Topic: Walsh 'Pompeian' grapefruit dish.

[Paul S.]

just to share really, and from a bunch of assorted bits earlier today.          Has a stunning ring which goes on forever (reminds me of the sound from some of the W/Fs bowls), and although the mark is very feint, it can just be seen simply as WALSH only  -  so I'm assuming around the late 1920's.    There are grapefruit bowls in Reynolds, and although he doesn't show one in Pompeian, they don't seem to have been an uncommon product.                       The backstamp is centred in the nicely ground/polished pontil depression  -  height is 3", and maximum width is about 4.75"

[Lustrousstone]

Nice one Paul

[JOK]

How funny, I was just about to post photos of a Pompeian vase in the same colour I found today. The book says they are marked, but I haven't found the mark yet, although the base is quite rubbed.

[Paul S.]

now I'm worried............there seems to be only one 'blue' in Reynolds book - which the grapefuit dish appears to agree with, and there's no doubt because the piece is marked.         However, I do have this vase which looks quite like yours, but a completely different blue from the book, and no mark that I can find.       No pontil depression on my vase either.            Was there more than one 'blue' in Pompeian, do we know.

[Ivo]

Not wishing to throw a spanner in these works, but here are two small glasses in the electric blue colour at issue. One was produced at Braine-le-Comte in Belgium (Verre Antique, Gobbe Hocquemiller), the other which is a bit less sophisticated was produced by Boom, Belgium for Dutch importer Rimac. So an alternative attribution is possible....

[JOK]

My vase is exactly the same colour as the blue vases in pls.20 and 21 in the Reynolds book and is also the same shape and size as the vase shown in plate 216 of the Hajdamach book, just a 'bad' photo/bad light. I know that Walsh marks are difficult to find even on pieces which aren't as worn on the base, so I'm sure it would have been marked at some point.
Here are a couple more photos which show it being a slightly different colour, in natural light, although the natural light is fading now.

[Paul S.]

thanks for the additional worry Ivo          the colour of your images does certainly match my grapefruit dish, although I don't have a problem with attribution for my dish since it most definitely carries the WALSH backstamp.         However, bubbly glass, similar to 'Pompeian' does seem to have been produced quite commonly in the first three or four decades of the C20 by a number of factories (and may have been produced in much more recent times  -  but we're speaking here of pieces that are believed to be 'period').
Obviously, the thicker the glass, then presumably the darker the appearance of the glass (for a given colour) - and as some of these vases are quite thick walled, then they will look a darker shade.
JOK's vase appears to have a good quality pontil depression, and if he says the colour matches Reynolds, then he may be on safe ground in saying Pompeian.
Unfortunately, now I look more at my vase, it appears a bit too dark, and the absence of a pontil depression (it seems to have a flattened base with a hint of where the pontil was snapped), may well mean it's not Pompeian.     I know almost nothing about making comparisons of this type of product, although I see many in antiques venues  -  so will play safe and say mine is of unknown provenance for the time being.
Pompeian is possibly the most common of the 'bubbled' glass, and it seems to have become a habit for us to say of any bubbled glass that it's from Walsh  -  saves having to consider the other makers. 
I no longer collect this bubbled glass, it's too much like hard work to id  -  I picked up this small dish only because it was less than Sterling £1.00, and came with some other interesting old bits.

Yes, I know this is too long winded

[rosieposie]

There is a blank box on the screen for your reply Paul...can you re write please so we can see what you have to say?

[Paul S.]

when at school, the 'precis' was a most hated excercise, and although I didn't appreciate its value for teaching how to cut superfluous verbiage (obviously I'm a lapsed precisist) it does force the mind to be succinct, so just for rosie here goes:

"My dish is marked WALSH and in view of the colour, so is JOK's I suspect, therefore I consider both are 'Pompeian'.       However, I remain uncertain about my vase, as there were many factories that produced bubbled glass in the early C20, and attribution is not an exact science.    I no longer collect 'Pompeian', but since the individual cost of my dish was c. £0.70, and formed part of a larger purchase, I made an exception". 
QED.
But the downside seems to be that I can't add smileys?     

[rosieposie]

still blank!!  What can I do to my pooter to fix this, please can someone help?