Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. > British & Irish Glass

Sowerby 1877 glass creamer marked DEPOSE

<< < (4/4)

Paul S.:
Reference your first paragraph Fred............crossed wires, I think :)            I don't doubt for a moment that Sowerby patterns 1224 and 1231 carry diamond lozenges which will date them to 31st May 1877 - also that these lozenges are found on Cottle;s 'angular' shaped pieces.

I was simply drawing attention to the fact that there is an obvious case of confusion somewhere along the line insofar as........... Simon Cottle links these Sowerby patterns 1224 and 1231 to the Kew Board of Trade Registrations Nos. 310595 and 310596 - this is wrong, and the objects are completely unrelated.             
His linking of these is misleading to anyone who is involved in cross-checking Registration Nos. with factory pattern data.         Much time is wasted due to the fact that the Rd. images at Kew do not match images of the Factory Patterns  -  despite carrying the same No. in Simon Cottle's book.
The bottom line is simply that these two Board of Trade Registration Nos. were not allocated to these two particular factory shapes/patterns.
My earlier suggestion was that, possibly, Simon Cottle had not seen the Kew images and had simply worked from Sowerby archive material - in which case perhaps we should blame Sowerby for sending the wrong images to the Board of Trade at the time of Registration.  ;)

Unlike yourself, I don't spend that much time involved with C19 pressed glass - neither am I that familiar with other data in Simon Cottle's book, so have no idea if this mis-linking is a one off, or if there might be other instances.
From my experience of taking snaps at Kew, it's apparent that Sowerby's Registrations with the Board of Trade during the latter part of the C19 were prolific to say the least - and so very obvious from looking at the size of the factory's catalogues, I just wish they hadn't used that purple ink that tends to fade with time :)

P.S.     wish you every success with your project of 'gallery of reference photographs of Sowerby glass items'

agincourt17:
Point taken, Paul, about ascribing Sowerby pattern numbers to a particular RD number within a design registration bundle without checking the design representation. 

Reliance on Thompson, Slack or Cottle alone (or in combination) always left almost as many queries unresolved as resolved. The only definitive way to check is to have simultaneous access to a a Sowerby piece (or at least decent photos of it), Sowerby pattern number, relevant pattern book illustration, alphanumeric lozenge details, and full registration details (including representation) as at Kew.

Until you started providing the design representations etc. from Kew, that was the main missing link for most researchers interested in Sowerby designs. As is already obvious in this thread, access to all the pertinent identifiers is capable of not only definitively attributing a piece but is also capable of revealing anomalies or longstanding misattributions.

I will amend the details for Sowerby pattern 1231 on the Glass Queries Gallery databases in the light of the information from these postings.

I’m sure there must be more anomlies or errors in the ascription of individual RD numbers to Sowerby pieces with known pattern numbers (and there are certainly problems in ascribing or collating known Sowerby pattern numbers with particular RD numbers within registration parcels corresponding to particular registration lozenges). I know that neilH has had similar kinds of problems with some of the Manchester glass registrations, trying to reconcile actual pieces with their registration descriptions or design representations. Hopefully, with better access to precise registration details as at Kew, many more of the queries posed on the GMB can reach a satisfactory conclusion.

Fred.

bfg:
thanks Paul, will do......and Fred, just had a peak - well done !

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page