Topic: Davidson 1895 Pattern - I have one with Lion mark

[Anne]

Apologies, 1896 not 1895 - Bernard, look on page 141 top right (Stewart and Stewart) , rd no 254027 - that looks like the same pattern on a different shaped item as Chloe has. Page 138 of the same book gives design no 254027 as the 1896 suite (5th item down in the table.)

[chloe]

aha - the corners are wrong for 1895 - I see now.

I do not have a copy of Stewart & Stewart - off to see if I can find an online picture

[Bernard C]

Anne & Chloe — See here for two examples of 1896 Suite/254027 which show the pattern rather more clearly than that Pearline cream, and you will see it's not that.

Bernard C. 

[ChrisStewart]

Hi,
    Your dish is not the 1896 pattern (Rd 254027), but from a design which dates 1880 - 1890. It is a No 812 divided sweetmeat dish.

Regards

Chris

[chloe]

Fabulous!  Thanks for everyones help 

[ChrisStewart]

Hi Bernard,

My own observation is that the 1960s TM, possibly in two sizes, is a little spikier than the Victorian one, as though it had had a Prince of Wales dragon as one of its ancestors, and that it was only used on some moulds intended solely for the production of Marble glassware, launched in 1964 according to Stewart & Stewart, much of which was sold into the antiques trade.
 

As well as two sizes, sometimes the lion is facing the wrong way round on these 1960s marble items. Also I’m afraid you have misquoted us. In the book we did not say that much of the marble glass was sold to the antiques trade.  We did quote the Pottery Gazette who said:

‘Antique dealers love it, laymen were not quite sure and Americans thought it great’


Regards

Chris

[Bernard C]

...   Also I’m afraid you have misquoted us.   ...

Chris — Thanks for the PG quote, which I had missed.   Please note that I had not quoted you at all, and that I had sourced just the launch date from your book.   In particular, my comment about the range being sold into the antiques trade was based on market place parallels I have found over the years between Davidson and Walsh deceptive reproduction ranges.   I had thought that my precise punctuation had made that clear, but I could have worded it rather better, splitting those few words off into a separate sentence, and so my apologies for any distress I seem to have unwittingly caused you and Val.

Incidentally, by pure coincidence, I have on its way to me my first example of Walsh deceptive repro illustrated in the Hill Ouston catalogue pages shown in Hajdamach, although this example is acid-etched WALSH, and so this particular example cannot be classed as deceptive repro, if you see what I mean!   It's the boat-shaped salt on a square foot shown in the third row down of Plate 369, and it's important as it provides a manufacturing attribution for all the glass illustrated on those two catalogue pages.

Regards,

Bernard C. 

[Anne]

Anne & Chloe — See here for two examples of 1896 Suite/254027 which show the pattern rather more clearly than that Pearline cream, and you will see it's not that.

Bernard C. 

Bernard thank you, that's so much clearer to see the difference - those corner mitres weren't evident in the other illustration hence my misconception.