Topic: fern engraved celery with folded rim

[Paul S.]

another piece that may not be all it seems.
It has the appearance of a second half C19 celery with fern engraving - the Victorians passion for pteridomania - but lacks the wear I prefer to see, and the folded rim is not something I've seen before on a celery.....   in fact folded top rims are uncommon.
There is a quality depression under the foot, some wear on the very outside of the foot rim, and a stunning ring when flicked, but glass looks perhaps too clean and lacks any seeds.      It's about 8.25" (210 mm) tall.

Does anyone know if such pieces have been reproduced in the C20, and would the folded top rim indicate a Continental manufacture?   Not suggesting it was made yesterday, but having trouble convincing myself that it's Victorian.   Thanks.

[Lustrousstone]

I think it looks fine for Victorian - not all Victorian glass has seeds in it...

[Paul S.]

thanks   -  and would you agree the folded rim is very unusual, I don't recall seeing it on a celery before.
Can only assume it had a lot of tlc and by the looks of it appears to have hardly ever been used.

[brucebanner]

Other end of the scale Paul, this one has seen plenty of action, i thought this may of had a lid, you can put your hand in no problem and the upper rim has wear around the top, and spoon wear in the base, it might just have been washed up and turned upside down a few hundred times, also a nice long ring to it.


There are three seeds in it, but as Christine says a lot is crystal clear.


It's 7 3/4 inches in height, 41 inches across the rim and base.

[brucebanner]

This one is 1860 something looks like it was made yesterday crystal clear no seeds and no wear.

[Paul S.]

There were four T/Webb Registrations on 19th October 1867 Chris - 212674 to 77, plus it looks to have T/Webb shell ribbed finials/prunts/handles - so could be one of theirs.       Unlike pressed designs which were produced for several decades, or more after the Rd. date, I never know for how long these non-pressed creations was produced after the Rd. date.             But of course having the lozenge does rather clinch it for you.

I must have seen  shed loads of celeries over the years and mine (here) was the first I'd seen with a folded top rim  -  now I've seen yours, so that's two in the space of a couple of days.    Yours does look to have a better capacity for celery than mine  -  the more practicable ones, I think, should have a decent inside space.
It does make sense with these thinner blown examples to have a folded rim, to help avoid breakages  -  whereas the pressed ones are acres thick and don't need strengthening.

I've never yet met with a celery that did have a lid - it would rather confine you to very short sticks of celery, but must admit that 41" across the rim and base must give problems with storage.

Thanks for sharing by the way, and sorry to see such a degree of bloom on the glass, but I'm a big fan of these fern engraved pieces  -  I was just being paranoid about the absence of wear  -  I like to see it on a piece that is trying to tell me it's well over one hundred years old.

[Paul S.]

Chris - coming back to your lidded whatever  -  I worked on the assumption that your lozenge indicates a date of 19th October 1867  -  of course if I have that wrong then the following won't make any sense.
Please look at the details within the diamond and tell me if my thoughts were correct, please.

Contrary to what we say usually about the National Archive images regarding British Board of Trade Registrations  - i.e. that they protect, usually, only outline shapes of articles  -  your bowl appears to be one of those minority of examples where the Registration Nos., and corresponding images, concern not the shape of the piece, but design features applied to the article.          In this instance it is the shell ribbed decoration on the outside of the container  -  and assuming the details of your lozenge do correspond to 19th October 1867  -  then Rd. Nos. 212674/5/6 and 77 were for the protection of these apparently new decorative designs.

Mervyn Gulliver shows a large jug, by T/Webb, with this applied decoration on page 239 -  and on page 270 he gives details of all four Registration Nos. which are a repeat of the National Archive images I've attached.
Not everyone has a copy of Gulliver, so these attached pictures will enable those that don't to see what we're banging on about.

Although T/Webb Registered these particular decorative features as being unique to them, virtually identical designs (for handles, prunts  and feet etc.) were Registered in 1868 and 1870 by Boulton & Mills - and then again in 1870 Hodgetts, Richardson & Pargetera appear to have repeated the exercise.     Details of these non-Webb's designs are also shown in Gulliver, and presumably there was sufficient difference in these other non-Webb designs to avoid plagiarism/infringement and subsequent litigation by T/Webb.

Ref.  'Victorian Decorative Glass - British Designs, 1850 to 1914' -  Mervyn Gulliver  -  2002 - Schiffer).