aside from the earlier posts providing literary critique
- the later words were intended to fill in some of the gaps in Cyril Manley's book, where his illustrations of Richardson glass lacked the corresponding Registration details etc., and attached are a few more National Archive images which hopefully will add interest and perhaps usability to Manley's work. Trust it's possible to marry up the attached pix with the following wording:
1......... another opaline jug Rd. 52329 - dated 13.06.1848, and transfer decorated with figures in classical dress. It's difficult with some of these jug shapes to know whether they occur in Manley or not - I don't think this one does, but that sort of uncertainty highlights the need in all books to provide as much info as possible so that future research can make accurate attributions.
2...........Rd. 96703 dated 24.08.1854 - this is the classic baluster shape showing in Manley - bottom line on page 56 - and agrees with the vermicelli decoration on his jug. However, as you can see (if you have a copy of Manley's book - and must take my word for it if not), the National Archive images parts company with Manley's when it comes to the handle - his having the more complex rope twist design against the Archives example of a simple C19 strap version. So ... Rd. 96703 appears NOT
to have Registered the twist handle - and would be very good to discover under which Registration that invention was in fact protected - off hand I don't know........... over to you Kevin.
3..........Rd. 98170 dated 16.11.1854 - another baluster type of shape and another example decorated with vermicelli pattern - but lacks a handle and so not a jug or ewer - the wording reading 'This pattern for all kinds of lamps, globes or shades or pedestals etc.' I've not been aware of seeing this pattern/shape in the books.
4..........finally, and just for a little interest, some of the monochrome and polychrome Registrations Nos. 43924 - 27 dated 06.07.1847, which were applied often to the opaline pieces - perhaps typical of the Victorian's unrealistic approach to Roman life, but no doubt they sold well. Not quite sure about the apparent Christian winged angel passing the helmet to the soldier - I thought the Romans were pagans.
Would suggest that in view of the subject matter this thread should be in British?? Feel free to criticize on anything and everything.
Sorry, two pix will run over, again.