at the same time, if they were made to confuse the buyer that they indeed have a reference to Picasso.

the way I see it the dates refer to the picasso editions the ancil origional version is done later and doesnt appear to be dated

Did you find the steel sculpture in google? It also has some confusing signs and the combination of the A & T looks about the same as on the first plate. Or is that coincidence?

I did find an image somewhat similar to the right plate. http://books.google.com/books?id=yZhsuba7REMC&pg=PA177&lpg=PA177&dq=when+was+picasso+satyr+62+done&source=bl&ots=GFhL4z0l20&sig=KZO7-_zuAtvCAy9tmzVIkPx02cw&hl=en&ei=8fTjToP2L4Lg0QGo19HKDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=when%20was%20picasso%20satyr%2062%20done&f=false Page 78 and 79. I have not found an image resembling the first plate.
Regarding - Sculpture, I do not have any idea what you are refering to.