Yes - the "mark" is just "ripples" ... but quite confincing as possible letters in this case!
I think the item may be Strathearn. But it might also be later Vasart (1956 to 1964, although perhaps the latter few years rather the earlier ones). I have seen a variety of weights with the later Vasart label but with canes that I used to think were "typically" Strathearn. Also, the red ground is one that I have now seen in Vasart weights, but which I used to think was later. Canes standing well out of the surface of the ground are known in weights from both later Vasart and (earlier?) Strathearn.
I am suprised, though, that the vase portion fluoresces differently to the base section. This seems to suggest that either the company was using at least two different glass batches at the same time or that more than one company was involved in the full making of the item. Neither of these options sounds right to me.
What strength of UV light is being used? And is the test being done in full darkness? For my weights, using my mains-powered UV lamp, even in just dimmed room lighting all later Vasart and all Strathearn show a clear, bright yellowish-green under the longwave UV - I would not really call it a "fuzzy green" (although I have, in my web pages, said that the shade of green does vary).
It may a good idea to re-check the UV reaction of the top of the rim of the vase bit as it can happen that the colour is weaker through the sides of a blown portion of glass. Unfortunately I don't have a Vasart / Strathearn bud vase [I do have a Chinese one though
], so I cannot check the UV reactions for myself. Anyone want to donate one of these to me?
Incidentally, thinking about all this, I checked my web pages for my comments on the UV reactions of Vasart / Strathearn. And I found what seems to be an error [shock, horror
]. I said in one part:
... using Short Wave ..., with all the weights in exactly the same position as before,... there is a group of four that do not fluoresce blue. In reality, these four show up as a murky, or dusty, shade of green.
I am sure that I should have said, "... murky, or dusty, shade of GREY." In fact, I have now checked the UV results for those weights, and yes, it's GREY not green under the shortwave.
How ever will I live with myself now ... that error has been there since July 2001. Oh! Woe, woe and thrice woe ...