Topic: is Stuart mark contemporary with Rd. 534388 date.

[Paul S.]

Probably impossible to determine.   As with pressed pieces, the date of manufacture may be some, or many years, after the Rd. date, but I don't really have any experience to know whether or not the same situation applied to cut glass.    Be intriguing to think that this bowl was actually made - and marked - at the time the No. was first registered i.e. 16.12.1908.   As the books indicate, Stuart did not officially start marking with the word 'Stuart' until about 1926, although I have an earlier piece - a pickle jar - where the mark is similarly italicised, but made into a plural - see here  http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,29005.msg157183.html#msg157183.
So - options are - this piece was made in 1908, and acid marked at that time.......which would then give us perhaps the earliest known Stuart mark..........or alternatively, the company made this particular bowl design all the way through to 1926, and then acid badged them with the date of the original year of registration.   Would that be an unusually long time for a particular design to remain in commercial production?      Whichever, it would seem that the marks on the 'pickle' and this 'bowl', are certainly older than those shown in the books.
This piece does have a ground and polished pontil as you can see  -  plus a few flea bites on the underside  -  and I don't really know what it's original use might have been.    The largest diameter is 11"/about 280mm, and the bowl part is about 2"/50mm deep.    Anyone have any thoughts, and thanks for looking, sorry it's a bit long-winded.

[Lustrousstone]

British cut glass (and pressed glass) designs were often made for many, many years: decades sometimes (Edinburgh Crystal Thistle has been virtually unchanged for 115 years). The registration number only gives you the date the design was registered. Your pickle jar and bowl may have been made for decades (BTW your pickle jar design is newer, 1921). I suggest that Stuarts is actually a "typo". These marks were applied with stencils. People tend to refer to glass companies in the possessive (Bagleys, Davidson, Chances...) but few of them actually had/have the possessive form in their registered name. Seems very likely that someone got it wrong. Even these days, few people actually know what their company is officially called (I'm one of the exceptions).

If we saw the whole bowl, we could guess at the use.

[Paul S.]

thanks  ....If we saw the whole bowl, we could guess at the use.......the first picture does show the whole bowl, although being clear glass the 3D aspect may be a little more difficult to assess.  I have tried again, see what you think.      Yes, we had discussed the more recent date for the pickle, back last year, and the possessive/type thingy is interesting.    As you say, this bowl is a design that was continued probably for some considerable time, and this particular piece quite possibly dates from very soon after the time that Stuart commenced back stamping.   So bang go my hopes of an historically interesting piece that might have been badged in 1908.

[nigel benson]

Hi Paul,

What Christine says about certain ranges running for decades is bourne out by examples from many companies, also I agree with the point she raises about the registration date 

As for the script mark, I agree totally that the one in the other thread looks like a plural, but not on the bowl in this thread. This one looks more like the 'tail', or underlining, flicks back from the upturned curve at the base of the 't', rather than it being an 's' - whereas the one in the other thread looks like an 's' has been included at the end. To me the two marks are noticably different at that point. Possibly giving us two marks? Or is it me?  :huh:

Nigel

[Lustrousstone]

Paul is muddying the waters with his mention of plurals. This one is definitely singular. The two scripts are also slightly different.

This bowl looks like it could be a tureen base with its handles. Did Stuart make such a thing?

[Paul S.]

I think we are running into potential confusion - I didn't think that I had implied there were two marks showing as plural - it was just the pickle showing the 's' - which, as an apparent plural,  is unlike all the other back stamps from this output.   At work now so I can't verify, but from my rather poor memory, all the books show marks that are upright scripts, whereas the pickle (in more ways than one , and my piece from the other day, show scripts that are more italicised.    Anyway, you have both dispelled my hopes that the suggested 'tureen' base was back stamped in 1908       Feel it is a fair guesstimate to say that both of 'my' marks are prior to 1926, since neither are shown in any books that I have seen.     However, I now know that cut pieces, just like the pressed ones, can have many decades in production, so thanks to both of you for that.    I guess that if I do have a tureen base, then I must now go looking for its lid.    

[Anne]

 :hi: Paul, can we add copies of these pics to the GlassGallery Registered Design album please?

[Paul S.]

but of course Anne, with pleasure.

[Anne]

Thanks again Paul.