Topic: Ale/spirit/? Georgian glass

[bat20]

Hi all,to find a glass like this is a very rare thing for me at boot fairs ,if it is pre 1800,so for a quid I was well chuffed,the seller then mentioned she had a box of them!while keeping a calm exterior in my mind I was holding Julie Andrews hand running through the Alps singing the "hills are a live...",only to come tumbling down the hillside on seeing the very unsimilar modern glass in the very disappointing box!Never mind got this one.It's lead glass with a broken Pontil ,conical foot and stands 13 cm ht,the bowl 5.5 cm and the foot 6cm,in the bottom of the bowl there is a nipple,I'm guessing dwarf ale,but also pondering on gin or spirit glass,any thoughts many thanks.

[Paul S.]

I think the shape conforms to what collectors call a drawn trumpet  i.e. the stem is drawn away from the metal of the bowl and not added afterwards as in 'stuck straws' (those three piece glasses where bowl, stem and foot are made separately then stuck together whilst soft).            The foot appears thick although not a problem I don't think, but need to be wary in case this has been ground down to erase chips)  -   and the nipple does occur on some of these pieces  -  I forget what Peter (Oldglassman) said about this  -  it might be caused by pressure of adding the foot, but not sure.
Despite the smallish overall size and lack of h.& b. engraving, think probably an ale in view of the shape of the bowl  -  the round stem as opposed to facet cut, may also indicate ale rather than wine.

When the foot is viewed from underneath, does it appear perfectly circular, or is it noticeably irregular  -  and can you see striations in the top half of the bowl, running round the bowl, and what is the colour of the glass?

If you look in Bickerton almost all of his ales, with plain straight stems, show engraving of h. & b. - so on the face of it this one is unusual.
Assuming this is a genuine period glass, then date wise could be anywhere from 1750 to 1820  -  all of which qualifies it for being Georgian  -  it's just which one I'm not sure.

If Peter is there perhaps he will give us a hand with this one - thanks. 

[bat20]

Hi Paul,yup I've managed to kill it with my photography skills,but it has all the tooling marks you would expect and the slight oiliness,I think the foot is ok with the wear in the right places plus the ridge on the rim of the foot R. Wilkinson talks about in his book,the photo does make it seem a tad thicker,I would say the glass is not as dark,especially the stem,as I have seen around but then again I've seen 1730 glass with clear brightish parts to their stems .i should have taken a photo of the foot because it has that classical conical shape making space for a broken Pontil,which has to be said is not very rough at all.

[Paul S.]

I've just remembered the other name for the stem in the (more usual) three part construction  -  stuck shank.              Sometimes you find dirt in the crevices of these pontil scars  -  depends how rough they are.
Another feature that can be seen often is the little blip on the rim of the bowl, indicating beginning and end of where the worker has cut the glass to neaten up and make the bowl symmetrical and even.

it sounds kosher - could be as early as 1750/60 but I don't do enough of these things to feel confident.           Brilliant for £1.
drawn stems are some of the most attractive looking glasses.

[bat20]

Yup got the blip,some of the tooling marks half way down run parallel in a wave pattern and I don't know if this helps in anyway,but there is one faint tool mark running vertical from the rim about 1" long.