Topic: Toastmaster glass date ?

[bat20]

Hi ,this glass was described as a penny lick ,which it almost certainly isn’t .It’s 9.5 cm height with a broken pontil and white bits dotted here and there and heavy for itS size.I can’t find it in Bickertons but judging from the shape of the foot and all I’m happy to glass forum bellyflop and guess at 1750 to 70 !?.Interestingly it has a tiny bit of green just at the edge of the broken pontil and under the glass.I know there’s a few on here interested in Georgian glass and it would be nice to get their take on it’s possible date , thanks .

[LEGSY]

Nice glass i had a couple of these a few years ago and seem to remember that my research
into them came to me  thinking that it was a dram glass. My one also had broken pontil
scar as yours but did not have an illusion on the bowl which is rarer i would think??
Possibly date wise i would be happy to think last half of the 18th century. They do come with
a terraced foot also in this shape glass which is lovely if you find one. May have been made
as late as 1880 but with cleaner metals and polished pontil scars more refined as time went on.
 

[thewingedsphinx]

Would this be called a pub deception glass ? Possibly early Victorian but that is a very rough guess.

[Ekimp]

I’m not sure, the basic shapes of Bickerton numbers 228 and 540 aren’t that dissimilar.

I would be cautious though as the shape is the same as some plentiful victorian glasses. The Victorian ones I’ve seen are lens cut but presumably they also sold them uncut. It’s easy to find the lens cut versions if you search eBay or Google for “victorian lens cut glass”. Here are some:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/262360/i.html?_ssn=deewainhouse&store_name=deewainhouse&_oac=1

The lens cut versions always seem to be deception glasses and I have seen one with a shear mark on the base, so made with a gadget rather than pontil rod. Most have polished pontils but the gadget one at least would be late 19c

Maybe it’s just a shape made for many years but I think you would need to compare it in the flesh with the victorian ones or known Georgian examples to see if it’s the same quality/finish etc.

I have two that are lens cut with polished pontils, the foot is a larger diameter than the rim so I had thought they might be late Georgian…that was until I saw the one made using a gadget.

[bat20]

Thanks everyone ,just the type feedback needed when exploring a glass.It does have a lot of similarities to the lens cut pieces not least of all I’ve found one with the same rim measurement !.This one could well missed out on a polished pontil and cutting for some reason ??.I’ll endeavour to handle a few on my travels.Here’s an image of the glass I found on line dated 1850ish ,maybe the foot being flatter due to being made with a ground out pontil in mind .


https://www.19cglass.co.uk/product/victorian-olive-cut-deceptive-dram-glass/

[bat20]

Or this one,5th glass down!!

https://www.19cglass.co.uk/product-tag/victorian-glass/page/19/?modus_perpage=18

[teckle peh]

It's a tavern dram or spirit glass with thick walls not a penny lick or deceptive toast master glass. The bowl goes all the way down to the start of the stem so not deceptive. Made anytime from late 18th century to 1840's

[bat20]

Leafing through Bickerton’s book some of the deceptives do go down to the top of the stem,although it appears they were very narrow and then drastically thinning at the last third toward the rims .After 1760 or so they seem to get more generous in proportion .

[Ekimp]

Agree with the ones shown in Bickerton. If the bowl of a deceptive glass didn’t extend as close to the stem as the normal equivalent then the glass wouldn’t be very deceptive.

With regard to it being just a normal tavern dram or spirit glass but with thick walls (not sold as deceptive), I agree that could be possible, especially as the lens cut versions all seem to be thick walled. If that was the case though, I don’t think it would date until after the glass excise tax was repealed in 1845 (if made in Britain). Why would they make a normal glass heavier than necessary?