Topic: please can anyone identify this - english ??

[abc]

Hello all ,
I think this is Stourbridge or Walsh , about 1900 am I wrong ??

[Lustrousstone]

It could be Walsh; the twist and the feet look right. Stourbridge is a place where there were several manufacturers; it's not  a maker

[Paul S.]

You might look for wear on the undersides of the feet.     A period piece -  something which might well be approaching 130  years old - should show some signs of matt wear.    Presumably these rustic tree root feet would cover the area where the pontil mark had been.    It looks rather plain somehow  -  I can't find anything in clear glass, and quite this plain in Gulliver  -  the Victorians were usually OTT with decoration, and mostly in colour.
Did this come with antique provenance?   

[Lustrousstone]

It looks like a version of this
http://lustrousstone.co.uk/cpg/displayimage.php?pid=1498

[abc]

Hi , thanks for you ideas . There dosn't look like much wear underneath , but the style would mean it would be old , wouldn't it

[Paul S.]

unfortunately not..........nothing is ever old simply because of its style.     The Victorians copied everything from the previous two thousand years  -  neo this and neo that.             Sometimes if all else fails it comes down to experience and an indefinable something that is maybe all you have to go on  -  glass i.d. is far from an exact science, but there are factors that can help, and the wear we discussed is one of those.
Other factors are, for example......................
Can you find the exact piece in a book
Is there wear appropriate for a lengthy period of time
If the glass is clear, what is its colour - bright white or perhaps greyish, or slightly purplish
Does the glass contain striations, bubbles, small stones, or glow slightly greenish grey under u.v. light (indicating manganese decolourant - and obviously only reliable for clear glass)
Is there a pontil scar on the underside.
Does the glass ring well when flicked (indicating lead content)
Does the piece come from a source reliable as to provenance

Not all are relilable, and sometimes genuine peices will defy some of the above.                 What made you suggest it was c. 1900?   
None of this is to say you are wrong, but it would be unreliable to make attributions of age, based solely on style.
I assume this was made as a posy vase, and had it been used some water mark might have remained on the inside.   It's also true that with these rustic root style feet, there is often damage to the extremities - those that survive 120 years or more without any scars are probably now in the minority, so have a careful look at the tips of the feet.

I hope it is genuine though.

[Bernard C]

Glyn — definitely Walsh with this style of six pulled naturalistic feet and you are about right with the date as the earliest date we have for Walsh naturalistic feet of any type is 1896, but the style certainly became more popular after 1900.   Lovely little vase.

Paul — Breaking off the pontil rod was always the final process on such pieces.   It took place after iridising, as on Walsh mother of pearl pieces like the little leaf tazza with naturalistic feet, Gulliver p.198 and in Leni's album here (scroll down), you will see iridescence everywhere except the pontil scar.

Bernard C. 

[abc]

Thanks Bernard and Paul for your help . I tend to agree with you Bernard and in Leni's album my vase is similar to the pair thats third from the left in the second to last row.

I think mine is old as although at first glance  there did not look like much wear underneath , however with theses feet it only touches the surface at small spots and they look worn under an eye glass . I do really appreciate both your help . Dont suppose you know anythinh about my other listing !!!!!!