Topic: Sowerby cup - ? mustard - pattern 1798 with accompanying saucer

[Anne E.B.]

The two cups have the Sowerby peacock mark on the base.  I think these might actually be mustards - shown in their catalogues up to 1912, pattern 1798.  They came with a pair of accompanying lacey pattern saucers which although they sit pefectly on, I suspect may originate from elsewhere.
Am I correct in thinking the cups are 'mustards' - minus their lids?
Also, any ideas about the saucers would be appreciated.  I've done mainland Europe searches but without as yet any success, but haven't checked EAPG patterns yet.
TIA

[neilh]

Have a look at the plate on the bottom of the page here:

http://sites.google.com/site/molwebbhistory/Home/registered-designs/percival-vickers-unregistered-pressed-glass

Looks the same to me except for the edge. This does not 100% guarantee it was by Percival & Vickers. I think the theory is many of these plate designs were churned out by mould makers in Birmingham and used by glassworks in the UK and near continent. There are plates in the Molineaux Webb catalogue which are 90% identical to plates seen in the 1840 Lenay Hautin catalogue, presumably because the artistic source was the same - some uber talented Brummie? One can only guess as the precise story will probably never be known with 100% certainty...

[Anne E.B.]

Many thanks Neil.
That is incredibly similar (apart from the edge as you say) even down to the 14 point star in the centre 
My little saucers/plates are only 5½" diameter and are not particularly well made.  The scallops become flattened at the top in places, so much so that on one, the edge loses its scallop design becoming almost solid.   

[neilh]

One additional point on the edge being a little different. This does not necessarily mean it isn't "a match" with the plate I showed. Sometimes the edges of these items can vary compared to the registration or base design, usually because of some utility function.

If you look at the images below, we have the 1878 Percival Vickers "Manchester" set celery with a pronounced broad upper edge. This was because the celery was meant to be used upside down on the table and a wide bowl placed on its base. There is a second version of this celery with a narrow top.

Also shown is a Molineaux Webb bowl from 1866 which has a strange frilly top edge - compare to the sketch in the pressed glass catalogue with no such edge. My guess was this might be due to it originally being a lidded version of the bowl.

Just guessing but maybe your plate originally came with some sort of attachment, or maybe its just an odd design variation... base of a butter tray...

[Lustrousstone]

They look like cup plates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cup_plate

[oldglassman]

[quote author=neilh If you look at the images below, we have the 1878 Percival Vickers "Manchester" set celery with a pronounced broad upper edge. This was because the celery was meant to be used upside down on the table and a wide bowl placed on its base. There is a second version of this celery with a narrow top. [/quote]

Hi All ,
           Completely out of my depth re era and type of glass,and well prepared to be shot down in flames but!!  why would a celery vase , which has a bowl, a stem and a foot be made to be placed upside down on the table to be a stand for another item ??

cheers ,
               Peter.

[Lustrousstone]

It was very common well into the 20th century: three items for the cost of two moulds. Cheaper and simpler than a centrepiece mould as well
http://lustrousstone.co.uk/cpg/displayimage.php?pid=615
http://lustrousstone.co.uk/cpg/displayimage.php?pid=616
http://lustrousstone.co.uk/cpg/displayimage.php?pid=617

[mhgcgolfclub]

I have seen a Molineaux and Webb 2 piece comport recently in 2 pieces the base designed to be used as a celery which could be used on its own , upside down designed to hold a bowl to be used as a comport, I have seen several of these over the last few years , Sowerby also made 2 piece comports  but the base was not designed as a celery and  the 2 pieces were only designed to be used together

Roy

[Lustrousstone]

When a centrepiece comes in two bits, only one of which could be used one its own, it's the complexity of the pressing required to create a single piece being more than the machinery can cope with that comes into play.

[oldglassman]

HI ,
           Thanks for that info Christine, I can clearly see from your examples that they have been made to compliment each other and the design employs a cog wheel base to accommodate both parts when together , this is clearly a very sensible idea with the examples you have shown and for the production reasons you mention , but would the original posts piece have been designed with this in mind ,having a plain foot, not too stable upside down with a larger bowl on top in my mind,unlike yours which clearly show the purpose of the design with what is almost a type of locking mechanism for both items to be stable when put together.

Sorry if i sound a bit dumb on this ,as I said completely out of my tiny sphere of glass knowledge

Cheers ,
                Peter.