Topic: ID request for pink jug please

[keith]

Last time I was there I spent half an hour just drooling over the books,the museum is not that big it depends on if there is anything particular you want to see,you might get 10 min's at The Red House Cone after but you need longer I think.You could always come back for the glass festival later in the year to see the rest

[flying free]

I don't have an answer to the Rose du Barry  question yet. I hope to do so, but for now I am going with the description Charles Hajdamach gave in his book 
m

[Paul S.]

huh - you can go off people you know

[flying free]

 

[flying free]

It appears to me,from further reading, that Rose du Barry was a name for one of the colours produced by Stevens and Williams
My reference being: Charles Hajdamach British Glass 1800-1914 page 216 where under the Chapter on Cameo Glass, it is stated
with reference Stevens and Williams Cameo glass -
'...By the early 1880's the pattern books are crammed with cameo designs.....  The range of objects consisted of vases, claret jugs....  The number of colours was no less varied and included claret, orange, nut brown, cinnamon, gorse yellow,.......rose du barry, turquoise, amber,....'

m

[Paul S.]

I suspect the second half of the C19 was awash with OTT forid (no pun intended) descriptions of colours - Royal Worcester's 'Blush Ivory always comes to mind - try googling the R. du B. and you'd be amazed as to how many different uses the name has been put.
None of which really solves the question of whether Mr. Williams-Thomas did or didn't use the word correctly for his own company's wares.
The name has probably been mis-used ever since its inception, and quite likely should really be used for only those opaque muted shadings like Burmese, since it was from ceramics that it came originally, not glass.           Presumably Mr. Hajdamach is quoting from factory records somewhere along the line.       Wouldn't be surprised if other C19 glass producers hadn't also used the description.
P.S.   I've forgotten now what started all this talk of colours

[flying free]

Paul, I can't accept that the colour name has just been 'misused'. 
Charles Hajdamach very clearly states the colour used for the Alabaster was 'their Rose du Barry' in his most recent book.  He also states clearly under Cameo glass in a book produced many years earlier, that it was one of the range of colours used for the Cameo range.  Presumably this is because Stevens and Williams had a pink glass that they called Rose du barry as well as their other pink glass which was called Rose.   Why repeat an error many years later for a different range?

According to a definition I found 'Rose du barry' is 'an opaque pink ceramic overglaze developed in France during the 18th century'.  Which would tie in with it being used as one of their 'pink names' for Alabaster and Cameo I suppose if both are opaque pink glass.

I wonder how their range 'Rose du Barry' similar to Burmese ware was made?  I'm off to look that up
m

[Lustrousstone]

There are actually Stevens and Williams pattern books surviving that give colour info. The Crystal Years gives a "record" of colours on p72. Under Opals is Rose Alabaster; under Reds and Pinks is Rosaline. The only other "pink" is Violet, which is described as pale mauve pink. Rose du Barry is described on p18 as "opaque or ivory glass, shading from pale primrose yellow at the base up to a very pale rose and to a deeper rose on the top rim." In other words a "burmese".

The late 19th C S&W bulb vases, as seen in the catalogues, include pink and pink opalescent.

I'd be more inclined to go with this than CH. His books are not error free

[flying free]

ah, your post and my modification to my post above where I added a definition of Rose du barry have crossed.  Well if the colour list survives then I will bow out gracefully  -  Paul, you were right    I am surprised at Rosaline, isn't that a colour name given to a Steuben pink as well?

m

[Lustrousstone]

It probably wasn't trademarked, Rosalin is another name used for pink by quite a few companies