Glass Message Board
Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. => British & Irish Glass => Topic started by: mhgcgolfclub on March 14, 2017, 06:14:51 PM
-
Here's one for you Fred ;D
I cannot remember seeing this before. Its like a round plated that has been squashed and sits on 3 feet.
Sowerby trade mark and date lozenge to base. Date lozenge not that clear but pretty sure its 16th October 1876 parcel number 8.
Roy
-
Four Registrations from Sowerby on that date - Nos. 304363,64,65 and 66.
Apologies to all ...... as you were. I do have all four pix, and this is in fact Reg. 304363.. the Kew image shows a basket-weave flat plate-shape which I will post later on this evening - so obviously it's the surface decoration that is being protected, and not the unusual shape.
sorry, didn't check the Board's archive to see if this one has been up before.
-
the original factory drawing shows the basket weave pattern, although not on this shape, and the text on the drawing says 'Flint Glass Plate'.
-
Meant to say Fred - if you do want Kew pix of the other three from that date, let me know.
-
Thank you, Roy for showing this. It is not a Sowerby design or a shape that I have come across before (though I do have photos of other 'tricorn' dishes in completely different patterns - see follow up post).
Thank you, Paul, for the design representation - at first sight is very similar to the ubiquitous Sowerby 1102 basketweave plates or dishes except that the designs of the centre portions are completely different.
I would certainly appreciate seeing the designs representations for Sowerby RDs 304363, -364 and -365, please. They should hopefully correspond to Sowerby patterns 1170, 1169 and 1166 respectively.
Fred
-
Photos of some more 'tricorn' pieces (presumably circular pieces in the mould but manipulated after removal whilst still hot).
Fred.
-
just my opinion, but think the clear glass example looks best. Attached are the remaining three from 16th October 1876.
-
Thank you, Paul.
As expected, RD 304363 corresponds to vase pattern 1170 (shown on page 2 of pattern book IX, 1882), and RD 304364 corresponds to vase pattern 304364 (also shown on page 2 of pattern book IX, 1882)
BUT UNEXPEXCTEDLY
RD 304365 obviously corresponds to Sowerby pattern 1168 (also shown on page 2 of pattern book IX, 1882) rather than the correlation to pattern 1166 that Simon Cottle attributes to it on page 99 of 'Sowerby - Gateshead Glass'. This only goes to show, yet again, that one should always refer back to original definitive primary sources (the design representation being THE definitive source, surely, in this case) rather than rely on secondary sources for information wherever possible.
BTW, I can't recall seeing any pics of actual examples of Sowerby pattern 1168, so does anyone have photos to show, please?
This does, of course, leave us with the quandary as to which Sowerby RD DOES correlate with Sowerby pattern 1166, but I will try and address (or even complicate) that in a follow-up post a.s.a.p.
Fred.
-
............. and the last thing we need now is a quandary Fred ;D I can put you out of your misery as to the original Board of Trade Registration No. for Sowerby factory pattern 1166 ............... it is Rd. 301312 dated 20th June 1876 - just a few months prior to the others here that appeared in October of that year.
Here is a copy of the original factory drawing held at Kew......... my opinion is that some of the outer decorative patterning showing on Roy's curly edged plate is also incorporated in pattern 1166, or at least it's quite similar - what do you think, and would you agree that 1166 agrees with Reg. 301312?
-
Thank you, Paul.
What the design representation for Sowerby RD 301312 of 20 June 1876 - Parcel 1 depicts is actually Sowerby pattern 1159, shown on page 1 of Sowerby pattern book IX (1882).
Your reply came in just before I was due to send off this post, but you will see that I too had come to the conclusion that pattern 1166 was from Sowerby RD 301312 of 20 June 1876 - Parcel 1 too.
So here is the text of my pre-empted follow-up post which includes some of the convoluted logic by which I had reached my (and now, our) conclusion:
I have rechecked my photos of Sowerby pattern 1166 pieces and the white one shown in the 4th photo from post #4 does have an indistinct registry date lozenge that seems to read 2? - V- M- ?.
The nearest matching Sowerby registration dates would seem to be 20 June 1876 - Parcel 1 (RD 301312) or 21 June 1876 - Parcel 1 (RD bundle 301326-327).
I have photos that clearly show the registry date lozenge for 20 June 1876 - Parcel 1 on Sowerby vase patterns 1159 and 1175 (both of which have similar distinctive basketweave decoration despite being a different shape).
The Sowerby pattern 1166 vase that I showed also has a similar distinctive basketweave decoration, so it looks as if Sowerby pattern 1166 is most likely to be from RD 301312 also.
Unfortunately, I don't have any reference pics for Sowerby RD 301326 of 21 June 1876 - Parcel 1 (but Cottle and Thompson both describe the design as a 'covered dish').
I do, however, have photos showing the registry date lozenge for 21 June 1876 - Parcel 1 ( and presumed RD 301327) on Sowerby pattern 1160 spill vases (which Cottle erroneously correlates with Sowerby 1154, despite clear evidence that pattern 1154 & 1154½ pieces bear the lozenge for 27 March 1876 - Parcel 13, and seems to correspond to RD 299524).
BTW, I am also preparing a follow-up to this follow-up which I think will throw more light on Roy's Sowerby dish.
Fred.
-
On checking back through my reference photos I find that I did have photos of a 'tricorn' dish near identical to that shown by Roy. The only reason that I hadn't posted them was that the lozenge was indistinct (apart from the fact that it appeared to indicate a registration date in either June or November 1876) - so problem now seemingly solved in that I agree with you that the 'curly' or tricorn dish is indeed from RD 301312 of 20 June 1876 - Parcel.
I attach photo of a Sowerby pattern 1165 pin dish along with its pattern book image (from page 2 of pattern book IX, 1882). There is no lozenge mark on the dish, but the centre of the dish bowl has a large peacock mark as a prominent part of the design, so the design would appear to be unregistered. It is fairly obvious, I think, that this pattern 1165 pin dish an 'uncurly' version of Roy's tricorn dish, even down to the three small feet, despite the centre pattern of the dishes differing in detail.
It is pretty evident that Sowerby used elements of this 'basketweave' design in several of their patterns (including 1159, 1175, and 1166). I suspect also that this 'basketweave' design was the basis for their unbiquitous unregistered pattern 1102 plates and dishes.
Fred.
-
congratulations Fred on todays sleuthing - you've put a lot of time and effort into these two very informative posts, which will stand the test of time and be a lasting source of definitive information for collectors of Sowerby patterns - well done.
Of course as you and I know, it's the workers in the field of pressed glass wot do all the hard work and original research - and post pix - who make this site so interesting for everyone else - where would the GMB without you. ;) ;D ;)
-
Thank you for your kind remarks, Paul.
I must admit that I contribute to the GMB not primarily from altruism but because I find it personally fulfilling, and I am fortunate in having the time and the resources to apply myself to shedding light into the some of the darker recesses of the nether world of Victorian glass designs.
Without your valuable input, however, whether from your own personal store of knowledge or from your excursions to TNA at Kew, I am sure that my task would be far more difficult, and the information revealed far less accurate and much less potentially useful to other like-minded GMB members.
Fred.
-
Thanks Fred and Paul
Thanks for all the hard work you both do. I will try and continue to find more items for you to research and to add more pictures for your gallery which seems to become more complete by the week.
I have not been online much in the last 48 hours as my wife lost her antique gold and diamond engagement and wedding rings in the town center on Tuesday. The more valuable engagement ring has since been returned having been found and having been taken into police station.
Roy