Just to correct my post above, I think the size in the catalogues could correspond to height rather than width as the tall vases all have their heights in, therefore it would not conform if the bowl shapes were suddenly given in diameter widths.
Also, another addition to my post.
It is very hard to be sure absolutely sure with these things, but I need to mention that the bowl Christine referred to earlier in the thread that featured in Truitt's Collectible Bohemian Glass 1880-1940 page 67 (4"high with the same trails as OP's bowl), identified as Harrach, appears to be the same or very similar in shape to a vase in that same Harrods catalogue page (reference source as above) with a code of CH 18081. This catalogue number appears to fit in with Stuart pattern numbers for this range. Although 3 other vases on that page have been cross checked and matched with Stuart pattern numbers (by Nigel for me on another thread) and designs, this was not one of them.
In the Harrods catalogue (1909 version) it appears as 5" in height v the Truitts version of 4". I do believe that Stuart Peacock eye trail style vases came in a variety of sizes, so I suppose it is possible that Harrods were only supplying that one size of that shape that year.
Caveat - I have been told in a previous thread that Truitt's is very accurate and that many of the Harrach pieces were photographed in their depository at Harrach.
m