quote from Fred ........................… "I don't think that Keith's goblet is duff - to me it looks similar to that shown second-from-the left on page 116 of Slack, and the "teardrop'-shaped bowl referred to by Neil."
Oh Fred, I'm mortified that you should think I was being serious - I hope Keith knew I was only joking - and yes, the similarity of Keith's glass with the photo image shown in Ray Slack's book was the exact point I was making - in other words both Keith's and Ray's examples differ substantially from the original factory drawing for 198277, currently held at The National Archives, and shown above.
Slack was usually very thorough and it's unlike him to make this sort of error - perhaps it's telling that whilst he provided the correct Registration date in the caption to his photo, he omitted the Rd. No. - perhaps he too was unable to interpret the lozenge, but knew enough to know it was a Derbyshire design, and may even have arrived at No. 198277 by a process of elimination.
The 'wrong design' has the appearance of a cup shaped rummer bowl, whilst the correct Registered design, being elongated, might better be described as an ovoid rummer bowl - these shapes are discussed, with images, in Tim Mills' marvellous book 'Rummers - A Social History Told in Glass' - 2013 - and one of the best glass books to have been published in recent years.
In the Kew Register, 198277 is described as a goblet - doubtless they were simply following the factory information since the word goblet is written on the original drawing, showing above. Probably true that most if not all of the 'pressed' shapes for rummers and goblets, produced in the second half of the C19, were based on designs of blown/hand made drinking glasses from fifty to one hundred years earlier.
At the time of Registration of these Derbyshire designs - the 1860s - 1870s - the heyday of rummers was over, and this may have caused Victorian designers from that period to simply say goblet - perhaps they imagined the word rummer to sound too rustic and dated.
That said, Tim Mills does include two press-moulded rummers in his book - one which he dates to c. 1845, with pressed bowl but traditionally made stem and foot ……….. and another later example he dates to c. 1880 which is a fully press-mould made glass. The latter example has a moulded pattern that appears vaguely familiar, but since Tim doesn't comment at all on the presence or otherwise of lozenges, then I'm assuming it isn't a Registered design, but again I could be wrong.
I've had both designs before, though now have neither, and I forget whether I ever used them for drinking. Neil's comment about "a very pleasant piece of glass to hold, tactile and practical, as the loops form natural finger holds.", might equally be said of the tall thumb print ales that were common in the second half of the C19, both cut and moulded examples - again, the lenses line up with finger-tips and make for a comfortable grip. Personally, I would prefer the tall ale glass, mostly since they hold more booze I'm sure, than these goblets.
All this talk of booze is irritating - but at least there is only a few more hours to go before my 'dry January' comes to an end.
Charming as Neil's suspicions are - as to the possible reasons for Derbyshire running two separate designs simultaneously, think it unlikely that we'll ever know why this situation existed.
Manufacturers of some well known Registered pressed designs/suites, were more interested in protecting a decorative pattern than a shape - and there are Registrations for decoration only where the same pattern is seen on many separate shapes. Don't know if I can follow Neil's explanation, here, for the existence of two different designs - plus quite different bowl shapes, and of course we don't know which of them came first, or if they were simultaneous.
Suffice to say that these two separate designs have caused annoyance and confusion over the years - even to leading someone of Ray Slack's expertise into error.
Sorry this is long winded - just read the top bit if you want
Topic: James Derbyshire rummer for show. (Read 1833 times)
