I will try and answer some
of these queries, and then I will say no more for now, or until I decide to go into more detail in print. After all why would anyone give information away gratis when trying to regain the outlay of research, time, expenses, and so on?? Frankly, I already feel that I have said too much on these boards
I believe that I must be conveying the information incorrectly
, otherwise why the confusion? Alternatively, reading the various posts which were not written with reference to one another, but as an answer to a specific question, muddies the waters
The fact that Elwell was totally seperate to any glassmaker and existed for an extended period of time does not bear any relation to the period that any given supplier actually supplied items. Therefore Elwell may have existed between the 1930's and 1960's, but why assume that Gray-Stan, Nazeing, Stevens and Williams, Thomas Webb, et al, supplied them for the whole of that time? For a start Gray-Stan ceased trading in 1936 (some references quote 1934), so how could they have traded with Elwell after then? They couldn't.
The other companies, which are only a selection of Elwell's suppliers, did NOT supply glass continually throughout the time Elwell traded in art glass according to research done to date. Until further research is done into all these other companies own records we will not even get an idea of when they supplied Elwell. Elwell's own records (or at least a known chunk of them) were destroyed by his grand-daughter as they were badly damaged by mould. Nazeing's are not complete.
Therfore how can anyone be expected to be accurate about dates of Elwell's association with any
We believe that Elwell had glass made specifically by Nazeing (possibly
to their own designs - ?
) after the war. We do not know.
A further complication is that Elwell was a buyer of glass that both retailed and wholesaled. For instance, they supplied Heals glass that was made by Nazeing (Studio Yearbook 1936), although it is claimed that they
produced the glass in the associated caption.
Frank's succinct answer, in another thread, might have been the correct route to take, rather than try to assist folks. Certainly it would take a great deal less time and thought :thup:
Definitive answers are, I'm afraid, not necessarily possible.