Topic: A Rare Unfinished Cordial, As It Came From The Mold c.1860s, Show & Tell

[cagney]

  I find this incredibly interesting and hope you will too. The pattern is New England Glass Company's [ NEG co.]"BLAZE" c. 1866? The patent drawing of the mold is c.1847 by Joseph Magoun of the NEG co.The idea behind the patented mold was to eliminate most of the unsightly mold line in pressed glass stemware.
  WORKING THE MOLD:
As "B" in the drawing is the only hinged two piece in the mold this is where the mold line would occur. The "plunger "H" would be lifted from the mold and "G" [top] lifted off, the hinged section "B" opened, then the "plug" "A" incorporating the cup shaped foot is pushed upward thus releasing the article from the mold.The article would be taken out the top of the mold and be subjected to the fire to form the foot thus polishing out most of the mold line there. Although the patent drawing shows a round baluster stem, the patent concept later refined for a multi-sided stem where the mold line would follow along two edges of the stem and be mostly hidden to the eye.
  A more complete drawing of the patent can be seen here: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/fa/87/6a/757236fccd1a69/US5302.pdf
  Finished pieces in this pattern and type of mold can be seen at; https://www.eapgs.net/pattern-details.php?idx=781 The line drawings in the link are from a NEG co. catalogue c. 1868-1869.

[flying free]

That's so interesting to see the piece along with the description and designs and mold!  Thanks for sharing.

What is happening with the foot please?  is it supposed to be like that for a purpose?  It's late here - my excuse for not recognising why it has a foot shaped like that

m

[cagney]

  There are at least two reasons more or less agreed upon.
1. The area that shapes the bowl part of the article "G" just above "B"is a static part of the mold. In order for the article to be taken out the top, any part of the article below has to fit through the narrow of the bottom of "G" where it intersects with "B". Thus the small "ledge" created on the piece because the narrow at the bottom of "G" is a little wider than the top of "B".
2. The shape would allow easy exposer to the fire on what will become the top of the foot where the mold line occurs. Also probably a very easy to shape to start with for the Gaffer with tools at hand.
  I think the "ledge" created in this type of mold  on articles where the stem meets the pattern is a defining feature. I am sure this type mold was refined at a later date than the patent drawing. In what way unknown.

[flying free]

Thank you for the explanation.  It's so interesting to see the produced piece and all the detail.
If I understood correctly, was the Blaze pattern introduced in 1866?  does this mean they were using this method of molding and retrieving from the mold 20 plus years after it was designed/invented?

and how does this piece (25 years after the French pressed glass in the Launay Hautin catalogue for example) compare to the finish quality of the pressed French glass of the Launay Hautin of the earlier period 1830s and the 1840/1841 catalogue I wonder in terms of visible mold lines, quality of production etc.?  Very interesting to consider the ramifications on perhaps French imports to the American market.


m

[cagney]

  The date 1866 is the earliest documented mention of the Blaze pattern , not necessarily the first date of production. Were they still using this process 25 years after the invention? It seems so.
Of the 11 patterns in the catalogue that could be had in complete sets 3 have stemware pressed in this type of mold. The patterns are Blaze, Reeded A.K.A.[Fine Rib], and Ashburton.
https://www.eapgs.net/pattern-details.php?idx=3995
https://ww.eapgs.net/pattern-details.php?idx=201
The Ashburton stemware could be had in two different forms. The patented method or what I assume to be the conventional method.

  You have probably noticed that the Ashburton pattern is problematic. The part of the mold that creates the semi-circles or punties in the upper part of the bowl will not allow the article to be taken out of the mold if that part of the mold is static. The answer to this problem is Joseph Magouns patent of a year later 1848.
google.comaipis/24/76/44/9463ab118a7f38/US5875.pdf

  If you combine elements of his 1848 patent with the hinged part of his 1847 patent that formed the stem and foot, you end up with a hybrid mold that the goblet pictured was pressed in.In fact  Magoun in his summary of the 1848 patent states "It is to be understood that my invention is particularly applicable to such molds as do not open in two parts or halves,and which do not produce the "mold marks" or impressions of the usual side-seam or seams. I do not however confine it to such, as it may be often used to advantage in other molds".
  This goblet is made of an excellent grade of metal and has been fire-polished as evidenced by the small polished pontil on the bottom of the foot. In regards to French pressed glass I give most of it high marks this goblet would come in a very close second

A little more information can be had at:https://books.google.com/books?id=JW9yDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA140&lpg=1848+joseph+magoun+patent&source=bl&ots

[cagney]

  The correct link to the Ashburton pattern.https://www.eapgs.net/pattern-details.php?idx=201
For the 1848 patent.https://patentimages.storage.googleaipis/24/76/44/9463ab118a7f38/US5875.pdf

[cagney]

1848 patenthttps://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/24/76/44/9463ab118a7f38/US5875.pdf
 

[flying free]

Thanks so much for the amazing and detailed information.  It's really interesting to see the lengths they've gone to to produce complex patterned glass in molds.  I was curious about the quality as I remember researching  Bakewell Pears (?) goblets in reference to a pink overlay clear goblet I own  and thinking the quality looked fantastic. 

The more I read descriptions of the designers of the molds and the making of the molds, the more I'm incredulous at how contemporary the thought processes were to today despite it being nearly 200 years ago.  And how sophisticated the designs were.  If they were still using them 25 years later then they worked well. 


Thanks for the book link.  Those uranium glass carafes (dating c.1850) are very interesting in a date context and with reference my thread on the GMB re Queen Victoria Uranium glass bowl in the V&A. V&A has it made by Davenports in England in 1837.
 
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=JW9yDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA140&source=bl&ots=&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

(ref thread on GMB - Queen Victoria uranium glass bowl in V&A c.1837/8

https://www.vam.ac.uk/blog/museum-life/seeing-more-glow-in-the-dark-glass

m

[cagney]

  During my research I read that Mr. Magoun was a machinist before becoming involved in the glass business, a very good knowledge base to start with.
  I am familiar with your thread concerning the Queen Victoria  uranium bowl, quite interesting.
  The google book link seems to be a bit ephemeral. I think they rotate different selections from the book at any given time. Possibly my outdated browser. Anyway no. 65 page 127 the uranium large lacy compote I found extremely informative. Specifically, the letter [1845] from William Leighton Sr. to a Scottish colleague concerning the recipe for uranium glass.

[flying free]

Oh I'll go and try and find that letter again!  and attach the reference to my thread  this time -  I found that whilst researching the QV bowl.  A good refresh.  Thank you.

The Uranium glass carafes are on page 72 and 73 - They're dated c.1850 and 'Probably East Cambridge or possibly Sandwich'

Magoun being a machinist is relevant and interesting - his interest in precision and design.  I always quietly marvel at the incredible technical skills of that period, and earlier obviously, but then have to remind myself that, despite it being centuries past, they were just like us in requiring precision designs for specific purposes, and also in their thought processes. So why shouldn't they be amazing?  I think I marvel because it was all done with logs and books and measuring tools and no computers and yet is still so utterly precise.  I'm not that old but my dad was an engineer and I remember as a small child him trying to show me how to use a slide rule calculator!  It was an extension of him,always on hand, bit like an iphone now!