Topic: Victorian Glass Vase Raspberry Pontil S&W Rockingham / Thomas Webb OR Walsh

[flying free]

Ok, so there is no example of 'Rockingham' in the Williams-Thomas book.
Interesting.
Bit difficult to positively identify a piece of Rockingham from Stevens and Williams if there is no primary reference source.
I couldn't see anything in Gulliver's book (see previous post for reference source) either.

So ... where is the source for any piece that is called 'Rockingham from Stevens and Williams'?

How do we know 'Rockingham' exists as a range and how do we know what it looked like?

[flying free]

see my reply above and also I couldn't find any reference to Stevens and Williams 'Rockingham' in CH British Glass in either of the two books.  Did I miss something in them?

I'd be looking at Thomas Webb and trying to find the prunts and the shell attached curled feet for a reference 

m

[Greg.]

Thank you both for taking a look.

I have also found it difficult to find a reliable example of S&W Rockingham or even a written reference to that matter.
I did manage to find two further instances online which reference S&W and Rockingham, however both of these seem to suggest Rockingham relates to the colour of the glass. Here are both of the links:

https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/23586/lot/147/

https://www.prices4antiques.com/Perfume-Bottle-Stevens-Williams-Engraved-Floral-Topaz-on-Brown-English-Silver-Stopper-6-inch--E8862047.html

The Bonhams comment regarding 'Rockingham Ruby' colouring seems to have come direct from the S&W pattern book.  I’m wondering if referring to Rockingham as a range may not be an accurate use of the term?

Just a few other observations.  Flicking through Manley’s book, (which I appreciate has many inaccuracies which have come to light over recent years) on page 64, item number 93, shows an example which is described as ‘Ribbed Rockingham cased crystal with silver flecks’

On the same page, item 81 shows an item described as S&W with scroll feet and raspberry prunt over the pontil  (although no other similarities) Would anyone know if this attribution is still valid?

Interestingly on page 60, item number 64 shows the same bowl which I linked to earlier in reply 6. No direct reference of S&W, although a possible suggestion of Frederick Carder.

[Helen W.]

I don't know where the S&W pattern books are archived, but I'd love to know. Perhaps the answer to your conundrum might be found there.

[flying free]

~They are out being used by someone from the family I think at the moment iirc?

I also looked at Manley but am absolutely loathe to include Manley in any reference sources - (his book is lovely, we have visited this issue before, but it is not credible to be used as a primary reference source).

I wonder if 'Rockingham' was a red colour rather than an actual decor?  perhaps a cranberry if the Bonhams id is accurate which just to correct Greg (sorry Greg) actually states under Footnotes, 'Rockingham/Ruby' with a slash between the two words:

Quote  'A fine Stevens and Williams silver-mounted claret jug by John Orchard, dated 1891
The globular glass body stained in cranberry and cased in deep ruby, deeply cut in Rock Crystal style with panels of acanthus leaves and rococo scrollwork, the American silver mounts by Gorham decorated with bands of scrollwork in high relief, the hinged cover with a shell thumbrest, engraved beneath the lip with an initial cipher and 'Christmas 1891', 28cm high, the mounts with Birmingham hallmarks as well as marks for Gorham and date mark for 1891
FOOTNOTES
This design appears in the Stevens and Williams factory Pattern Book no.14 listing designs 15532-16644 from 5 June 1890 to 27 June 1891. This is listed as 'Pillared Rock Crystal' with 'Rockingham/Ruby' colouring. The cutting cost 10 shillings and Orchard was paid 13 shillings. The factory selling price (unmounted) was three guineas.'

[flying free]

....

Just a few other observations.  Flicking through Manley’s book, (which I appreciate has many inaccuracies which have come to light over recent years) on page 64, item number 93, shows an example which is described as ‘Ribbed Rockingham cased crystal with silver flecks’

On the same page, item 81 shows an item described as S&W with scroll feet and raspberry prunt over the pontil  (although no other similarities) Would anyone know if this attribution is still valid?

Interestingly on page 60, item number 64 shows the same bowl which I linked to earlier in reply 6. No direct reference of S&W, although a possible suggestion of Frederick Carder.

Re that bowl  item number 81- it's a pattern that Bernard had something in and I'm sure it was identified (there was some discussion on his thread on whether it was Tapestry corrected as Bernard actually thought it was Moresque, or not and he was told it definitively was not Tapestry iirc corrected, Bernard thought it might be 'Moresque').  I'll try and find the thread as I can't remember what it was formally identified as in the end. 

But again, no to Manley as a source of id, e.g. a bowl on page 80 *no 187 he identifies as Thomas Webb is I am pretty sure Stuart.  And there are many more examples too numerous to mention (but lovely book with fab glass examples in his collection - just that many of them are incorrectly id'd with no primary reference sources to pattern books).

Ok here's Bernard's thread - I've not read it yet so I probably haven't remembered that information properly 
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,5410.msg45070.html#msg45070

Here is a link to Kev's salts that comes from that thread and seem to have the similar pattern to the bowl that Greg refered as item 81 pp64 in Manley
http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?pos=-1792

And this is Dilwyn Hier's response to Bernard about his piece (link taken from that thread)
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,5410.msg46317.html#msg46317

UH OH - this is what Bernard had to say later in that thread about his Tazza that I think was the same pattern as item 81 on pp64 in Manley:

'Brian — Your reference to the Webb piece with amber threading got me thinking, and left me unsure about the colour of the threading on my tazza.   It could be amber or golden-amber threading, with the green colour that I could certainly see at a very specific angle the result of refraction through the distorted threads.

Since then, fourteen months ago, no progress, until two days ago, Bank Holiday Monday, August 27, 2007, at the Woking Art Deco & Nouveau Fair.   I had the tazza on display, and, during a quiet spell (which you never really get at the glass fairs), Mervyn Gulliver checked over my stand and read my information ticket on the tazza with some interest.   He then took me back to his stand and showed me the factory pattern book entry for it.    Not a close match, but an exact one, with descriptive text and a date.

The succinct description reads: "Ruby body, diamond moulded, amber threads over."   Pattern number 3701, dated July 12 1881, and made in several sizes.

Now for the really interesting part.   Not Stevens & Williams, Richardson, Webb, or Boulton & Mills, but Stuart.

According to Gulliver, Victorian Decorative Glass, 1881 is also the year when Frederick Stuart left the partnership of Stuart & Mills at the Albert Glassworks, Wordsley, and set up on his own, acquiring the lease of the Red House Glassworks from Philip Pargeter, becoming Stuart & Sons in 1885.   So this tazza must be one of the earliest independent designs of Frederick Stuart.

My sincere thanks to all who contributed.

Bernard C.  '

Stuart!  so I THINK the bowl item 81 pp64 Manley might be Stuart??

m

[flying free]

Greg - long reply above and I've added to it just in case you read it when I first posted it.
Basically I think item 81 Manley pp 64 might be Stuart.


m

[flying free]

See my previous replies and to add:

Going to be really controversial here 

The feet have remarkable similarities with a foot described as on  an item made by Stuart and Sons Limited (Gulliver, Victorian Decorative Glass pp 65 - see foot on blue bowl.)
See also the feet on page 174 all Stuart. They look like your foot.


There is a foot reg design by Webb that is similar :

Thomas Webb registered design 21264 October 19 1867 shows a similar design for the feet. (source Gulliver, Victorian Decorative Glass, pp 270)
but that looks more detailed and 'refined/reeded' than your foot.

Hodgetts Richardson and Son RD 238052 also show a similar foot, but the curl is more open, the reeding is finer and more of the 'reeds'.
There is another Stuart foot on page 64, but again not the same as the one on 65 which to my eye really does look remarkably like your foot.

mmm, so, did Stuart ever do anything with an encased foil?




I've found Bernard's Tazza marked in my Gulliver's book as pattern no 3890 ref Bernard.  I presume that bowl you were querying item 81 is also Stuart.



Ok last but not least see pp 169 where a crimped rim bowl with shell reeded applied straight feet and with lizards on each end is shown in what looks like a similar decor to yours but is most similar to this one:
http://fieldingsauctioneers.co.uk/lot/120824

-Thomas Webb  & Sons Limited.   The pontil mark is covered with a prunt impressed with a Registered Design Diamond mark, incorporating the date code for November 11, 1882.

I am finding it hard to believe these items id'd as Stevens and Williams 'Rockingham' are actually by Stevens and Williams, and hard to believe that 'Rockingham' could be used as a descriptor of a decor at all, but I could be wrong.
Indeed this vase
http://fieldingsauctioneers.co.uk/lot/120778
uses remarkably similar colouring and decor to the Webb bowl with lizards in the Gulliver book pp 169.  The lizards on the bowl are amber applied glass like the handles on the vase.  The decor I think is the same, it's just been 'brightened' up in the Fieldings pictures.  But the problem my brain is having computing this is that the Fieldings vase look so 'crude' in terms of design, chunky/heavy, not well balanced somehow.  Whereas the bowl in the book is stunning on all fronts.

m

[KevinH]

I have not looked at this thread in any great detail so I apologise if my comments here have already been covered.

References to items in the books by Gulliver and Manley, and the many internet lnks that can be found, do not explain (to me at least) what "Rockigham" really refers to. There is, however, an interesting internet example which has descriptive text including the following:

" ...decorated silver leaf over a Rockingham brown ground, ..."

. A Rockingham brown ground? Other references tend to suggest a ruby or an amethyst colour. Hmm.

I have a vase that has the same form, colouring, and size as the one shown in Manley, page 62, item 93. Manley's description states (as mentioned in an earlier post),

"... ribbed Rockingham cased crystal with siver flecks (aventurine). ..."

. Ignoring the "aventurine" part of that, I can confirm that Manley's description was accurate in terms of the structure of the item. The external ribs show a translucent amber colour highlighted by the effect of the changed colour of the "silver flecks" laid onto the interior crystal glass.

I am not sure if the amber in my vase and the one in Manley's book was picked up (possibly as thin rods) on the item before an outer layer of crystal was added and then ribbed. But the layer of silver flecks definitely shows as vertical lines of silver and amber,

What is common to many examples with "Rockingham" included in the description, is a multi-tone colour effect and siver flecks. But I do not think such an effect would be regarded as a "design" referred to as "Rockingham". Manley, however, seems to have hinted at a possible "design feature" when he said, in the page 65 descripition,

"... it is my opinion that the type [of glassware] was the forerunner of the uniqure 'Silveria' [of Stevens & Williams] ..."

. But in his basic text on pages 35 and 36, he said,

"The formualtion of Stevens & Williams glass mixture ... 'Dragon's Blood', I have always understood was accidental when the firm was developing 'Rockingham' ..."

. On that basis, Manley was saying that 'Rockingham' was a colour, not a design feature preceding 'Silveria'.

So, assuming Manley was right on that description of the vase and his page 35/6 text, then my belief is that "Rockingham" refers to a shade (or translucency?) of amber colour (or a rather dark brown if we take the view of the Fieldings link above!).

[glassobsessed]

Another vase with similar feet and raspberry prunt (sorry no photo), similar diameter but taller. No idea now why I named it Webb some four years ago...

John