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

Piano insulator, RD 120613, 8 July 1859 - Percival, Yates & Vickers connection?

<< < (2/3) > >>

agincourt17:
Two photos of the lozenge-marked RD 120613 piano insulator in uranium glass, showing the same star base as the clear example.

(Permission for the re-use of these images on the GMB granted by suticat).

Fred.

Paul S.:
I've just had a quick look at the Kew images for 120613  -  they're quite detailed, and the wording certainly agrees with Barrie Skelcher's notes.             There's also another insulator under 119975, although very different Registrant.

If you'd like Archive pix of 120613 and/or 119975, let me know.                 Think I did once have 120613, but can't now find it, so probably gave it away.

agincourt17:
Pix of RD 120613 and RD 119975 would be fantastic, Paul.

RD 119975 appears to have been registered to Davis, Greathead and Green, Stourbridge on 20 May 1859 - Parcel 6. They were a glasshouse that I haven't come across before, but I see that Jason Ellis has details about them as being proprietors at the Dial Glasshouses, Audnam, so I will try and dig out some info about them to accompany the pix in due course.

Fred

Paul S.:
Details for Rd. 119975 - as you've already said - are Davis Greathead & Green of the Flint Glass Works, Stoubridge, and the piece is listed in the Register as 'Pianoforte Insulator'  -  date of Registration is 20th May 1859 - parcel 6.
The Representation is shown as per the first image.

Rd. 120613 is shown as pictures two and three.                 In the Archive Representation it can be seen that the names of Percival Yates & Vickers is shown together with Thomas Dawkins etc  -  parcel 6..........           However the entry in the Kew Register shows the Registrant as Thomas Dawkins only and makes no reference to P.V.              The piece is described as a 'Piano Insulator'.

agincourt17:
Thank you, Paul.

Aren’t these representations beautifully executed?!

The similarity in the two designs is striking, though the representation details for the Dawkins piano insulator is so much more detailed and precise compared to the Davis, Greathead and Green piano insulator  – ‘similar but not the same’. I wonder how ‘unique’ a design feature had to be to make it registerable, and how detailed the representation had to be to make it admissible as legal evidence in a case for breach of copyright?

The source references from TNA again reinforce the unique value of source documentation for references as against derivative information.

The link between Thomas Dawkins and Percival, Yates and Vickers for the RD 120613 piano insulator in absolutely unequivocal from the representation legend.

For the RD 119975 Davis, Greathead & Green piano insulator, the summary register in Jenny Thompson gives the full registrant’s address, whereas Slack merely abbreviates this to “Stourbridge”. In this case, the address is a significant piece of information in that Davis, Greathead and Green operated glasshouses at two quite different locations in the area during the period of their partnership, and the  chronology of  a business often has a significant bearing on their designs and manufacturing output.

I will do a little more research about Davis, Greathead and Green and post a separate topic referring, among other things, to their RD 119975 piano insulator design registration. Do you think it would be best to simply link to this current topic, or can would it be better for me to copy the design registration from here to show as an immediate and permanent reference (with due credit to you and TNA, of course)?

Fred.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page