Very attractive Keith - good finds .......... so probably your one hundred and nineteenth shelf??
Most of this thread seems now to be quite ancient - 2011 feels like almost half a lifetime ago, especially looking at the volume of viewings - but looking at Ross' comments re glass versus crystal, I wonder how many beginners or those unseasoned in the terminology of glass will find the wording that some pieces are glass but not crystal, or that crystal isn't glass - a tad confusing, especially as it all starts with silica. Sorry to be picky Ross
- and I'm sure I know what you mean - but this explanation for my old brain seems to lack some clarity.
Regret I don't recall investigating the constituent make up of Stuart glass, or looking at their labels, although no doubt I did have pieces with stickers, but have to assume from your comments that you have some labels that confirm a lead oxide content (your 'crystal'), and the remainder - which in theory would not have any label, that were non-lead pieces (your 'glass').
I notice that the Stuart label shown in this thread states STUART ENGLAND, so perhaps there is another Stuart label - which I can't at the moment seem to find anywhere on the Board's archive, or in my books - which indicates a lead content for some of their pieces.
Lead content varies from 'full lead crystal' (in the U.K. 34% usually) with around maximum 24% in much Continental material, which is known as 'half-lead. If you consider the mid C20 cut bowls from Stuart - those shown in the Benson/Hayhurst booklet for example - then it's reasonable to assume most or all of these have a high lead content, and this is supported by the comments in Stuart's own States directed ad for their 'Camelot' range, on page 290, of CH's '20th Century British Glass' - part of which reads ............. 'And with a lead content so high perhaps no other crystal made today ....... etc. etc.' Perhaps a little odd that seeing how proud they were of this process they didn't see fit to tell us what the percentage was. Lead oxide apparently makes the cutting easier, better refractive properties, in addition to making for a better 'ring', although many non-lead pieces will ring if they are of a substantial hollow shape.
But - the glass discussed in this thread is unrelated to those heavily cut and thick bowls, so we mustn't assume they are of the same make-up.
Apologies for the long-winded post - just that I'm confused when folk speak of crystal and glass without use of the word 'lead', leaving some uncertainty of meaning, and a small alteration in description would make the meaning clearer for some of us. 'Lead Crystal' or non-lead crystal.
Would be interested to hear details of lead oxide inclusion, or not, in the type of Stuart glass showing in this thread, and examples of their labels indicating specific lead content.
Anyway this makes up for the fact that I've not contributed for few days
Topic: addition to Stuart pattern. (Read 13041 times)
