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

Sowerby pattern 1852 opalescent uranium glass swan.

<< < (2/4) > >>

Thank you, Nick.

The detail is certainly much crisper on the V&A example, but that may perhaps be because reheating the freshly-moulded piece to produce the opalescence has partially melted the detail in the hottest parts.


I also have the same swan in 2 sizes.
They have the same mottled base and both have a lot of rough flashing, especially around the heads.
Sorry, never have been able to attribute them.

Thank you, Mike. Very nice photos.

Interesting that you have the swan in two sizes (like the Sowerby swans), but then again the Burtles & Tate swans also came in several sizes.

The mottled base is certainly unlike any Sowerby piece that I have come across before so I agree that a firm attribution for the swan(s) is still lacking.


Hi All,
I must admit to being really confused by the attributions of pressed glass swans in general. Maybe it's the camera angles of the photos, but the number of feather bars on the wings seem to differ quite often (especially in Burtles Tate attributions) In the photo on the V&A site, for example, there are four bars of feathers on the wing whereas the Sowerby pattern picture (larger bird) and Fred's photo show three. Could this be a differing mould, camera position, picture definition, incorrect attribution, or is this just me assuming the V&A swan is the larger version or do I need an optician or psychiatric help ;)? Mike's photos also show three wing bars, but I assume the base rules out the Sowerby attribution?
Oh and thanks Fred for your reply to my email, much appreciated.
Kind regards

The most reliable indicator for the Burtles, Tate & Co. swan attributions (irrespective of the size) is the RD number 20086 (registered 8 January 1885) that they usually bear.

Similarly, the Jane Webb & Joseph Hammond etc. swans normally bear the lozenge for 21 Dec 1874 - Parcel 4 (RD 2880150).

Otherwise, without some kind of manufacturer's markings, it seems that really firm attribution of a glass swan to a particular manufacturer is often a problem (especially in view of different sizes, moulds etc.).

I gather that a similar problem occurs with unmarked glass 'hens on baskets'.



[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version