Topic: Lemon squeezer rummer

[bat20]

Hi all,I suppose a slightly similar post to Chris' about finding his very cheap sweetmeat glass,I found this one in a smart cabinet ,I'm sure everyone recognises,with the air of"I know my onions "type antiques ,for a tenner,ok so the base has some minor damage,but even so?i've got it down as circa 1800and the glass is good quality and thinner than later ones,there is a very similar one in Timothy Mills book ,page 107 engraved John Wilden,all I can think of is that there is very little wear so it was thought to be much later,or any damage  at all to a square foot kills them dead,any thoughts many thanks.

[Paul S.]

Well I think it's better to have some sort of example of most bowl shapes, rather than get too picky because of damage  -  otherwise some of us would have few pieces.
As we've said before, there's a limit I think to what can be determined with some glasses when looking at the screen only  -  especially clear drinking glasses where copying and later examples seem to proliferate.             

If you look at Tim's book (essential reading for anyone collecting drinking glasses from this period) - you'll see that he comments on page 15 that cup shaped bowls seem to have appeared around 1810  -  together with barrels..............   prior to this it seems to have been ovoids only (for rummers that is).                       However, it does seem that having looked through the book that cup bowls with square feet seem uncommon  -  they're mostly ovoids.            Square feet seem to have lasted to somewhere around 1820 ish, so this one may be a little later than you have suggested.

All the usual potential pointers should be considered  -  seeds  -  tool marks on the bowl  -  slight impressions on the foot, remaining from the mould, wear etc.

I think some of these things - especially undecorated examples and damaged ones  -  can be picked up fairly cheaply - depends where you shop I suppose.         You're in the best position probably, to determine if genuine.             The proportion of foot to bowl looks about right, and you've mentioned quality and thinness, so if the other factors indicating age are present then every reason to think it's o.k.
Is it lead glass with a good ring - I'd say it should be ............................  and the height is .........?

Don't know what a smart cabinet is I'm afraid

[bat20]

The height is 13 cm just over 5 ",do you not!?,you know ,one's with a bit more space around smarter items,ones I normally don't find things in my price range ,but just look in to admire.I'm sure it's pucke r,the bowl has everything you would look for with a real deeper quality ring,the foot looks brighter for some reason with bubbles here
and there and what I take to be mould marks on the base,I don't know where the wear marks have gone especially as there are nicks  and what not around the square foot,but I'm sure it hasn't been cut down.
Another thing I thought was interesting reading TM's book ,was how the Knop,if that's what it is,being positioned for strength purposes.

[Paul S.]

the difference in colour/quality between some feet and the rest of the article might be due to the practice within the glass trade whereby manufacturers acquired their moulded feet from a group of itinerant workers known as 'pinchers'.              In the U.K. these guys apparently used some form of tongs which incorporated a mould at the front end, to produce the square feet seen on rummers like yours - believe they also produced feet for some sticks. 
G. Bernard Hughes, writing specifically of these 'pinchers' says  - ('English, Scottish and Irish Table Glass')  ""They supplied units consisting of feet and stems to the established glass- houses at cut prices, in metal inferior to that of the blown bowls: the contrast between the two metals on a single rummer is often conspicuous.""
Don't really know what gave rise the the square foot - apart from rummers they appear commonly on monteiths c. 1800 and you see them on salts, but they don't seem to go back (at least in the U.K.) to much before about . 1790 ish.
I have some rummers with square feet, but only with ovoid and bucket bowls  -  my only cup-bowl rummer has a plain circular foot - I think the square foot with cup bowl is far less common than with the ovoid.

My take on reading Tim's comments about strength between stem and bowl was a little more along the lines that it was the merese or collar - the ring immediately under the bowl that strengthened the join - yours appears more as a knop, but may well serve the same purpose.

Think I got the gist of your first line, but not entirely sure of the meaning  -  your punctuation not my strong point  -  and though some of our members across the water are very clever, we should try to make our meanings clear for them, especially, since posts in Glass are read by many folk from around the planet.

anyway a good addition to your collection, and at a bargain price to boot.

[bat20]

Thanks very much Paul,really interesting about the 'pinchers'.I'm sorry to say you're all going to have to be just as exasperated as my poor English teachers,I'll try to keep it simple in future.

[bat20]

Paul,did the "pinchers" make decanter stoppers?

[Paul S.]

according to Andy McConnell's book  'The Decanter' (page 183) he says.............""Recognised as a separate trade in 1777, pinchers specialised in small, cut-price parts, including stoppers, drops and lemon-squeezers for rummers, candelabra, salts etc., which were sold to differing glasshouses""

As far as stoppers go, I get the impression that mushrooms and target/bull's eyes were the most commonly pinched shapes.

[bat20]

Ahhhh,that makes sense of a lot of things I've been pondering on...philamayaye