Topic: Is this an unsigned Royal Brierley vase? Answer = Yes

[albglass]

Hi, I thought this was a Royal Brierley studio pieces, since the shape matches the 5882 flower bowl shown in www.great-glass.co.uk/library/lib2aa.htm   The color is a deep blue that looks black on the inside.  What gives me pause is that it is not signed on the bottom.  It looks like there may be an H scratched on the edge of the bottom, and maybe an impressed C which could be a B if I use my imagination.  Were any of the Royal Brierley Studio pieces unsigned?  Thanks!

[jakgene]

Sure looks like Royal Brierley Studio to me

I have had a small baluster? (think that is the description ) vase of theirs which was not signed, the same colour as yours. I currently have 3 of the Pink in different shapes - all of which are signed. One of them is the exact shape and size of the blue one I had so I know it was right.

Not sure why some are signed and some not - mine didn't look like a second in any way.

Nor sure if that helped at all - I suppose the quick answer is yes - some of them are unsigned 

JAK

[albglass]

Thanks so much, JAK.  The few I've seen were signed, so I couldn't be sure.  It is good news to hear that unsigned pieces are not unusual! 

[Paul S.]

try the GMB search using.........'Michael Harris studio for Royal Brierley'......you will find three separate useful and interesting entries - although most of the pics. will have by now disappeared.         I also like this particular output, and have so far seen them in the deep blue, black, the pinky red and white  -  I don't know if there were additional colours.

[flying free]

I had a gorgeous simple contemporary shaped bowl in turquoise - sold it and regretted it since.
m

[glassobsessed]

Yes, definitely Royal Brierley Studio range.

They are never signed, marked yes (acid etched I guess) but not signed. By definition signed would require it to have been engraved by hand with a signature and not a makers mark.

John

[chopin-liszt]

Absolutely correct, and a particularly beautiful example.  :smg:

[Bernard C]

...   Not sure why some are signed and some not - mine didn't look like a second in any way.   ...

JAK — The usual reason in respect of the main glassworks that usually marked glass was not that the piece was a second but that it was part of an order from one of the trade buyers that didn't want their glass signed, of which there were quite a large number.   Examples include John Lewis until quite recently, Liberty & Co.,  and Marks & Spencer.

This is the fifth or sixth time I've said this on the GMB — averaging out at roughly once a year back to 2005.   Do I need to make a diary note to mention it again next year?   

Bernard C. 

[jakgene]

  Very probably Bernard - the way my "Oldtimers" is kickin' in!   :ooh:

Sorry, but It is not a question I have seen mentioned before - but have only been on the board for about 2 years, so I plead ignorant for any years before that!    :usd:   However. thanks for the explanation - it makes sense!

JAK

[albglass]

Oh, sorry you had to repeat your info.  I did a search on Royal Brierley and your explanation didn't turn up on the search.  Sometimes it is hard to get the right search term to bring up relevant information.  Thanks for taking the time to repeat it---It is well worth repeating!