Topic: Georgian, Victorian punch cup or something else?.

[Paul S.]

would be great to at least know the reasoning behind Hughes comments, but think it's a bit late now to ask him

My opinion is that yours is too small to be a serving rummer, or serving punch glass............    punch glasses, or at least those I've owned, have always been a lot smaller than this one ...........   the ladle image is intriguing - perhaps they 'ladled' syllabub into this one.
Knowing as we do the art of producing glasses c. 1750 - 1830 ish, they gave a lot more thought to fine glass ware with thinner structure than the crowd that came after William IV, and the Georgians had tankards with more finesse than the Victorian heavyweights, plus many more designs were 'blown' since the advent of mass produced mould made items was a little way off.
I think early tankards were made both with and without handles - straps and round section.          As it's cracked I'd chuck it and move on to the next gem

[bat20]

Flips could have been made in a large pot and the ladled into tankards,?..warmed with a hot poker and you have a perfect Monday morning pick me up.

[brucebanner]

Can't chuck it Paul it could be the only one left, it's a struggle to date anything on colour as it seems to vary so much, in fact the older the glass the clearer it looks, i've thought this one (that's also in  bad shape) is not quite Victorian.

You think you will not find them but there are always more gems.

2 3/4 inches in height.

[flying free]

I like that one
 why do you think it's not quite Victorian?
Perhaps made at one of the smaller makers?
I'm sure I've read something about that claw type dab somewhere but can't think where.
m

[Paul S.]

that attachment is reminiscent of T/Webb's Registered designs  -  a shell-like form of decoration  -  but this one is far more crude and less refined than Webb's, so I would say definitely not theirs.

It's good sometimes to keep these unusual pieces  -  I've certainly kept some cracked and damaged pieces that I have a fondness for.

[bat20]

Absolutely keep pieces with no commercial investment,it's not the only barometer of worth.

[flying free]

I try to only keep the 'unusual' ones - by that I mean  'I've ' never seen another one, or that the technique used was unusual (so might be kept for further research). 

Your trailed pot would fall into that category   The top reminds me of Webb, the trailing and colour of it reminds me of Hodgetts Richardson pieces, but the glass quality and the pontil mark don't fall into those categories.  The pontil mark might be excusable (a trial piece? not finished off?) but the glass quality makes it look maybe older? 
m

[brucebanner]

Yes, as i'm swimming in Victorian glass i can safely say this sticks out a mile that's why i think it might be an earlier one.

[flying free]

difficult call - I do know what you mean I think, i.e. taking the bits in the glass, the look of the glass, the pontil mark etc into account it looks old ... however, the claw dab on the rigaree raises a bit of a query - would that be seen on older glass?  Perhaps try searching for rigaree glass or something and see what comes up. 

m

[brucebanner]

Ive got a lot of old glass to look at and it does not fit in with the Victorian decorative glass i have, i found an early Georgian jelly today, about 1730 this time in good condition which is also white not grey, it really is confusing, i'm wondering if the colour has anything to do with the amount of light a piece of glass has been exposed to over the years?.