Author Topic: Golden amber bowls (Read 3581 times)

Anne · « **on:** September 10, 2005, 01:15:19 AM »

http://www.yobunny.org.uk/gallery1/displayimage.php?&pos=-531
http://www.yobunny.org.uk/gallery1/displayimage.php?&pos=-528

Found four of these today, they are very heavy for their size - 5" diameter and 2" high, they are optic ribbed and have a polished pontil on the base.

Does anyone have any ideas who may have made them please?

Anne · « **Reply #1 on:** September 12, 2005, 01:43:36 AM »

I've searched the Whitefriars catalogues and they seem not to be W/f. Someone suggested they may be Webb, but there's no signature/mark. Is Webb a possibility would anyone know please?

Bernard C · « **Reply #2 on:** September 12, 2005, 05:51:25 AM »

Anne â€” How many ribs? Any trace of light iridescence remaining on the least vulnerable areas? I was thinking of Walsh iridescent as a possibility, although it tends to be quite light in weight.

Then there is Stevens & Williams / Royal Brierley; who knows what they made? I am just starting to recognise a few of their pieces, but much quality glass that is unattributable or wrongly attributed must have been made by them. They were a big glassworks, nearly twice the size of Walsh.

Looking at Roger Dodsworth's list of glassworks at the back of his 1987 exhibition catalogue, there are some ten or so other possibilities, not including one or two that he missed. And that's not including imported glass.

... and what about exclusive products and ranges that glassworks made for just one wholesaler or retailer? They would never have appeared in trade catalogues. Don't forget that trade catalogues are not complete inventories.

Bernard C.

Anne · « **Reply #3 on:** September 12, 2005, 07:17:08 PM »

Thanks Bernard, no irridescence at all on the bowls. I've counted the ribs (3 times!) and think there are 25. Does that help at all?

Bernard C · « **Reply #4 on:** September 13, 2005, 08:50:09 AM »

Anne â€” I am fairly certain that you have miscounted. Or, to put it another way, I think you counted the one with your finger on twice!

If you think about it, cutting tools and turntables were marked out in degrees; some perhaps with a lock that would only engage at a whole degree. Therefore you will find that virtually all counts of ribs or any other pattern are always a factor of 360. So, possible numbers are 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 18, 20, 24, 30, 36, 45, 60, 72, 90, 120, 180, and 360.

Do you see the flaw in my argument? Arguably the most frequently used rib dip-mould was 16-rib, not in my list. Still, not too difficult to make, either by rotating by 22Â½Â° between each pattern, or by rotating 45Â° for the first eight patterns, and setting up again for the in-between patterns. 16 is the only mould pattern repeat I have found which is not in this list of factors.

... and your bowls are not Walsh.

Bernard C.

Anne · « **Reply #5 on:** September 13, 2005, 01:25:17 PM »

:lol: Bernard I probably did... I counted them again (more than three times) and kept getting a different answer each time so I shall engage the help of my dear OH who doesn't get as confused as me with things like this!

Your explanation of the number of sides is very interesting and entirely understandable, thank you.

Also not Walsh, noted thank you.

Anne · « **Reply #6 on:** September 13, 2005, 10:01:23 PM »

OK Bernard, himself has counted and determined I was wrong! There are 24 ribs not 25. Does that help any more? Thanks again for all your help.

Bernard C · « **Reply #7 on:** September 13, 2005, 10:21:57 PM »

Anne â€” At least your OH has not wrecked my theory! And, apologies, as what I meant to say was that in my opinion your bowls are almost certainly not Walsh, although they had a 24-rib dip mould.

Bernard C.

Anne · « **Reply #8 on:** September 13, 2005, 10:46:33 PM »

No apologies needed Bernard.

I've added a side view of one of the bowls in case it helps more than the earlier shots:
http://www.yobunny.org.uk/gallery1/displayimage.php?pos=-546