Topic: Sowerby Pattern 1239 Queen's Ivory Ware 18th September 1877

[mhgcgolfclub]

Fred for your reference.

A pair of Sowerby pattern 1239 Queen's Ivory Ware vases.
Marked inside the base with Sowerby trade mark and date lozenge for 18th September 1877

Height 3.25"
Roy

[agincourt17]

Thank you, Roy.

Not a common pattern, and very nice to have a pair, especially in QIW.

Sowerby pattern 1239 appears on page 4 of the Sowerby pattern book IX (1882).

The lozenge for 18 September 1877 – Parcel 7 covers quite a large bundle of Sowerby design registrations ( RDs 314265 to 314282), but I see from page 99 of Simon Cottle’s “Sowerby – Gateshead Glass” that Sowerby pattern 1239 corresponds to RD 314268.

Cottle also shows (in a colour photo on page 54) an example of pattern 1239 in Stained Blanc de Lait (with the woven chequerboard top border and the stylised flower heads picked out in a dark red-brown stain).

The Thistlewood Sowerby CD-ROM (Volume 3), section ‘Sowerby Glass in Pictures’ page 3, shows the pattern book illustration with a link to a photo of an example of pattern 1239 …“in a very unusual lime green malachite colour. (Courtesy Broadfield House Museum)."

Fred.

[MHT]

I also have a pair of these in Queensware, but neither are marked with a trade or a reg mark.

Does anyone know how many moulds Sowerby made for each piece in production?
 
I assume they must have made more than one, depending on the popularity of the pieces.
 
There must have been a lot of metal moulds made, and a lot of mouldmakers?

[Paul S.]

Regret I can't answer Mike's questions, other than to ask if he is certain his are PQIW  -  assuming they are, then they must glow of course.          I say this as many patterns, 1239 amongst them, were produced in materials other than Ivory Ware - am I correct in thinking that Ivory Ware is almost always trade marked and has a lozenge?

I didn't really have anything riveting to add to this thread, but just wanted to mention something which I thought of interest ...................   

I notice that Raymond Slack also shows pattern 1239 (page 33) as depicted in a Sowerby samples sheet from The Pottery Gazette dated 1st November 1879.              This shows the 'woven' pattern decoration around the top of the vase, the same as Roy's pair.       
However, again in Slack, there is another example of 1239 shown on page 52, where it appears as one of the items on a page from Sowerby Pattern Book VIII, dated1880.
This time though the 'woven' pattern is replaced with a regular squared pattern, with unbroken lines running
through the design, and although this replicated pages doesn't say as much, Slack describes these Pattern Book VIII pieces as 'articles in gold'  -  presumably a gold coloured 'Vitro-Porcelain, but I'm really not sure.               This squared variety of the design is similar to the small pic shown by Fred  -  not sure of the source of his picture.           
The number of rosettes is 9 on both varieties of the vase.

I've attached pix of Kew images for Rd. 314267 and 314268, from which it would appear that pattern 1239 corresponds to the former and not the latter as indicated by Simon Cottle.

Of course I may well be completely off the wall with all this, so put me right if I'm wrong please

Obviously different moulds used for each design, so as part of an answer to Mikes question then, there were at least two separate moulds used for pattern 1239 in view of the varieties of the rim pattern. 

[MHT]

All interesting.

I have over 20 pieces of Queensware, all are marked with either one or both marks except this pair. The registration marks would have been on the plunger, maybe there was a problem with this at some time and it was changed, we will never know.

Mine have the same decoration around the top as Roy's.
The pattern Rd. 314267 that you heve pictured shows a hexagonal pattern around the top which is different again. Maybe it was easier to make the mould with squares.

All my Queensware is the same colour, a 'creamy' ivory. A few years ago I had a piece that was obviously Queensware but was a slightly different colour, not so 'creamy' and a slightly darker colour. I read somewhere, possibly Slack, that the two colours had been noticed before. Maybe it was just a slightly different mix and unintentional. I no longer have the piece so I cannot glow test it.

[agincourt17]

Thank you for showing the design representations, Paul, especially as it makes it quite obvious that  Sowerby pattern 1239 corresponds to RD 314267 (NOT, as Cottle would have it, RD 312268). I shall correct my references accordingly.

My image of pattern 1239 in reply #1 was from page 4 of pattern book IX (1882).

Importantly, too, the design representation for RD 314268 of 18 September 1877 quite clearly shows it to correlate with Sowerby pattern 1238˝ (see image below), shown alongside pattern 1239 on page 4 of pattern book 1X (1882).

By the way, I don’t yet have a photo reference for pattern number 1238˝, so does anyone have one to show, please ? (preferably with permission to add it to the GMB RD database and the Glass Queries Gallery Sowerby  pattern number database).

Cottle (page 100) correlates pattern 1238˝ with RD 314269 (so Cottle is in error again with his pattern number correlation in this 18 September 1877 design registration bundle).

This is, of course, the problem with relying on secondary sources for information , so I will look carefully at this RD bundle to try and make sure that pattern numbers I have reference photos for do correspond to the correct RD numbers as shown in the design representations - the primary and definitive sources.

Fred.