Glass Message Board

Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: redheat4 on November 17, 2008, 10:28:23 AM

Title: porringer? loving cup?
Post by: redheat4 on November 17, 2008, 10:28:23 AM
Hi all, what would you describe this lovely piece of amethyst glass as?

It stands 15cm tall has a polished pontil and weighs in at 1.1kg.
Title: Re: porringer? loving cup?
Post by: Lustrousstone on November 17, 2008, 10:43:35 AM
At that size is may just be a sugar bowl. It was a very common form in the USA in the 1920s and 1930s and even longer. One pressed glass example is the Hazel Atlas Royal Lace sugar bowl.
Title: Re: porringer? loving cup?
Post by: Frank on November 17, 2008, 02:18:37 PM
A porringer is more of a low bowl and usually only one handle. The difference between a loving cup and a sugar bowl/trophy/handled vase is fairly arbitrary unless appropriately engraved - and it could just be named so by a maker for marketing purposes.
Title: Re: porringer? loving cup?
Post by: deco.queen on November 17, 2008, 02:49:44 PM
The handles look hand applied and not anything like American Pressed Glass.  I would think European sugar bowl.
Title: Re: porringer? loving cup?
Post by: nigel benson on November 17, 2008, 02:51:36 PM
Hello,

Frank is right in his description in that a porringer has one handle on a low bowl. However, the handle is not a loop, more an everted panel of glass that is a continuation of the body of the vessel.

The fact that it is everted is important, since often cut down decanters are used to make-up a quasi-porringer, but of necessity the handle can only follow the line of the body of the vessel vertically.

Therefore this is not a porringer.

I also agree with Frank's observations about naming the vessel according to size and/or best marketing opportunity.

Nigel
Title: Re: porringer? loving cup?
Post by: Lustrousstone on November 17, 2008, 03:09:00 PM
I didn't mean that it was pressed, just that this two-handled form was common for sugar bowls
Title: Re: porringer? loving cup?
Post by: redheat4 on November 22, 2008, 08:08:57 PM
Thank you for your suggestion of sugar bowl Christine, I have found some excellent American glass examples from the early 19th century in R. A. Robertsons  “Chats on old glass” and I must admit I thought my piece was too deep for a sugar bowl but seeing those it is a possibility.

Notwithstanding your excellent descriptions of a “porringer” Frank and Nigel, a description that I may add is echoed by Wikipedia, I find it fascinating that 98% of all “porringers” illustrated on 2 auction result sites, several reference books and countless antiques valuation books have 2 handles and some 68% of these could hardly be described as having a shallow bowl, indeed one example of a glass “porringer” illustrated in “English Table Glass” by Percy Bate, published 1913, is over 11 inches in height and is similar to this 6 ½ inch one. http://www.antique-glass.co.uk/Collectors_curiosities.htm

So though my piece is technically not a “porringer” there does seem to be a general acceptance within the antiques arena that a two handled deep cup can be described as a “porringer”.

However, whatever one wants to describe my piece as, it is undeniably a magnificent example of early 19th century glassware. :thup:
Title: Re: porringer? loving cup?
Post by: nigel benson on November 28, 2008, 04:30:15 PM
Ian,

My apologies, you are quite correct, twin handled, lidded and often with a single spout - a porringer.

My excuse - I was thinking of a piggin and simply crossed the two names in my thought process :o ::)  - without checking, that'll teach me ;)

This also means Wikipedia is wrong :o

Good piece of detective work by you though - I don't think you really need us ;) :)

Cheers, Nigel
Title: Re: porringer? loving cup?
Post by: Frank on November 28, 2008, 10:19:27 PM
The actual design can vary, as with any household object and as I said it is "usually"a single handle. The consistent part is that is invariably a low bowl.

A loving cup will also be found with 3 handles, the 3rd represented a chaperone.